Refund: Fritz Karinthy
About the playwright
Fritz Karinthy was
a Hungarian author, playwright, poet, journalist, and translator.
He was the first proponent of the six degrees separation concept in his 1929 short story, Chains (Láncszemek). Karinthy remains one of the most popular
Hungarian writers.
Summary
The play is about a former student of a school
Wasserkopf, who demands that his tuition should be refunded because he feels
his education was worthless. But eventually, he loses his fight when he is
tricked by the mathematics master. The play is full of humor that deals with
an extra-ordinarily ridiculous situation.
Wasserkopf is forty years old. He could not get any
job and wherever he goes, people tell him that he is fit for nothing. One day
he meets Leaderer and asks him about his business. He replies that he was engaged in
foreign exchange and Hungarian money. Wasserkopf did not understand anything. Wasserkopf
further seeks an explanation about the foreign exchange to the embarrassment of
Leaderer. Leaderer replies if he did not know the silly thing then what did he
study at school? He better may go to the school and demand his tuition back. Wasserkopf,
who is jobless and does not have any finance to support him, and decided the idea
to be worth trying. Thus he visited his school to claim his tuition back.
Wasserkopf demands a refund of his tuition fees which
were paid eighteen years ago because he was taught badly. The principal of the school
is shocked. He encounters himself in a peculiar situation and calls for an
urgent meeting with all other staff members. The masters realize that Wasserkopf’s real intention was to fail in the exam and claim the refund, they decide to
outsmart the old student by proving all his answers right. The mathematics master
proposes that they have to be united and ought to help each other in implementing
their plan. The exam was an oral one as Wasserkopf refused to write it down.
They decide beforehand that whatever answers he gives whether right or wrong,
they will prove him right.
The firsts question was from the History master. He asks
Wasserkopf how many years the ‘thirty years war’ lasted. The answer was in the
question itself. However, Wasserkopf was hell-bent on giving the wrong answer. He
replies that the war lasted for seven years. The master does not know how to
prove the response right. Fortunately, for him, the mathematics master comes to the rescue by proving that the answer was right on the basis of Einstein’s Theory
of Relativity. The master argues that time and space are relative terms and
therefore years can be represented in terms of meter. The war took place for
half of each day, three hours a day to eat, so a total of seven years. The actual
time spent in fighting was seven years and the figure has arrived following
Einstein’s theory. Wasserkopf called the History master a numskull.
The Physics master asks Wasserkopf whether clocks in the church become smaller if one walks away from it because of optical illusion. He
called the Physics master an ass. The master responds that the answer was
right because ass does not have an illusion of vision. Therefore, Wasserkopf
has given a metaphorical explanation. Wasserkopf called him a cannibal.
The Geography master asks Wasserkopf for the name of a city
that has the same name as the capital of the German province of Brunswick. He
replied as ‘Same’ which the master proved to be the right answer. There was a
legend that once as the emperor Barbarossa was riding in the city, he met a
young peasant girl who was munching a bun. He called out to her ‘God bless you and asked the name of the city. She answered ‘same to you sir’ for his
wishes. Thus the emperor mistook the name of the city to be ‘Same’.
One after another, each master justified Wasserkopf’s wrong answer to be correct and they marked him excellent disregarding his abusive words. The masters do not show their anger either as they had to prove him an excellent student.
At last, the mathematics master asks him one difficult
and one easy question. For the easy question, Wasserkopf responds with a wrong
answer. At this, the master gets angry and replies that Wasserkopf has failed
his exam. He is entitled to claim his tuition fees back. He asks the exact
amount which he has to obtain a refund. Wasserkopf did not realize that he was
going to be trapped and tells him a list of the exact amounts. At this, the
mathematics master says that it was his difficult question and the answer was
right. Thus he is proved excellent in entire subjects of study. They throw him
out without allowing him to say anything further.
The story shows the smartness of the masters in
tackling the difficult situation and also save the reputation of the school.
Understanding the text
Answer the following questions.
a. Why does Wasserkopf demand a refund of his tuition
fees from the school?
Wasserkopf demands the refund of his
tuition fees that were paid eighteen years back because he thought, he was
taught badly. When he claims it, the principal is shocked. He finds himself in
a peculiar situation and calls for an urgent meeting with all the staff
members.
b. Why does Wasserkopf consider himself good for
nothing?
Wasserkopf, a good-for-nothing
fellow, tells the principal that he had not received the proper education and had
learned nothing. Therefore, he was entitled to a refund of the fees he had paid
as a student. He adds that a re-examination would prove that his claim was valid.
c. What did the teachers decide to do when Wasserkopf
asked for a refund?
The teachers realized that Wasserkopf’s real intention
was to fail the exam and claim the refund, they decide to outsmart the old
student by proving all his answers right. The mathematics master proposes that
they stand united and ought to help each other in implementing their plan. The
exam was an oral one as Wasserkopf refused to write it down. They decided
beforehand that whatever answers he gives whether right or wrong, they will
prove him right.
d. Why did Wasserkopf give ridiculous answers? Why did
the teachers accept these answers?
The exam was an oral one as Wasserkopf refused to
write it down. They decided beforehand that whatever answers he gives whether
right or wrong, they will prove him right. Wasserkopf, time and again responded
with a ridiculous answer yet the teachers continued to accept those answers as
right because they were intent on proving Wasserkopf to be a brilliant student.
This was necessary to save the reputation of the school as well as save
unwanted and unforeseen financial liability.
e. How does the mathematics master describe
Wasserkopf’s character?
When the History master asks Wasserkopf the first
question, he responded with a ridiculous answer although the answer was itself in
the given question. He was hell-bent on giving the wrong answer. The master does not know how to prove the
response right. Fortunately, the mathematics master comes to the rescue by proving
that the answer was right on the basis of Einstein’s
Theory of Relativity. The mathematics master ultimately declared Wasserkopf
was not a blunt student rather a brilliant one.
f. How did the teachers outwit Wasserkopf?
As the last question, the mathematics master asked him one
difficult and one easy question. For the easy question, Wasserkopf responded
with a wrong answer. At this, the master got angry and declared that Wasserkopf
has failed his exam. He is entitled to claim his tuition fees back. He wanted
to know from Wasserkopf the exact amount which he has to obtain a refund.
Wasserkopf did not realize that he was going to be trapped and revealed his
list of the exact amounts. At this, the mathematics master said that it was his
difficult question and the answer was right. Thus he is proved excellent in
entire subjects of study. They threw him out without allowing him to say
anything further. Finally, the smartness of the masters tackled the difficult
situation and also saved the reputation of the school.
g. What is the final judgment on Wasserkopf’s demand
of refund?
The teachers proved Wasserkopf to be excellent in
entire subjects of study. They threw him out without allowing him to say
anything further. The smartness of the masters tackled the difficult situation
and also saved the reputation of the school.
Reference to the context
Read the extract from the play given below and answer
the questions that follow.
a. “It’s possible I’ve changed. What the hell……! Your
class records will show I’ve got a right to come here “
i. Who is the speaker? Who is he speaking to?
ii. Why is the speaker say these words?
iii. Where is the speaker at this moment?
The speaker referred to above is Wasserkopf. He is
speaking to the principal of his old school.
The speaker says these words to the principal because
the latter fails to recognize the former who insists on telling that he was a former pupil at the school.
The speaker is at his old school at the moment.
b. Read
the extract dialogue given below and answer the questions that follow.
“THE STAFF:
(bowing, heartily) How do you do?
WASSERKOPF: Who the
hell are you? Sit down, you loafers! (He grins, waiting to be thrown out)
THE PRINCIPAL: How
dare you –“
i. What is to be the response to ‘How do you do’?
ii. Is Wasserkopf’s response polite enough to the staff?
iii. How does Wasserkopf rebuke the staff?
iv. What does the principal mean by ‘How dare you?
The response to the polite greeting ‘How do you do’
has to be ‘How do you do’. This is used when introduced for the first time.
No, the response of Wasserkopf is not polite enough to
the staff.
Wasserkopf rebukes the staff as ‘loafers’ and asks him
to sit down.
The principal’s remark ‘How dare you’ means what right
or courage Wasserkopf has to rebuke the staff.
c. Explain the following line of the play:
“Because I did not get my money’s worth, that’s why!”
The extracted line from the play tells the reason why
Wasserkopf has demanded his tuition back from his old school because his
spending on his learning didn’t make him a suitable person for the job.
d. What is the theme of the play?
The main theme of the play is that dishonesty can’t be the rule of the
road in a civilized society. The play revolves around an ex-student of a school
who returns to his alma mater after eighteen years to demand a refund of his tuition
fees believing that he received worthless education that did not make him fit
in the practical world. The mathematics master proposes a solution where every
teacher would ask him two questions and he would get his money back provided he
fails the exam. The man intentionally attempts to trick his teachers by supplying
irrelevant and ridiculous answers yet the teachers outsmart him by justifying
that the answers thus supplied were absolute to the point. Ultimately, he is
tricked and trapped by the mathematics master. Thus he does not get his money
back and the story proves that dishonesty of any form will backfire in the end.
Wasserkopf, the protagonist in the play is a dejected man of forty who
has lost all hopes of finding a suitable job. He was recently thrown out of his job
because of his ill manners and rude behaviors and is unemployed. He is gullible
and believes people when they say he knows nothing. People’s comment makes him
further frustrated and angry. One of his friends advised him to go back to his
school and demand the tuition back as he received nothing from the education. So,
with this idea, he visits his school after eighteen years and asks for a refund of
paid fees.
However, the clever teachers hatch a plan to outwit him. They held an
oral test to prove that he was intelligent. They go about proving that even the
most incorrect answer from him is correct. He admits that he is worthless and a failure and puts all blame on the school and his teachers. He was a poor fellow
and also a greedy person. He neither had any sense of shame nor sense of
respect. He even threatens the principal that he would complain to the Ministry
of Education. He is like a ruffian. He stares insolently at the principal. He
calls the teachers ‘loafers’. He does not show any politeness to his teachers.
He calls the history teacher a ‘numskull’, Physics teacher ‘a cannibal’, and ‘a
whiskered balloon. He calls the Mathematics teacher ‘old stick-in-the-mud. He
admits that in his school days he indulged doing mischievous things with the
teachers. He is a stupid guy. Thus, at the end of the play, the principal and
the teachers proved every foolish answer of Wasserkopf as correct and they
passed him in the re-examination. They kicked him out of the school premises.
Reference beyond the text
As is implied in Refund,
knowledge imparted by education might not have practical relevance if it does
not help someone earn a living. However, it would have practical relevance if
it helps someone acquire a stable job and a decent income. The relevance
depends on the person, the education, and myriad additional factors, like race,
gender, and socio-economic status.
The practical relevance of education and the knowledge gained or not
gained from said education is likely to change depending on the individual and
education in question.
If the relevance is lacking, there’s ample blame to go around. In Wasserkopf’s case, blame could be assigned to his teachers for continuing to
endow him with misinformation. Blame might also be assigned to Wasserkopf
himself. If it took him eighteen years to realize that his education was
insufficient, perhaps, Wasserkopf is just not very sharp and there’s little his
educators could have done.
Moving away from Wasserkopf and into real life, there seems to be many
examples of people whose education does not bear a practical relevance to their
day-to-day life. There’s an array of people with master’s degrees who are
unable to meet their needs and acquire shelter, a stable job, and a decent
living.
Conversely, there’re examples of people who, prior to seeking education,
were not living the most practical lives. However, once they obtained an
education, their lives became much more feasible and sustainable. Before
getting his degree, Michael Lopez was a gang member who was ‘going nowhere. However,
after his degree, Lopez’s trajectory became much more serviceable and useful.
His education gave him the knowledge to start a nonprofit that helps homeless
people.
Thus the relevance of education depends on the person, the education,
and myriad additional factors, like race, gender, and socio-economic status.
b. Our education system focuses on memorization rather than creative thinking. Do you think the knowledge imparted by education may not have practical relevance in one’s day-to-day life? Who do you blame for this?
Admittedly, our education system focuses on memorization rather than
creative thinking. In education pedagogy, the memorization model is called the ‘banking
model’ and the creative thinking technique is called the ‘problem-solving model of learning.
Memorization is criticized for being an oppressive system where there is no room
for creative thinking. However, the problem-solving model encourages freedom of
creativity and change.
In the case of memorization, students are taught to simply receive,
memorize, and repeat information only to receive higher grades on tests. This
refrains students from communicating and implying education knowledge to the real
world. The teacher plays the major role and students simply comply with the
teacher’s choice. They have no idea that they have an idea and can’t contradict
the teacher. This takes away a student’s ability to be unique and creative
which is the most crucial part of learning. A student should not just be taught
Math or English, but instead, they should also be taught about each other.
The memorization technique of learning intervenes a student from the world
because they are not aware of their critical consciousness. An example of
this can be standardized testing. Students are taught how to take the
test as opposed to obtaining educational knowledge for the test. The
teachers just present information since they knew “everything” and the students
are expected to follow because they knew “nothing”. It is like an
empty account that is waiting for a deposit.
The creative model engages students and teachers
to work together in communicating and learning information. Both
sides present their opinion so that there are multiple perspectives. In
problem-posing education, men develop their power to perceive critically the
way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they
come to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in process, in
transformation. The students are taught to change the world instead of
having to change for the world. The teacher is also learning and the
students are teaching each other. Classrooms are more engaging and
students are taught to think critically and evaluate. This system helps
students find their creativity and helps lead them to their success.
Students are not just restating information, but creating arguments and
oppositions. It gives students the skill they need to know to
differentiate them from other students. An example of “problem-solving”
model is when teachers engage lectures by creating different teaching
methods. Instead of just speaking or putting up power points, teachers
create critical questions or engaging conversations that help present
information in different ways. This creates a comfortable and entertaining
way of learning.
I blame the education system for rote learning. To
take an example of higher secondary schooling in Nepal, students do not have
any idea of note-taking because everything is provided ready-made by the
teachers. The classrooms are like tea-houses where they chat most of the time.
The picture is not different in many other societies.
c. Most of the students want to learn just for
examination rather than knowledge. Do you think that certificates will help
them in their future career?
We increasingly hear employers, prospective students, and
futurists saying that it is all about the skills, not about the degree. What
does that mean for higher education?
Historically, employers made the baccalaureate, and in
some cases advanced degrees, the gateway to an interview. If you did not hold
the sheepskin, you would not get in the door. But times have changed. Rapidly
advancing technologies such as artificial intelligence, big data analytics,
robotics, and the advent of quantum computing have created an environment in
which much of what is learned in college becomes outdated in a few short years.
Certainly, the soft skills of creative thinking, critical thinking, communication, and leadership do not go out of date and remain in demand by employers. But the
hard facts and skills of most of the disciplines are changing as technology
ripples through the economy and society.
So, what we hear from the industry is that they want
workers with soft skills that do not go out of date, as well as a basic
understanding of the current hard facts and skills that will be useful for just
a few years before they must be upskilled for a new generation of technology.
This combination of knowledge and skills may not require a degree.
Futurists are of the view that future corporates will increasingly give importance to skills. Increasingly there are more and more renowned
and prestigious companies that no longer require a college degree for work. Major
powerhouses such as Apple and Google may take in skills rather than degrees. So,
why is there a sudden cultural shift from the bigwigs?
Business magazines often write about qualities that
you don't necessarily pick up from a degree. There are qualities … that
have a tendency to be completely overlooked when people are sifting through
résumés or LinkedIn profiles. And yet, increasingly, we find that these are the
kinds of people that make the biggest difference within our organization.
Increasingly we hear this mantra: Skills,
not degrees. It's not skill at the exclusion of degrees, it's just
expanding our perspective to go beyond degrees.
The U.S. Labor Department is expecting that there will
be a shortfall of skilled workers in the economy. Corporations are already
feeling the pinch. For these openings, they are not looking for conventional white-collar or blue-collar workers but new-collar workers, an individual who develops the
technical and soft skills needed to work in technology jobs through
nontraditional education paths. These workers do not have a four-year degree
from college. Instead, the new-collar worker is trained through community
colleges, vocational schools, software boot camps, technical certification
programs, high school technical education, and on-the-job apprentices and
internships.
In this environment of changing expectations for
applicants, higher education is taking yet another hit, this time from Google. It has launched an IT support specialist program in Coursera that has enrolled thousands of students worldwide for
the in-demand field of IT support. With Google in the lead, there is little
doubt that other corporate leaders will follow, creating specialized
certificates customized to their field.
In the near future, I believe skills will move the job
market. Increasingly, evidence of attainment of the stated skills will be
mandatory. Also, increasingly the degree or certificates will become optional.
Our business in higher education will be to fulfill those basic soft skills by
certifying the core skills of creative thinking, critical thinking,
communication, and leadership. However, the students must be taught technological
implementation; emerging practices and technologies; and cultivating in them
flexibility in the application of knowledge to new environments. To the extent
that education is integrated with technological knowledge, the degree will be relevant
to both employers and prospective students alike.
Comments
Post a Comment