Con’s of a Girl Story
David Arnasons story, A Girls Story writes about the difficulties of writing its self. His strategy of using his own knowledge to explain to us why he writes, the story of the girl is just a used, as a stage for Arnason to write about writing itself. Although his point was to show what writing is really about on some levels it doesn’t really work the way it was meant too. When Arnason writes he consistently interrupts him self to talk about why he used the technique he did. Though this was done for a purpose it does not work well on all levels.
This technique he uses, no matter how it was to come across, seems to be a way to dumb things down. Arnason story is simple and very easy to follow. There is no need for the use of interruption to explain to us what is happening. Arnason tells us that we are supposed to ask ourselves what the ring means; when he tells us that he slipped in details and clues to show us what is called foreshadowing. All this does is make us think that Arnason is purposely trying to dumb the story down like we wouldn’t understand otherwise. Arnason goes about this in another way as well. When he writes he finds the need to consistently stop, and explain what he had just finished telling us.
David Arnason tends to interrupt the reader at the worst possible time. He tries to help the reader but telling us what things mean or why he included it in his text, but it interrupts our train of thought and doesn’t let us get involved in the story. Short stories are usually written with a moral or point that you come to the conclusion on your self, though in the case of A Girl Story you can’t. He writes in such a way that you cannot think on your own, he tells you what you should be thinking and why. Arnason basically holds you hand throughout the whole story, telling you what to think and what’s going on. When he writes of the girl holding the ring up to the light, Arnason tells us that we are supposed...