In the Mountains · hospitality, wounded pride and an excluded friend
Analyse a change in the mother’s response to hospitality · Distinguish Pritam’s skill from social humiliation · Test declared values against the treatment of a friend
Exam scope and assessment notes
0408 preparation for exam year(s) 2025. The assessment changes in 2028; follow the component and selected texts for your year. Original teaching for the historical 2025 Stories of Ourselves Volume 2 option only. Nine of the ten historical 2025 story members have original teaching and practice: The Doll’s House, The Gold Watch, A Visit and Promenade have four lessons each, A Walk to the Jetty and In the Mountains have seven each, Mrs. Sen’s has six, and The Plantation and The Paper Menagerie have five each. Together they provide forty-six lessons, one hundred and thirty-eight staged tasks and one hundred and one developed-response models. Complete primary readings support each sequence; check exact quotations and edition differences in the centre anthology. Words and full-selection workshops remain unfinished. The complete 2025 story option remains a content gap. This is not the different 2026–2028 Volume 2 or 2029–2030 Volume 3 selection. The complete older public-domain Mansfield reading is supplied, not the protected anthology. It is not certified identical to Cambridge’s edition in punctuation, paragraph layout or spelling. Use your centre’s complete anthology for exact wording. Bracketed reading blocks are StudyForA navigation aids, not original line numbers. These original tasks and models are not Cambridge questions and do not award Cambridge marks or grades or certify mastery. Alternative supported readings can be valid. Qualified teacher assessment and calibrated full papers remain unfinished. Do not submit a model as your own assessed coursework; the 2025 set-text option is not eligible 2025 coursework reading. Teaching follows the complete publisher transcription from the opening reunion through the final food invitation and climb. The publisher warns of automated transcription errors; original printed pages and exact typography have not been visually verified. Access may require a subscription; use your complete centre anthology. This transcription is not certified identical to that edition. Teaching uses scene-based reading locators, not invented printed pages or line numbers; exact language must be checked in the approved text. No protected passage or source image is reproduced. Words and full-selection workshops remain unfinished; the complete ten-story option is unavailable.
Before you begin
- Historical 2025 preparation only: confirm your centre selected the complete ten-story option. Read every required member, not just these nine. Private candidates cannot enter 0408.
- Read In the Mountains in full before analysing a passage; compare exact wording with your centre’s anthology.
- Teaching follows the complete publisher transcription from the opening reunion through the final food invitation and climb. The publisher warns of automated transcription errors; original printed pages and exact typography have not been visually verified. Access may require a subscription; use your complete centre anthology. This transcription is not certified identical to that edition. Teaching uses scene-based reading locators, not invented printed pages or line numbers; exact language must be checked in the approved text. No protected passage or source image is reproduced. Words and full-selection workshops remain unfinished; the complete ten-story option is unavailable.
Work on paper. Try each question before revealing help, and explain why your method works.
Quick readiness check
What should support a claim about a literary text?
What you will learn
- Analyse a change in the mother’s response to hospitality
- Distinguish Pritam’s skill from social humiliation
- Test declared values against the treatment of a friend
In the Mountains · a table that reveals unequal recognition
- Read In the Mountains in full in the approved centre anthology before using these scene-based locators. The linked publisher transcription runs through the final invitation to eat; access may require a subscription.
- The publisher warns of automated transcription errors. These scene descriptions are navigation aids, not printed page or line numbers. Check exact language and typography in the centre edition.
- Write independently before comparing. Distinguish narration, a character’s judgement and an interpretation you can support.
Original StudyForA teaching and self-review, not Cambridge questions, marked scripts, calibrated full papers or authenticated coursework. No protected story passage is reproduced. Models do not award marks or certify mastery; alternative supported readings can be valid. Words and full-selection workshops remain unfinished.
Read the meal
Reread the cooking, arrival, eight-year separation and the mother’s changing reaction.
1. How does the meal expose a conflict beyond the expected family quarrel?
Compare after trying
The superb meal and enthusiastic welcome defeat the mother’s fear of an unpleasant reception. Her distress instead grows when she sees Pritam pleasing the guests, particularly Bobby, and imagines her daughter reduced to service. The apparently successful gathering therefore reveals a second, less comfortable conflict about dignity.
The servant comparison belongs to the mother’s painful perception, while Pritam herself enjoys giving the food. That difference makes hospitality contested rather than simply degrading. It is not evidence of an employment arrangement or a badly cooked meal.
Why this response fits
- Attribute the image.
- Explain why successful hospitality can still cause pain.
Read the closed-door argument
Reread the accusation of spying and the mother’s defence of inviting the neighbour.
1. How does the argument complicate your judgement of both women?
Compare after trying
The mother’s defence of inviting Doctor Sahib revises her earlier disapproval. She now values a friend who has remained available, and food becomes a way of recognising that loyalty. The change prevents her from remaining only a representative of social prejudice.
Pritam’s degrading account of his past hunger reveals a hierarchy within her own defensive speech. Placed beside her earlier shelter and repairs, it makes generosity inconsistent rather than wholly imaginary. The argument unsettles both women’s positions instead of assigning all compassion to one of them.
Why this response fits
- Use a revision for each woman.
- Analyse prejudiced speech without adopting it.
Competence unsettles an expected quarrel
Pritam’s enjoyment and skill in cooking prevent an equation between unconventional appearance and general incompetence. Her welcome also defeats an expectation of hostility. The reunion with Bobby occurs after eight years, but the meal initially proceeds easily. Instead of treating the mother’s response as irrational because the visitors enjoy themselves, ask what kind of behaviour she thinks she is witnessing. A change from relief to distress reveals another standard at work. What appears generous to one observer can look like submission to another, especially when family memory gives a particular guest additional importance.
A comparison belongs to an observing mind
The mother’s image of her daughter as a servant is a judgement, not evidence that the family has formally employed or forced her into domestic service. It conveys pain about unequal recognition. The daughter’s pleasure and the mother’s distress therefore need to remain different responses to the same scene. The subsequent bedroom exchange gives food another function: the mother asks why the neighbour was not invited. Her earlier social disapproval does not prevent a later defence of his friendship. This turn complicates a static division between a generous outsider and a uniformly prejudiced family representative.
The daughter can reproduce the hierarchy she resists
Pritam’s suspicion about being observed leads to a private confrontation, but the mother redirects attention towards an old friend. Pritam then uses degrading class comparisons about his earlier hunger. Such language should be analysed as her defensive speech rather than adopted as the lesson’s standard of human value. The scene exposes a contradiction between practical generosity, the wish for independence and the desire to be acceptable to particular people. It does not cancel every earlier act of care. An argument becomes more convincing when it follows that inconsistency instead of choosing a character as wholly admirable or wholly false.
Sources for this lesson
Pause and explain
Is the comparison with a servant a confirmed employment arrangement?
Worked example
Improve “The mother objects because the meal is badly cooked”.
Show the worked solution
- Separate the food’s quality from her interpretation of service.
- Notice her first relief and later distress.
- Explain the change rather than invent a failed meal.
Answer Her response concerns dignity and recognition within the relationship, not an absence of cooking skill.
Try a topic test
Choose Easy, Normal or Difficult. Save your answers and open worked review after finishing.
Test this topic →From guided practice to a new situation
Write your answer and reasoning first. Use a hint only if you are stuck. The model solution is for self-checking; your written work is not automatically marked.
Explain a reversal in the mother’s response.
Give me a hint
Compare what she fears with what later troubles her.
Compare my reasoning
- An initial expectation is avoided.
- A different concern then emerges.
The changed response reveals competing desires rather than one simple wish that the visit should fail.
Look for these in your work
- Trace before and after
- Explain the competing values
How does the friend’s absence test a generous self-image?
Give me a hint
Compare earlier help with the present guest list.
Compare my reasoning
- Care has already been demonstrated.
- The meal exposes a different social choice.
A particular omission can complicate a general claim without proving that every previous generous act was insincere.
Look for these in your work
- Use action and omission
- Avoid a total reversal
Qualify “Only the mother judges people by social rank”.
Give me a hint
Find a later speech that challenges the claim.
Compare my reasoning
- The mother’s initial disapproval is explicit.
- The daughter later invokes degrading social comparisons.
The hierarchy is reproduced within a defensive response, making the contrast between the women less stable.
Look for these in your work
- Attribute the language
- Explain the contradiction
Common mistakes
- Do not endorse the degrading social comparisons spoken in the argument.
- Do not keep the mother’s attitude fixed at her initial disapproval after she defends the friendship.
What can you explain now?
Is the comparison with a servant a confirmed employment arrangement?
Compare with the explanation
No; it is the mother’s distressed interpretation of the scene.
An image in a character’s perspective must not become an invented contractual fact.
After trying it yourself, choose your next review. This is your self-assessment.
Your review choice appears on Today. Sign in to sync it across devices.
Make it stick
Is the comparison with a servant a confirmed employment arrangement?
If you needed the solution, close it and solve the problem again from a blank page. A correct answer is stronger when you can explain the reason for each step.