Cowan Donovan Mrs. Poirier English 122 26 September 2014 “The large ant” and Formalism Formalism is a very harmonic style of literary criticism. To be a formalist is to believe that all parts to a story work together and follow a set line of criteria. Only what is on the page is taken into account. Although formalism is a well-known style, it is not appropriate for Howard Fast’s short story “The Large Ant”. Using Formalism to interpret cannot be effective because the readers need to understand the background information.
Not all Novels should be Clear In many causes while reading certain novels and stories you might wonder why some stories have so much changing to them Or why so much back and forward amongst each of the stories? Many of these things may happen not because the author is trying to confuse the reader instead because the author is trying to give the reader a better understanding of many stories through different perspectives. Throughout this essay you will learn about how a great author Junot Diaz portrays this sort of writing style. Through Diaz’s writing in Drown we were able to see how the lack of chorological order made things shift around a bit for the reader, for instance the book began with the story Ysrael. A story that gave us the reader
Explore the presentation of the unreliable narrator in The Great Gatsby and consider how your ideas have been illuminated by your response to The Catcher in the Rye. The definition of an unreliable narrator is a story teller who cannot be trusted, either due to ignorance or motive. In F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel, The Great Gatsby, the reader puts trust in the narrator (Nick) to communicate the story. Similarly, in J.D Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye, we believe in Holden to take us on the journey that he travelled in the lead up to his admission to a mental hospital. The question arises in any novel whether the narration may be trusted or whether we should rely on our own judgement.
Their goal is to make you feel their story so deeply within the pit of your stomach that you know their words to be true. In a collection of short stories entitled, The Things They Carried, author Tim O'Brien reveals the marvels of storytelling by breaking down the barriers between fact and fiction, thus making it impossible to distinguish whether or not any given event in the stories truly happened. In the section “How to Tell a True War Story” O'Brien discloses how to ascertain the difference between a true war story and one that is untrue you should see no virtue, you should be skeptical, and you should feel the truth. In the section titled, “Sweetheart of Song Tra Bong”, O'Brien heeds each piece of advice he recited making his fictional war story true. When telling a true war story Tim O'Brien states that “[there] is no rectitude”, if at the end you feel uplifted or as if you were taught something, “you have become the victim of a very old and terrible lie” (O'Brien p. 65).
He points out that it is just a part of the job: “But we’re never really alone when we are rejected; it’s the other side of being a writer, the side that isn’t shared as much as our successes.” He uses factual quotes taken from rejection letters (utilizing the epistolary genre) that published authors have received. Sylvia Plath’s writing was rejected by an editor who said, “There certainly isn’t enough genuine talent for us to take notice.” These quotes could also place the essay in the form of an expository essay because they impart information. On the other hand, his use of memory in the following lines is symbolic of a memoir: “When I read such negative responses, I always think: What if the writer had just given up?” and his mother’s advice: “Don’t compare yourself with anyone else … unless it’s to make yourself feel better.” These lines quoted from memory place the essay in the fiction genre because memory is flawed. His thoughts or his mother’s words may not have been thought or said in those exact words because memory is flawed and can never be 100 percent accurate. It is also a fiction essay because it has points where the author interjects his own thoughts and feeling in brackets: (Ah Mum, she always knew what to say!)
Imagery in A Good Man Is Hard to Find In literature, authors generally use symbolism to get their point across without beating you over the head with it. They use a combination of literary elements to be used as symbols in their story. Colors, places, names, double entendres, among a list of other things can be used as a symbol for other things or as for foreshadowing for the rest of the story. In O’Connor’s short story A Good Man Is Hard to Find, she does just that. By using imagery and play on words, she helps to create symbols that cause a deep sense of foreboding and imagery to help understand the story better.
Lauren Payne July 25, 2015 Writing About Literature Professor Green The Battle Royale Writers use symbols to Understanding the meaning of written and spoken words is relevant to the audience because it acknowledges the purpose of the literature. When the purpose is known, then there is a reason for the object, concept, or situation to exist. Without meaning or purpose, no direction can be found, and can leave the audience with a sense of emptiness. Symbols are an important way to hide meaningful information in plain sight. The reader may personalize the interpretation of the symbols, or it could be dictated by the author.
Such an opinion can only be the result of a cursory reading. It is true that the book has a kind of stylistic and organizational brilliance. But it is not merely a display; it is invariably at the service of plot and character. The nature of her subject imposed certain difficulties on Wharton, particularly her characters' lack of articulation. How could she, without over-narrating, get a deep problem involving such characters when they do not speak enough to reveal that problem?
The writer is seen as a literary “prophet”, a “realist of distances” (O’Connor, 818), because he takes upon himself the task of explicitly illuminating that which most other texts merely imply, and thus the scales of meaning are tipped almost entirely in favor of the writer. Writers of grotesque fiction are thus those that go the greatest distance in bringing to the surface the intricate nuances of our existence by conjuring up characters (and situations) whose traditional physicality and/or personality is maimed and contorted under the burden of ideas trying to be elicited by the writer. It is as if the characters are the materialization of traditionally intangible concepts and notions. In traversing this distance, a necessary sacrifice is made of the intermediary subject matter that lies between the essential concrete needed to create the basic familiar outline and the deeper reality that is being highlighted. In part, it is simply a stylistic sacrifice that prevents the dilution of the deeper reality, where the absence of the familiar accentuates the presence of the extreme.
The first person narrative is as accessible as contemporary dialogue. Nothing is overly dramatized or glamorized, even the account of an overseer brutally whipping Dana on the plantation. Although, it may be because Dana is a straightforward character who is not excitable, I thought the simple style lacked intensity. For me, Kindred came across as a novel for kids and young adults that uses fiction to teach what life in the past--in this case, slavery in the 1800s--was really like. One major theme in Kindred is adapting to difficult situations, and many of the characters must do this, with a varying degree of acceptance.