Stanza 1
The poet begins by saying, “Nothing” and adds that he has missed nothing as they (teacher and students) realized that he (the absentee) was not there and hence they were sitting quietly for two hours. with their hands on the desks. It is a kind of sarcastic answer.
Stanza 2
In the next stanza, the teacher’s anger comes out. He tells the absentee that he taught the lessons which covered 40% of the term syllabus and also assigned the students a quiz which is worth 50% of the term paper’s marks.
Stanza 3
The tone again shifts to sarcasm. According to the teacher, he (student) missed nothing as the course has no values or meaning. So he should remain absent as all the activities that take place in the class have no purpose for himself as well as for the absentee.
Stanza 4
In the 4th stanza, the poet says that shortly after he began teaching an angel just appeared that told about the ways to attain wisdom for the life and also that this is the last class after which they will have to spread the good news to the world.This stanza is a satire on the religious faiths like Christian and Jewish religious practices and beliefs. It was believed that angels descend from the sky to impart knowledge to the clergy who afterwards spread that message (good news) to the commoners.
Stanza 5
The tone again reverts to sarcastic. the teacher asks the student how anything can happen in the class without him (student) being present there.
Stanza 6
In the final stanza, the teacher says that the classroom is a world full of human experiences which were assembled for him (student) to grab, examine and understand. It was an opportunity which he has lost now.
Hope this helps
It’s a bad example because a lot of negative things can turn into positive things depending on wish we look at it and yes life isn’t fair sometimes but sometimes life is incredible beautiful and so magical that it’s worth some parts of life that aren’t fair
<em>Banksys' plan to sell anything as "art" is pure genius, as Banksy is a firm believer in not placing a price on art. Therefore his act was out of art, not vandalism because he was trying to get his point across the board. Although he didn't make his point clear due to the art selling for even more after self-destructing. Banksy makes street art and putting a price on his art to destroy it was the most modernly artistic thing an artist could do nowadays. Everyone is pricing their art for millions, while Banksy is making his free for the people to appreciate.</em>
Answer:
if you can give us a story ill edit my answer do it on the question though
Explanation:
