The significance of authorial interjection line 59 – 78 in the Millers prologue In the Millers prologue the author plays mainly a narrative role until line 59 where the author, Geoffrey Chaucer, enters the text as himself in authorial interjection. His tone is apologetic (even embarrassed of the tale he is about to ‘re-tell’) yet detached . He seems to be ‘talking’ to a large, varying audience or group of readers. In a world or time where most writers and authors were anonymous the above interjection and way in which he partakes in the text was rather unique and could be seen as a completely new way in which a author interact with the story and audience. Chaucer is both apologizing and excusing himself in the excerpt (line 59-78) from what he is about to recount, this could be seen as a way to draw the reader forward to discover exactly what could make the tale into one of ‘ribaldry’ (crude stories) and that which should be taken as ‘game’ (humorous), or a manner of protecting himself from his readers that might indeed look down upon him for such crude stories.
At the beginning of the novel, the words “the beginning is the simple to mark” are words that are somewhat inaccurate as well as being very misleading for the reader. The beginning of the novel is obvious but when the novel is read, it is clear that the different story lines are unclear to Joe. When the accident was described as “the beginning and of course the end” is significant as it could be representing the different chapters in Joe’s life. This could have connotations towards Joe’s scientific and logical
As I tried to figure out what have I read I found several interpretation of this work but they did not fit to my conceptions or to say my ideas. Many scholars wrote several critical essays and resource papers on this story and of course they focused on several different things but rewriting history. According to Christopher James – who won the national poetry competition in 2009 – this novel is: “Essentially it’s Robinson Crusoe meets Bear Grylls meets Life of Pi set in the 1940s and in the bleakest possible surroundings.”(James). That is one side of this multi shaped coin. After this I searched further interpretation of the text and I found Howard Babb’s words who said that many critics found this novel Golding’s most challenging book (Babb 65).
Alex Villa KM 1302.3018 18 March 2012 From Revolution to Revelation and Transformation Death, rape, alcohol, and drugs are all a part of the story “The Greasy Lake” written by T.C. Boyle. I am examining this text using the post-structuralism approach and proving how one could interpret this story in more ways than just one using the literary element of setting. If you give a group of people this story to read, and ask of them to present responses on it, including what they thought the meaning was, I highly doubt it would result in a unanimous response. There are different ways one could go about interpreting this story.
Unreliable narration is a major narrative device in Enduring Love. The story is told in first person by Joe Rose and the reader is constantly drawn to query whether we should trust his views on events. From the beginning, McEwan makes it clear that Joe is not necessarily telling the truth, but elaborating on it, creating it like McEwan does himself when he writes the novel. When discussing the balloon incident he says, ‘Knowing what I know now, it’s odd to evoke the figure of Jed Parry’. It is usually the author who evokes characters, so it is pointed out that Joe is creating his own story and its truths.
Her point of view tells the story of the main character, Jim Burden, who remembers specific moments in an abstract pattern in his life about his Antonia. This is so because the collection of books that make up the novel, My Antonia, is about Willa Cather; the narrator's idea of what and to what point Jim Burden remembers. Miller also states that the novel "lacks focus and abounds in irrelevancies" (Wells 1). This is due to the fact that Cather didn't provide a consistent character portrayal throughout her novel. Another critic, Kim Wells, asserts Miller's opinion on the novel because as he states the novel has many "variations from a theme" (Wells 1).
In the beginning of the article I was hesitant to believe that Conrad meant to put the two rivers into contrast. I doubted that he meant one river to stand for good and the other to stand for bad. But as the author went more in depth into the contrast and brought in excerpts from the novel I began to see where he was coming from. 4) Explain points you would argue
The narrative technic is stream of consciousness and this would not poise any trouble if Benjy were not retarded. Faulkner gives a moment to moment perception of a person who is unable to speak, to feed or to dress himself. We read an intricate flow or “river of thoughts” and this means going back and forth in time following his particular associations which are never crystal clear to the reader. Here it must be said that the author switches typography from Roman to italic when a change is done but then, we are presented with another situation in another point in time and when we go from one to the other there is the change of typography again. Therefore, different typography would mean different moments in time and/or back to the present.
Dustin F. Guastella A.P. English Mr. Conston April 03, 2009 John Barth's Experimental Postmodernism John Barth discovered that literature was repetitive that it was growing old and bland styles and genres were perpetually repeating themselves so he decided to attempt to break from this norm. With his essays on the Literature of Exhaustion, his short stories, and his novels he explores a new realm of fiction and a new aspect of humanism. His philosophies on ambiguity are the driving force throughout this new literature, which is neither absurd nor classic but a hybrid of the two. Through the bewitching stories we see that Barth is exploring an entirely new style of writing, sometimes confusing, sometimes fragmented, but always captivating.
Fitzgerald uses flashbacks very frequently in the novel, and by doing this Fitzgerald immediately has the reader questioning Nick, as accounts of the past are not as reliable as descriptions of the present. The form is also an important factor of how Fitzgerald tells the story in chapter two, as form is all about perspective. As Nick is the only narrator, we only hear Nick’s perspective on everything and therefore rely on Nick’s perspective on things such as characters and events in order to form our own judgment on them. However, Fitzgerald uses this technique very cleverly as we learn a lot about Nick Carraway as a character through his narration. In chapter one, he mentions that he is “inclined to reserve all