Maria Javed

Roll No. 1007

"City People" by Lydia Davis
"City People", a flash fiction piece by Lydia Davis, was first published in 2001 in Samuel
Johnson is Indignant and later included in The Collected Stories of Lydia Davis (2009). Known
for her minimalist prose (mukhtasir likhaawat [‫ )]مختصر لکھاوٹ‬and incisive observations (nukta-
sanj nazar [‫)]نکتہ سنج نظر‬, Davis crafts a brief yet poignant narrative about displacement and
discontent. At approximately 130 words, the story exemplifies her ability to distill complex
emotions (murkab jazbaat [‫ )]مرتب جذبات‬into sparse, evocative prose. Below, each requested
aspect is explored in extensive detail, with critical analysis and contextual connections.

1. Summary of the Story

Overview:
"City People" is a concise flash fiction piece that captures the unease (bechaini [‫ )]بے چینی‬of a
couple who relocate from an urban environment (shehri mahaul [‫ )]شہری ماحول‬to the countryside
(dehati ilaqa [‫)]دیہاتی عالقہ‬. Through understated prose (sada likhaawat [‫)]سادہ لکھاوٹ‬, Davis
explores their struggle to adapt, their growing discord (na-ittifaqi [‫)]نااتفاقی‬, and a broader sense
of dissatisfaction (na-khushi [‫ )]ناخوشی‬with their new life. The story’s brevity belies its emotional
depth (jazbaati gehraai [‫)]جذباتی گہرائی‬, reflecting Davis’s signature style of revealing profound
truths (gehre sach [‫ )]گہرے سچ‬through minimal detail.
Detailed Summary:
The narrative centers on an unnamed couple, identified only as “city people” (shehri log [ ‫شہری‬
‫)]لوگ‬, who have moved to a rural setting (dehati manzar [‫)]دیہاتی منظر‬. The countryside, initially
perceived as “nice enough” (kaafi achha [‫)]کافی اچھا‬, quickly becomes a source of discomfort
(takleef [‫)]تکلیف‬. Strange noises—such as a car on the driveway or mice in the walls—disrupt
their peace (sukoon [‫)]سکون‬, triggering anxiety (pareeshaani [‫)]پریشانی‬. The wife wakes in panic
(dehshat [‫ )]دہشت‬at sounds like her husband’s sniffle or external disturbances (bahari khalal
[‫)]باہری خلل‬, while the husband grows pale (peela parna [‫ )]پیال پڑنا‬and irritable (chirchira
[‫)]چڑچڑا‬, hating the mice and resenting the neighbor’s barking dog.
Their adjustment is marred by practical challenges (amali mushkilaat [‫)]عملی مشکالت‬: a broken
pump requires replacement (tabdeeli [‫)]تبدیلی‬, and they resort to poisoning the mice (zehr dena
[‫)]زہر دینا‬, actions that reflect their attempts to impose control (qaboo [‫ )]قابو‬on an unfamiliar
environment (ajnabi mahaul [‫)]اجنبی ماحول‬. However, these efforts fail to alleviate their unease.
Their relationship deteriorates (bigarna [‫)]بگڑنا‬, marked by increased quarrels (jhagray [‫)]جھگڑے‬.
The wife often cries (rona [‫)]رونا‬, and the husband bows his head (sir jhukana [‫)]سر جھکانا‬,
signaling defeat (haar [‫ )]ہار‬or resignation (tasleem [‫)]تسلیم‬. The countryside’s beauty—sunlight
on their faces—cannot mask their discontent (na-khushi [‫)]ناخوشی‬.
The story culminates in the husband’s declaration: “We’re city people… and there aren’t any
nice cities to live in.” This statement encapsulates their realization (ehsaas [‫ )]احساس‬that their
dissatisfaction transcends location (muqaam [‫)]مقام‬. The city, idealized in memory (yaad [‫)]یاد‬, is
no longer a viable refuge (panaah [‫)]پناہ‬, leaving them trapped in a cycle of longing (tamanna
[‫ )]تمنا‬and disillusionment (na-umeedi [‫)]ناعمیدی‬. The narrative ends abruptly, without resolution
(bila-hal [‫)]بال حل‬, mirroring the couple’s unresolved turmoil (androoni kashmakash [ ‫اندرونی کش‬
‫)]مکش‬.
Significance:
The summary underscores Davis’s economy (mukhtasir-pan [‫)]مختصر پن‬, where every word
carries weight (wazan [‫)]وزن‬. The couple’s struggle reflects a universal human experience (aam
insani tajurba [‫—)]عام انسانی تجربہ‬the search for belonging (talab-e-sakoon [‫—)]طلب سکون‬
rendered with precision (sachai [‫ )]سچائی‬and ambiguity (do-rukha-pan [‫)]دو رخی پن‬. The story’s
open-endedness invites readers to ponder the roots of the couple’s discontent, aligning with
Davis’s minimalist ethos (sada falsafa [‫)]سادہ فلسفہ‬.

2. Symbols in the Story

Davis employs subtle symbols to convey the couple’s alienation (judaai [‫ )]جدائی‬and inner
turmoil (androoni kashmakash [‫)]اندرونی کش مکش‬. Each symbol is analyzed below, with textual
connections and interpretive depth:
 The Countryside:
The rural setting symbolizes an idealized escape (farar ka khayal [‫ )]فرار کا خیال‬from
urban chaos (shehri afra-tafri [‫)]شہری افراتفری‬, but it becomes a mirror for the couple’s
unease (bechaini [‫)]بے چینی‬. Described as “nice enough,” its beauty is overshadowed by
disturbances (khalal [‫—)]خلل‬mice, barking dogs, strange noises. The countryside
represents an unattainable idyll (khayali jannat [‫)]خیالی جنت‬, exposing the couple’s
inability to adapt (dhaal parna [‫)]ڈھال پڑنا‬. It’s less about the place itself and more about
their projected discontent (na-khushi [‫)]ناخوشی‬, a common Davis trope (mauzoo [‫)]موضوع‬
where environment reflects psyche (nafs [‫)]نفس‬.
 Mice:
The “mice chattering in the walls” symbolize persistent, uncontrollable irritations (chhoti
takleefein [‫ )]چھوٹی تکلیفیں‬that invade the couple’s attempt at peace (sukoon [‫)]سکون‬. Their
decision to “poison the mice” reflects a futile effort (baykaar koshish [‫ )]بیک کار کوشش‬to
eliminate these disturbances, but it also hints at self-destruction (khud-tabahi [‫)]خود تباہی‬,
as their actions deepen their alienation (judaai [‫)]جدائی‬. The mice embody the couple’s
inner anxieties (androoni fikrein [‫)]اندرونی فکریں‬, which persist despite external fixes
(bahari hal [‫)]باہری حل‬.
 The Broken Pump:
The pump, which “breaks” and is replaced, symbolizes the couple’s fragile attempt
(naazuk koshish [‫ )]نازک کوشش‬to establish functionality (kaam-kar-pan [‫ )]کام کر پن‬in their
new life. Its failure mirrors their broader struggle (jaddo-jehad [‫ )]جدو جہد‬to make the
countryside work for them. The act of replacement (tabdeeli [‫ )]تبدیلی‬suggests a
superficial solution (sathi hal [‫)]سطحی حل‬, as the underlying issues (buniyaadi masail
[‫—)]بنیادی مسائل‬their discomfort and discord—remain unresolved (bila-hal [‫)]بال حل‬.
 The Neighbor’s Dog:
The barking dog, which the wife considers poisoning, symbolizes external chaos (bahari
afra-tafri [‫ )]باہری افراتفری‬that exacerbates the couple’s tension (kashmakash [‫)]کش مکش‬.
Its relentless noise (musalsal shor [‫ )]مسلسل شور‬parallels their internal unrest (androoni
bechaini [‫)]اندرونی بے چینی‬, and the wife’s dark impulse (tareek khayal [‫ )]تاریک خیال‬to
harm it reflects her desperation (mayoosi [‫)]مایوسی‬. The dog underscores their isolation
(tanhaai [‫)]تنہائی‬, as it belongs to a neighbor they don’t connect with, highlighting their
outsider status (ajnabi haisiyat [‫)]اجنبی حیثیت‬.
 Sunlight:
The “sunlight on their faces” in the morning symbolizes a fleeting promise (chhota wada
[‫ )]چھوٹا وعدہ‬of hope (umeed [‫ )]امید‬or renewal (naya-shuroo [‫)]نیا شروع‬. However, its
presence alongside mice and quarrels undercuts its warmth (garmi [‫)]گرمی‬, suggesting
that external beauty (zahiri husn [‫ )]ظاہری حسن‬cannot heal internal strife (androoni jhagra
 [‫)]اندرونی جھگڑا‬. The sunlight’s irony (tanz [‫ )]طنز‬lies in its failure to transform the
couple’s mood (mizaj [‫)]مزاج‬, a subtle critique (nukta-cheeni [‫ )]نکتہ چینی‬of romanticized
rural life.
Expanded Analysis:
These symbols, though understated, resonate with Davis’s minimalist style (sada andaaz [ ‫سادہ‬
‫)]انداز‬, where ordinary objects carry profound meaning (gehra matlab [‫)]گہرا مطلب‬. The
countryside and its disturbances reflect the couple’s psychological displacement (nafsiyati be-
makani [‫)]نفسیاتی بے مکانی‬, while the sunlight’s irony critiques idealized transitions (khayali
tabdeeli [‫)]خیالی تبدیلی‬. The symbols’ ambiguity (do-rukha-pan [‫ )]دو رخی پن‬invites readers to
interpret the couple’s struggle as both personal (shakhsi [‫ )]شخصی‬and universal (aam [‫)]عام‬,
aligning with Davis’s broader exploration of human discontent (insani na-khushi [‫)]انسانی ناخوشی‬.

3. Themes of the Story

Davis weaves several interconnected themes, each illuminated through the couple’s experience
and her precise prose (sachai bhari likhaawat [‫)]سچائی بھری لکھاوٹ‬. Below, each theme is
explored in detail:
 Displacement and Alienation (be-makani aur judaai [‫)]بے مکانی اور جدائی‬:
The couple’s move to the countryside highlights their sense of displacement (be-makani
[‫)]بے مکانی‬, as they feel out of place (ghair-mustaqil [‫ )]غیر مستقل‬in their new
environment. The strange noises and practical challenges—mice, broken pump, barking
dog—amplify their alienation (judaai [‫)]جدائی‬, as they cannot integrate (shamil hona
[‫ )]شامل ہونا‬into rural life. The husband’s claim, “We’re city people,” suggests a fixed
identity (muqarrar shanakht [‫ )]مقرر شناخت‬that clashes with their surroundings,
underscoring a broader human struggle (insani jaddo-jehad [‫ )]انسانی جدو جہد‬to find
belonging (sakoon ka muqaam [‫)]سکون کا مقام‬.
 Discontent and Restlessness (na-khushi aur bechaini [‫)]ناخوشی اور بے چینی‬:
The story probes the couple’s pervasive dissatisfaction (na-khushi [‫)]ناخوشی‬, which
transcends location (muqaam [‫)]مقام‬. The husband’s lament—“there aren’t any nice cities
to live in”—implies that their unrest (bechaini [‫ )]بے چینی‬is not merely about the
countryside but a deeper, existential malaise (wajoodi beemari [‫)]وجودی بیماری‬. Their
quarrels and tears reflect a restlessness (bay-qarari [‫ )]بے قراری‬that Davis often explores,
where characters seek fulfillment (itminaan [‫ )]اطمینان‬but find it elusive (dushwaar
[‫)]دشوار‬.
 Relationship Strain (rishton ka dabao [‫)]رشتوں کا دباؤ‬:
The couple’s increased quarrels—“They quarrel more often”—and emotional outbursts—
“They cry, or she cries and he bows his head”—highlight the strain (dabao [‫ )]دباؤ‬their
move places on their relationship. The countryside, rather than uniting them, exposes
underlying tensions (chhupi kashmakash [‫)]چھپی کش مکش‬, as external discomforts (bahari
takleefein [‫ )]باہری تکلیفیں‬mirror internal discord (androoni na-ittifaqi [‫)]اندرونی نااتفاقی‬. This
theme aligns with Davis’s interest in domestic dynamics (gharelu harkaat [‫)]گھریلو حرکات‬,
seen in stories like “The Two Davises and the Rug.”
 Illusion of Escape (farar ka weham [‫)]فرار کا وہم‬:
The move to the countryside represents an illusory escape (khayali farar [‫ )]خیالی فرار‬from
urban discontent (shehri na-khushi [‫)]شہری ناخوشی‬. The couple’s romanticized view
(romani khayal [‫ )]رومانی خیال‬of rural life crumbles under practical realities (haqeeqi
masail [‫)]حقیقی مسائل‬, suggesting that true contentment (sachchi khushi [‫)]سچی خوشی‬
 cannot be achieved by changing locations (jagah badalna [‫)]جگہ بدلنا‬. The husband’s
realization that no “nice cities” exist extends this critique (tanqeed [‫)]تنقید‬, exposing the
futility (bay-soodi [‫ )]بے سودی‬of seeking external solutions (bahari hal [‫ )]باہری حل‬for
internal problems (androoni masail [‫)]اندرونی مسائل‬.
 Anxiety and Vulnerability (pareeshaani aur kamzori [‫)]پریشانی اور کمزوری‬:
The wife’s panic (dehshat [‫ )]دہشت‬at night and the husband’s pallor (peela-pan [‫)]پیال پن‬
underscore their vulnerability (kamzori [‫ )]کمزوری‬in an unfamiliar setting (ajnabi jagah
[‫)]اجنبی جگہ‬. The countryside’s noises—cars, sniffles, mice—become amplified threats
(khaufnak khatray [‫)]خوفناک خطرات‬, reflecting their heightened anxiety (ziyada
pareeshaani [‫)]زیادہ پریشانی‬. This theme connects to Davis’s broader exploration of human
fragility (insani naazuk-pan [‫)]انسانی نازک پن‬, where small triggers (chhoti wajohaat
[‫ )]چھوٹی وجوہات‬expose deeper fears (gehra khauf [‫)]گہرا خوف‬.
Expanded Analysis:
These themes interweave to create a layered portrait (murkab tasweer [‫ )]مرتب تصویر‬of human
discontent. The couple’s displacement echoes modernist concerns (jadeed fikrein [‫)]جدید فکریں‬
about rootlessness (be-jarr-pan [‫)]بے جڑ پن‬, while their restlessness aligns with existential
questions (wajoodi sawaal [‫ )]وجودی سوال‬about purpose (maqsad [‫)]مقصد‬. The focus on
relationship strain grounds the narrative in domestic reality (gharelu haqeeqat [‫)]گھریلو حقیقت‬, a
hallmark of Davis’s work. The illusion of escape critiques societal myths (samaji afsanay [ ‫سماجی‬
‫ )]افسانے‬about “better” lives, making the story both intimate (qareebi [‫ )]قریبی‬and universal (aam
[‫)]عام‬.

4. Setting of the Story

Overview:
"City People" is set in an unnamed rural area (dehati ilaqa [‫ )]دیہاتی عالقہ‬where the couple has
relocated from an urban environment (shehri mahaul [‫)]شہری ماحول‬. The setting, described
sparsely, serves as a catalyst (muharrik [‫ )]محرک‬for their unease (bechaini [‫ )]بے چینی‬and a mirror
(aaina [‫ )]آئینہ‬for their internal struggles (androoni kashmakash [‫)]اندرونی کش مکش‬.
Detailed Explanation:
 The Countryside:
The primary setting is a rural home, likely a house or cottage (chhota ghar [‫)]چھوٹا گھر‬,
surrounded by natural elements (qudrati ansar [‫—)]قدرتی عنصر‬trees, sunlight, animals.
Davis describes it minimally: “The country is nice enough,” with details like “sunlight on
their faces” and “mice chattering in the walls.” The countryside’s beauty is
acknowledged but overshadowed by disturbances (khalal [‫—)]خلل‬a barking dog, a car on
the driveway, a broken pump. These elements create a sense of unfamiliarity (ajnabi-pan
[‫)]اجنبی پن‬, contrasting with the couple’s urban past (shehri maazi [‫)]شہری ماضی‬. The rural
setting is generic (aam [‫)]عام‬, lacking specific landmarks (nishanaat [‫)]نشانیں‬, which
universalizes the couple’s experience (aam tajurba [‫)]عام تجربہ‬.
 Temporal Context:
The story’s timing is ambiguous (mubham [‫)]مبہم‬, likely contemporary to its 2001
publication, reflecting a modern era (jadeed daur [‫ )]جدید دور‬of urban-rural migration
(shehri-dehati hijrat [‫)]شہری دیہاتی ہجرت‬. The narrative spans an undefined period (ghair-
muayyan muddat [‫)]غیر معین مدت‬, with references to day (“morning”) and night (“she
wakes in a panic”), suggesting a cyclical routine (dairay-daar tarz [‫)]دائرے دار طرز‬
disrupted by anxiety (pareeshaani [‫)]پریشانی‬. The lack of precise temporal markers (waqt
 ke nishaan [‫ )]وقت کے نشان‬enhances the story’s timelessness (hamesha-rehnay-wali [ ‫ہمیشہ‬
‫)]رہنے والی‬.
 The City (Implied):
Though not physically present, the city looms as a remembered space (yaad ki jagah [ ‫یاد‬
‫)]کی جگہ‬. The husband’s statement—“We’re city people, and there aren’t any nice cities
to live in”—implies a past urban life (shehri zindagi [‫ )]شہری زندگی‬marked by familiarity
(ashnai [‫ )]آشنائی‬but also dissatisfaction (na-khushi [‫)]ناخوشی‬. The city is an abstract
contrast (mukhtalif tasweer [‫ )]مختلف تصویر‬to the countryside, its absence amplifying the
couple’s sense of loss (nuqsaan ka ehsaas [‫)]نقصان کا احساس‬.
 Cultural Context:
The rural setting taps into American narratives (Amriki kahaaniyaan [‫ )]امریکی کہانیاں‬of
escaping urban stress (shehri dabao [‫ )]شہری دباؤ‬for pastoral simplicity (dehati sada-pan
[‫)]دیہاتی سادگی‬. Davis subverts (ulti tasweer [‫ )]الٹی تصویر‬this trope, portraying the
countryside as unsettling (pareeshan-kun [‫ )]پریشان کن‬rather than idyllic (khayali jannat
[‫)]خیالی جنت‬. The lack of cultural specificity (saqafati tafseel [‫—)]ثقافتی تفصیل‬no named
town or region—makes the setting a blank canvas (khaali tasweer [‫ )]خالی تصویر‬for the
couple’s projections (khayalaat [‫)]خیاالت‬.
Expanded Analysis:
The setting is a dynamic force (harkaati quwwat [‫)]حرکاتی قوت‬, driving the couple’s conflict
(tanaza [‫ )]تنازع‬and reflecting their psyche (nafs [‫)]نفس‬. The countryside’s sparse description
aligns with Davis’s minimalist aesthetic (sada jamaliyat [‫)]سادہ جمالیات‬, where less detail invites
more interpretation (tafheem [‫)]تفہیم‬. The implied city adds a layer of nostalgia (yaad-e-maazi [ ‫یاد‬
‫)]ماضی‬, complicating the rural experience. The setting’s universality (aamiyat [‫ )]عامیت‬makes it
relatable, while its disturbances ground it in gritty reality (sakht haqeeqat [‫)]سخت حقیقت‬, a balance
Davis masters in her microfiction (chhoti kahaani [‫)]چھوٹی کہانی‬.

5. Plot of the Story

Overview:
The plot of "City People" is minimalist (mukhtasir [‫)]مختصر‬, unfolding in a brief narrative arc
(kahaani ka chhota dairah [‫ )]کہانی کا چھوٹا دائرہ‬that captures the couple’s adjustment to rural life.
With no traditional climax (inteha [‫)]انتہا‬, the story relies on accumulating tension (kashmakash
ka izafa [‫ )]کش مکش کا اضافہ‬and a poignant final statement (aakhri jumla [‫)]آخری جملہ‬.
Detailed Plot:
 Exposition:
The story opens with the couple already settled in the countryside: “The country is nice
enough, but they are uneasy.” This establishes their new environment (naya mahaul [ ‫نیا‬
‫ )]ماحول‬and immediate discomfort (takleef [‫)]تکلیف‬. The wife’s panic at night—“She
wakes in a panic, hearing him sniffle”—and the husband’s irritation—“He hates the
mice”—introduce their emotional state (jazbaati haalat [‫ )]جذباتی حالت‬and the rural
disturbances (dehati khalal [‫—)]دیہاتی خلل‬mice, barking dogs, a car on the driveway.
 Rising Action:
Tension builds as practical challenges emerge (amali mushkilaat [‫)]عملی مشکالت‬. The
pump breaks, and they replace it, while the mice prompt them to use poison (zehr [‫)]زہر‬.
These actions reflect their struggle (koshish [‫ )]کوشش‬to control their environment, but
each fix fails to restore peace (sukoon [‫)]سکون‬. Their relationship frays (rishta tootna
[‫)]رشتہ ٹوٹنا‬: “They quarrel more often. They cry, or she cries and he bows his head.” The
 wife’s tears (aansoo [‫ )]آنسو‬and the husband’s resignation (tasleem [‫ )]تسلیم‬signal
deepening discord (na-ittifaqi [‫)]نااتفاقی‬, amplified by the countryside’s noises and
isolation (tanhaai [‫)]تنہائی‬.
 Climax (Subtle):
Unlike traditional plots, the climax is understated (dabba hua [‫)]دبا ہوا‬, occurring in the
husband’s declaration: “We’re city people… and there aren’t any nice cities to live in.”
This moment crystallizes their realization (ehsaas [‫ )]احساس‬that their discontent (na-
khushi [‫ )]ناخوشی‬is not solely about the countryside but a broader existential trap (wajoodi
jaal [‫)]وجودی جال‬. The statement shifts the narrative from external struggle (bahari
kashmakash [‫ )]باہری کش مکش‬to internal reflection (androoni tafakkur [‫)]اندرونی تفکر‬.
 Falling Action:
There is minimal falling action, as the story ends abruptly after the husband’s words. The
lack of further detail—whether they stay or leave—leaves their future uncertain (ghair-
yaqeeni [‫)]غیر یقینی‬. The final line lingers, emphasizing their trapped state (phansa hua
[‫ )]پھنسا ہوا‬between an unappealing past (na-pasand maazi [‫ )]ناپسند ماضی‬and an
uncomfortable present (pareeshan haal [‫)]پریشان حال‬.
 Resolution:
The story offers no resolution (koi hal [‫)]کوئی حل‬, true to Davis’s flash fiction style
(chhoti kahaani andaaz [‫)]چھوٹی کہانی انداز‬. The couple remains in limbo (adhoora-pan
[‫)]ادھورا پن‬, their discontent unresolved (bila-hal [‫)]بال حل‬. The open-endedness (kholay-
siray [‫ )]کھولے سرے‬invites readers to ponder the source of their unease (bechaini ka
sabab [‫)]بے چینی کا سبب‬.
Expanded Analysis:
The plot’s brevity (mukhtasir-pan [‫ )]مختصر پن‬belies its emotional weight (jazbaati wazan [ ‫جذباتی‬
‫)]وزن‬. Each sentence advances the couple’s struggle (jaddo-jehad [‫)]جدو جہد‬, with disturbances
piling up like a quiet crescendo (dheema izafa [‫)]دھیما اضافہ‬. The lack of a traditional climax
aligns with Davis’s rejection (inkaar [‫ )]انکار‬of conventional narrative (riwayati kahaani [ ‫روایتی‬
‫)]کہانی‬, focusing instead on a single, revelatory moment (waqt-e-inkishaaf [‫)]وقت انکشاف‬. The
plot’s structure mirrors the couple’s cyclical discontent (dairay-daar na-khushi [ ‫دائرے دار‬
‫)]ناخوشی‬, echoing Davis’s broader exploration of human restlessness (insani bechaini [ ‫انسانی بے‬
‫)]چینی‬.

6. Point of View
Overview:
"City People" is narrated in the third-person limited point of view, focusing on the couple’s
collective experience (jamma tajurba [‫ )]جمع تجربہ‬without fully entering their individual minds
(shakhsi khayaalat [‫)]شخصی خیاالت‬. This perspective creates intimacy (qurbat [‫ )]قربت‬while
maintaining distance (faseela [‫)]فاصلہ‬.
Detailed Explanation:
 Third-Person Limited:
The narrator describes the couple’s actions and emotions—“They are uneasy,” “She
wakes in a panic,” “He bows his head”—without omniscient access (har-cheez-daan [ ‫ہر‬
‫ )]چیز دان‬to their deeper thoughts. This limited perspective (mehdood nazar [‫)]محدود نظر‬
keeps the focus on observable behaviors (zahiri rawayya [‫ )]ظاہری رویہ‬and external
triggers (bahari muharrikaat [‫)]باہری محرکات‬, such as noises or broken pumps. The use of
 “they” and occasional shifts to “she” or “he” suggests a collective yet fractured
experience (jamma lekin toota [‫)]جمع لیکن ٹوٹا‬.
 Narrative Distance:
The third-person voice is detached (alag-thalag [‫)]الگ تھلگ‬, avoiding direct dialogue
(seedhi guftagu [‫ )]سیدھی گفتگو‬except for the husband’s final statement. This distance
mirrors the couple’s alienation (judaai [‫)]جدائی‬, as readers observe their struggle
(kashmakash [‫ )]کش مکش‬without fully inhabiting it (rahaish karna [‫)]رہائش کرنا‬. The
narrator’s neutrality (ghair-jaanibdaari [‫—)]غیر جانبداری‬no judgment (faisla [‫ )]فیصلہ‬on
their actions—enhances the story’s ambiguity (do-rukha-pan [‫)]دو رخی پن‬, inviting
interpretation (tafheem [‫)]تفہیم‬.
 Effect on Tone:
The POV contributes to a clinical yet empathetic tone (saaf lekin hamdard [ ‫صاف لیکن‬
‫)]ہمدرد‬. Phrases like “They quarrel more often” or “She could poison the dog” are stated
matter-of-factly (haqeeqat-parasti [‫)]حقیقت پرستی‬, yet evoke pathos (dilsuzi [‫)]دل سوزی‬.
The limited access to the couple’s minds underscores their isolation (tanhaai [‫)]تنہائی‬, as
even the narrator cannot bridge their emotional gap (jazbaati khalaa [‫)]جذباتی خال‬.
 Connection to Davis’s Style:
Davis often uses third-person limited in her microfiction (chhoti kahaani [‫ )]چھوٹی کہانی‬to
balance intimacy (qurbat [‫ )]قربت‬and detachment (alag-thalag [‫)]الگ تھلگ‬, as seen in
stories like “The Visitor.” Here, it captures the couple’s shared unease (jamma bechaini
[‫ )]جمع بے چینی‬while preserving their individuality (infiradiyat [‫)]انفرادیت‬, aligning with
her focus on precise observation (nukta-sanj nazar [‫)]نکتہ سنج نظر‬.
Expanded Analysis:
The POV’s restraint (rok-tham [‫ )]روک تھام‬mirrors Davis’s minimalist ethos (sada falsafa [ ‫سادہ‬
‫)]فلسفہ‬, where less revelation (inkishaaf [‫ )]انکشاف‬creates more impact (asar [‫)]اثر‬. The third-
person limited perspective externalizes the couple’s internal struggle (androoni kashmakash
[‫)]اندرونی کش مکش‬, making their alienation palpable (chhoo-saknay-wala [‫)]چھو سکنے واال‬. By
withholding deep psychological insight (nafsiyati baseerat [‫)]نفسیاتی بصیرت‬, Davis invites readers
to project their own experiences (shakhsi tajurba [‫)]شخصی تجربہ‬, enhancing the story’s
universality (aamiyat [‫)]عامیت‬.
7. Conflict
The story’s conflicts—both external and internal—drive its exploration of displacement (be-
makani [‫ )]بے مکانی‬and discontent (na-khushi [‫)]ناخوشی‬. Each is analyzed below with textual
support:
 External Conflict (Couple vs. Countryside):
The primary external conflict pits the couple against their rural environment (dehati
mahaul [‫)]دیہاتی ماحول‬. Disturbances like “mice chattering in the walls,” a “barking dog,”
and a “car go[ing] up the driveway” disrupt their peace (sukoon [‫)]سکون‬, triggering panic
(dehshat [‫ )]دہشت‬and irritation (chirchirapan [‫)]چڑچڑاپن‬. Practical challenges (amali
mushkilaat [‫—)]عملی مشکالت‬a broken pump, the need to poison mice—represent their
struggle (jaddo-jehad [‫ )]جدو جہد‬to adapt (dhaal parna [‫)]ڈھال پڑنا‬. These external
obstacles (rukawatein [‫ )]رکاوٹیں‬symbolize broader incompatibilities (na-mutabiqat
[‫ )]نامطابقت‬between their urban identity (shehri shanakht [‫ )]شہری شناخت‬and rural reality
(dehati haqeeqat [‫)]دیہاتی حقیقت‬.
 Internal Conflict (Couple’s Discontent):
The couple’s internal conflict lies in their pervasive dissatisfaction (na-khushi [‫)]ناخوشی‬,
 which the countryside exacerbates but does not cause. The wife’s panic—“She wakes in a
panic, hearing him sniffle”—and the husband’s pallor—“He is pale all the time now”—
reflect personal anxieties (shakhsi pareeshaani [‫ )]شخصی پریشانی‬magnified by their new
setting (naya muqaam [‫)]نیا مقام‬. The husband’s final statement—“there aren’t any nice
cities to live in”—reveals a deeper existential unrest (wajoodi bechaini [‫)]وجودی بے چینی‬,
as they realize no location (koi jagah [‫ )]کوئی جگہ‬can satisfy them. This internal struggle
(androoni kashmakash [‫ )]اندرونی کش مکش‬is the story’s emotional core (jazbaati markaz
[‫)]جذباتی مرکز‬.
 Interpersonal Conflict (Couple vs. Each Other):
The couple’s relationship becomes a battleground (maidaan-e-jang [‫)]میدان جنگ‬, as “They
quarrel more often.” The wife’s tears—“She cries”—and the husband’s resignation—“He
bows his head”—signal emotional distance (jazbaati faseela [‫)]جذباتی فاصلہ‬. The
countryside’s pressures (dabao [‫ )]دباؤ‬expose underlying tensions (chhupi kashmakash
[‫)]چھپی کش مکش‬, transforming their partnership (sath [‫ )]ساتھ‬into a source of conflict
(tanaza [‫)]تنازع‬. This interpersonal strife (rishton ka jhagra [‫ )]رشتوں کا جھگڑا‬reflects
Davis’s interest in domestic friction (gharelu ragar [‫)]گھریلو رگڑ‬.
Expanded Analysis:
The conflicts interlock to create a multifaceted narrative (bahut-rukha kahaani [‫)]بہت رخی کہانی‬.
The external struggle with the countryside externalizes their internal discontent (androoni na-
khushi [‫)]اندرونی ناخوشی‬, while the interpersonal conflict humanizes their plight (insani haalat
[‫)]انسانی حالت‬. Davis’s subtle escalation (dheema izafa [‫—)]دھیما اضافہ‬from noises to quarrels to
existential realization (wajoodi ehsaas [‫—)]وجودی احساس‬mirrors her microfiction’s ability to pack
complexity (murkab-pan [‫ )]مرتب پن‬into brevity (mukhtasir-pan [‫)]مختصر پن‬. The lack of
resolution (bila-hal [‫ )]بال حل‬underscores the conflicts’ insolubility (na-hal-honay-wala [ ‫ناحل‬
‫)]ہونے واال‬, a hallmark of Davis’s work.
8. Biography of Lydia Davis
Overview:
Lydia Davis (born July 15, 1947) is an American short-story writer, novelist, essayist, and
translator, renowned for her innovative microfiction (chhoti kahaani [‫ )]چھوٹی کہانی‬and precise
prose (sachai bhari likhaawat [‫)]سچائی بھری لکھاوٹ‬. Often called a “virtuoso of the short story
form” (chhoti kahaani ka ustaad [‫)]چھوٹی کہانی کا استاد‬, she explores human emotions (insani
jazbaat [‫ )]انسانی جذبات‬and linguistic nuances (zabaani nukta [‫ )]زبانی نکتہ‬with unparalleled clarity
(safai [‫)]صفائی‬.
Detailed Biography:
 Early Life and Education:
Born in Northampton, Massachusetts, Davis grew up in a literary family (adabi khandaan
[‫)]ادبی خاندان‬. Her father, Robert Gorham Davis, was a critic and professor, and her
mother, Hope Hale Davis, was a writer. This environment fostered her love for language
(zabaan se mohabbat [‫)]زبان سے محبت‬. She studied at Barnard College, graduating in
1970, and later pursued graduate work, immersing herself in literature (adab [‫ )]ادب‬and
translation (tarjuma [‫)]ترجمہ‬. Her early exposure to modernist writers (jadeed adeeb [ ‫جدید‬
‫ )]ادیب‬like Samuel Beckett shaped her minimalist style (sada andaaz [‫)]سادہ انداز‬.
 Literary Career:
Davis began publishing short stories in the 1970s, gaining recognition with Break It
Down (1986), a collection of brief, incisive tales (mukhtasir aur teekhi kahaaniyaan
[‫)]مختصر اور تیکھی کہانیاں‬. Her subsequent works include:
 o Samuel Johnson is Indignant (2001): Contains City People, showcasing her flash fiction
(chhoti kahaani [‫)]چھوٹی کہانی‬.
o Varieties of Disturbance (2007): A National Book Award finalist (inaam ka umeedwaar
[‫)]انعام کا امیدوار‬, blending stories and observations (nazarat [‫)]نظارات‬.
o Can’t and Won’t (2014): Further experiments in form (shakl [‫)]شکل‬.
o The Collected Stories of Lydia Davis (2009): A comprehensive anthology (mukammal
majmooa [‫ )]مکمل مجموعہ‬cementing her legacy (viraasat [‫)]وراثت‬.
o The End of the Story (1995): Her only novel (nawil [‫)]ناول‬, exploring memory (yaad [‫)]یاد‬
and relationships (rishtay [‫)]رشتے‬.
o Essays One (2019) and Essays Two (2021): Reflections (tafakkuraat [‫ )]تفکرات‬on writing
and translation.
Her stories, often a sentence or paragraph long, defy categorization (zummra-bandi
[‫)]زمرہ بندی‬, blending fiction (afsaana [‫)]افسانہ‬, prose poetry (nasri nazm [‫)]نثری نظم‬, and
philosophy (falsafa [‫)]فلسفہ‬. Critics praise her “eerie lucidity” (ajeeb safai [‫)]عجیب صفائی‬
and ability to make the mundane profound (mamooli ko gehra [‫)]معمولی کو گہرا‬.
 Translation Work:
Davis is an acclaimed translator (mutarjim [‫)]مترجم‬, particularly of French literature
(Fransi adab [‫)]فرانسی ادب‬. Her translations include Marcel Proust’s Swann’s Way (2003),
retitled The Way by Swann’s for precision (sachai [‫)]سچائی‬, and Gustave Flaubert’s
Madame Bovary (2010). She has also translated Maurice Blanchot and Michel Leiris,
reflecting her affinity (lagao [‫ )]لگاؤ‬for linguistic depth (zabaani gehraai [‫)]زبانی گہرائی‬.
Her translation work informs her fiction, emphasizing exactitude (durusti [‫ )]درستی‬and
economy (mukhtasir-pan [‫)]مختصر پن‬.
 Personal Life:
Davis was married to novelist Paul Auster from 1974 to 1978, a period reflected in stories
like “St Martin,” which depicts a strained rural stay (dabao bhari dehati qayaam [ ‫دباؤ‬
‫)]بھری دیہاتی قیام‬. She later married artist Alan Cote, with whom she has a son; she also has
a son from her marriage to Auster. Her experiences as a mother, wife, and academic
(aalim [‫ )]عالم‬surface subtly in her work, though she avoids confessional writing (khud-
nawisi [‫)]خود نویسی‬, preferring observation (nazar [‫ )]نظر‬over autobiography (khud-
zindagi-nama [‫)]خود زندگی نامہ‬.
 Awards and Recognition:
Davis’s honors include a MacArthur Fellowship (2003), often called a “genius grant”
(dehaat ka inaam [‫)]دہائت کا انعام‬, the Man Booker International Prize (2013) for her
oeuvre (tamam kaam [‫)]تمام کام‬, and a Guggenheim Fellowship. Her work has been
anthologized (majmooa mein shamil [‫ )]مجموعہ میں شامل‬widely, and she is a professor
emerita at the University at Albany, SUNY, where she taught creative writing (takhleeqi
likhaawat [‫)]تخلیقی لکھاوٹ‬.
 Relevance to City People:
Davis’s interest in displacement (be-makani [‫ )]بے مکانی‬and domestic tension (gharelu
kashmakash [‫ )]گھریلو کش مکش‬shapes City People. Her minimalist style (sada andaaz
[‫)]سادہ انداز‬, honed through translation (tarjuma [‫)]ترجمہ‬, distills the couple’s struggle
(jaddo-jehad [‫ )]جدو جہد‬into precise images (sachchi tasweerein [‫)]سچی تصویریں‬. Her
experiences in rural settings (dehati ilaqa [‫)]دیہاتی عالقہ‬, possibly during her marriage to
Auster, lend authenticity (asliyat [‫ )]اصلیت‬to the story’s unease (bechaini [‫)]بے چینی‬. Her
fascination with linguistic nuance (zabaani nukta [‫ )]زبانی نکتہ‬ensures every word in the
story serves its theme (mauzoo [‫)]موضوع‬.
Expanded Analysis:
Davis’s biography illuminates City People as a microcosm (chhota jahan [‫ )]چھوٹا جہان‬of her
literary project (adabi mansooba [‫)]ادبی منصوبہ‬. Her translation work sharpens her prose’s clarity
(safai [‫)]صفائی‬, while her modernist influences (jadeed asaraat [‫—)]جدید اثرات‬Beckett, Proust—
infuse the story with existential weight (wajoodi wazan [‫)]وجودی وزن‬. Her personal transitions
(shakhsi tabdeeliyaan [‫—)]شخصی تبدیلیاں‬urban to rural, marriage to divorce—parallel the couple’s
displacement, making the story both intimate (qareebi [‫ )]قریبی‬and universal (aam [‫)]عام‬. Her
legacy as a “quiet giant” (dheema deo [‫ )]دھیما دیو‬of American fiction underscores her impact
(asar [‫)]اثر‬.
Difficult Words with Urdu Meanings
 Minimalist (sada-pan [‫)]سادگی‬: Simple, using few elements.
 Displacement (be-makani [‫)]بے مکانی‬: Feeling out of place.
 Alienation (judaai [‫)]جدائی‬: Isolation or disconnection.
 Discontent (na-khushi [‫)]ناخوشی‬: Dissatisfaction.
 Restlessness (bechaini [‫)]بے چینی‬: Inability to find peace.
 Anxiety (pareeshaani [‫)]پریشانی‬: Nervousness or worry.
 Vulnerability (kamzori [‫)]کمزوری‬: Weakness or exposure.
 Illusion (weham [‫)]وہم‬: False belief.
 Unease (bechaini [‫)]بے چینی‬: Discomfort.
 Quarrel (jhagra [‫)]جھگڑا‬: Argument or dispute.
 Resignation (tasleem [‫)]تسلیم‬: Acceptance of something undesirable.
 Ambiguity (do-rukha-pan [‫)]دو رخی پن‬: Uncertainty in meaning.
 Precision (sachai [‫)]سچائی‬: Exactness.
 Microfiction (chhoti kahaani [‫)]چھوٹی کہانی‬: Very short fiction.
 Existential (wajoodi [‫)]وجودی‬: Relating to existence or meaning.
 Authenticity (asliyat [‫)]اصلیت‬: Genuineness.
 Nuance (nukta [‫)]نکتہ‬: Subtle difference.
 Pathos (dilsuzi [‫)]دل سوزی‬: Quality evoking pity.
 Irony (tanz [‫)]طنز‬: Expression where meaning differs from words.
 Resilience (mazbooti [‫)]مضبوطی‬: Strength to recover.
Additional Notes
 Davis’s Minimalist Style:
City People exemplifies Davis’s “pared-down style” (sada andaaz [‫)]سادہ انداز‬, influenced by
Beckett, where simple words—“nice enough,” “uneasy”—carry emotional weight (jazbaati
wazan [‫)]جذباتی وزن‬. Her refusal to vary vocabulary (lafzon ka ikhtilaaf [‫ )]لفظوں کا اختالف‬creates a
stark, effective voice (wazeh awaaz [‫)]واضح آواز‬.
 Flash Fiction Context:
At 130 words, the story fits Davis’s microfiction ethos (chhoti kahaani falsafa [‫)]چھوٹی کہانی فلسفہ‬,
capturing a “small, mysterious moment” (chhota raazdaar lamha [‫)]چھوٹا رازدار لمحہ‬. Its brevity
aligns with her belief, per The Paris Review, that any subject—language, relationships, or mice—
merits exploration (talaash [‫)]تالش‬.
 Modernist and Postmodernist Elements:
The story’s ambiguity (do-rukha-pan [‫ )]دو رخی پن‬and focus on alienation (judaai [‫ )]جدائی‬echo
modernist themes (jadeed mawaad [‫)]جدید موضوعات‬, while its playful subversion (khelta hua
ulat-pher [‫ )]کھیلتا ہوا الٹ پھیر‬of rural ideals aligns with postmodernism (baad-jadeediyat [ ‫بعد‬
‫)]جدیدیت‬.