In our english class, we've read many short stories. As assigned, my classmates and I read through the story making annotations over plot, point of view, etc. While some have been pretty weird, some have been really sad, some of them show relief at the end, or any sort of feeling, they all seem to personal stories. No story tells of an event of some type, the story shows connections between the characters and the event being told.
For example, one may tell the story of the trojan war, but they don't tell the story based on the point of view of one of the soldiers. The narrator isn't biased towards a side and explains what's happening, "And the spartans surrendered, giving a giant horse to the trojans, triggering a celebration that would leave the city rowdy and drunk." But, to make the story have tension and suspense, "the spartans gathered with an idea, they had to get past the trojan's walls, and knew just how to do it, but first they surrendered. Not knowing what comes next, the spartans prepared for a plan that required perfect timing and a common goal, destroy the city of Troy." Both examples would tell a story, but which one would tell it better? I like the second one, and it must be popular among other people.
Siddhartha, Herman Hesse
9/29-45 minutes, 33 pages
Hunger, Michael Grant
9/29-1 hour and 35 minutes, 55 pages
Do you enjoy any of the stories?
ReplyDeleteBailey, you are making a great point about point of view here! Your narrator in the first example is detached and objective, while the second narrator may be omniscient and is creating drama through the story.
ReplyDelete