I thought the most interesting part of "The Cask of Amontillado" was Edgar Allen Poe's use of irony. To begin with, Fortunato's name in itself is ironic. It implies that he is fortunate, but really the whole story is leading up to his murder. It is also ironic that this death is occurring at a time when a carnival is going on, which is usually surrounded by happiness. When Montresor first meets Fortunato, he smiles and tells him he is "luckily met", which is ironic because the smile is actually one of evil and Fortunato is not going to be lucky. Later, Fortunato toasts to the dead in the catacombs, little does he know that he is toasting to his own death soon too. Poe's use of inroy contributes to the dark and mysterious effect of the entire story.
I thought that the title was appropriate for Hemingway's "Hills Like White Elephants". Throughout the story a man and a woman are discussing the woman getting an operation, an abortion, with the operation being the "elephant in the room" as neither of them address it outright. Additionally, although the woman initially states that the hills look like white elephants she later retracts her comment.It is significant that she refers to the hills as white elephants. White elephants are seen as a symbol of something burdensome and unwanted.The woman taking back her statement about the hills highlights the woman's indecisiveness and hints that she may change her mind about having the operation. While at first the woman sees the hills, and the child as something undesirable, a white elephant, she later thinks that having a child might actually be lovely. Incorporating elephants into the title illuminates the significance of what was a seemingly irrelevant comment.
In keeping in line with the apparent pattern of writing about the three different stories in descending chronological order "How" is a vastly different approach to the same idea of "Hills like White Elephants", the idea of connecting with the reader through a specific piece of the plot being generic. In "How" Moore speaks directly to the reader asking what we would do and even though we are not middle aged women it is hard not to ask what we would do in any one of the situations. By the end of the story it becomes unclear wether this is a clever game littered with the difficulty of living through and past indecisive decisions or a parody of a self help book asking the reader sarcastically "what would you do".
When I first started reading "The Cask of Amontillado" I was a little confused, but after really focusing on what I was reading, I started to like it a lot more. The dark, mysterious tone is what pulled me in. Throughout the short story Poe uses a lot of irony and symbolism which adds to the story. The first thing that I noticed was the way Fortunato is dressed. It is described that "he had on a tight-fitting parti-stripped dress, and his head was surmounted by the conical cap and bells," so from the start Poe creates this foolish character. Another thing that I found interesting was Montresor's family motto, which means "No one provokes me with impunity". Basically this motto is saying that he will get revenge on anyone who crosses him, and when he tells Fortunato this he responds with "Good!" which I found humorous. By adding these comical aspects to the story the mood is lightened a little, but it is made clear from the start that Fortunato is doomed.
The first person point of view was interesting considering it was narrated by the murderer. Since Fortunato is already dead when Montresor tells the tale, we only have an unreliable narrator to tell the story since we do not have any other witnesses. Furthermore, Montresor does not explicitly state what it was that Fortunato did to make him feel the need to be avenged. The narrator tries to defend himself by stating that "it must be understood that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good will." Montresor does not view himself as a villain, but rather a person seeking justice. In order to make himself appear as a better person, he introduces Fortunato as a drunk ignorant fool dressed in a "parti-striped dress." In addition, Montresor mentions how Fortunato constantly mentions "Amontillado," perhaps to show Fortunato as a greedy drunkard. The narrator also makes sure to mention how Fortunato has a cold and how the narrator asks if he still wants to continue further in the "nitre" to highlight himself in a better light. Montresor even states "I implore you to return" as a way to justify that it was Fortunato's fault for his own death. In addition, after Montresor kills Fortunato and he receives no answer when he calls for him, "[Montresor's] heart grew sick; it was the dampness of the catacombs that made it so." Montresor does not blame himself for the killing, but rather the damp setting and Fortunato's cold.
I think it is interesting that in the short story "Hills Like White Elephants", the entire story revolves around the title in a both physical and metaphorical way. The girl points out that the mountains resemble white elephants from afar. The American boy disagrees which introduces a conflict between the two. Later, the boy advocates for an operation, which we can infer is an abortion, that he wishes the girl would get. They are discussing this matter in a bar which I found somewhat ironic because they are evaluating an intensely serious situation while being surrounded by a stereotypically casual atmosphere. The "white elephant" in this situation directly represents this conflict. I believe that the narration in this short story is intriguing for it intentionally aims to draw curiosity. The characters express themselves through conversation and are represented through dialogue, but the true thoughts and intentions of these characters are impossible to unveil. This adds an effect of suspense because it is difficult to predict what will happen next in the story. For example, when the American wandered off a bit, I was hesitant to believe that he would return or even whether the girl would still be there when he returned.
The narration in "Hills like White Elephants" by Ernest Hemingway, was unlike any other. The third-person narrator takes a fly-on-the-wall point of view and even leaves out descriptors of the characters simple referring to each as "the girl" or "the man". He doesn't say what they are thinking or feeling, simply what they are saying. The way that the story is told in past tense makes it feel like the narrator is describing a mere memory. By not revealing the character's intimate thoughts, Hemingway leaves room for readers to interpret the text themselves. This goes a long way when reading the short story and I think it really conveys the purpose of the work as a whole, the purpose being to let us, the readers, in on the situation as if we were overhearing the conversation on the train ourselves. -Gabriela Eckensberger
The short story "How" was my favorite of the three stories. I think that the way it was written, in short sentences, gets across the purpose—that happiness is not always found where it should be. Although this woman should be in love with this seemingly nice and loving man, she is not. The short, less descriptive sentences show the pain that the woman feels in not loving the man, even though she knows she should, and wants to. The fact that the narration is in second person is also interesting because it states what will happen rather than having the woman contemplate it. Overall I think that the narration develops interest to the story, making it more fun to read and adding purpose to the story.
The use of second-person narrative in “How” by Lorrie Moore allows for great speculation in a number of areas. Because the story is directed at “you” it generalizes the plot enough to allow for the story to be adjusted with “your” own personal situations. In this way Lorrie Moore successfully adapts the mode of an instructional guide in order to convey a story; the story of “you” (the reader). In addition, Moore has manipulated this “you” to also fit the persona of the main character. Though on the surface it clearly illustrates the young woman’s growing apathy towards her partner, it also helps to elaborate on her clear ambivalence towards love in general. She spends a great amount of time reflecting on the faults of her partner in comparison with others, rather than addressing the origin of her dissatisfaction which is her own cynical nature. I think this piece was really interesting as it not only creates a connection between the reader and narrator, but also allows readers to question “How” their own personal relationships are affected, not by the actions of others, but rather their own feelings and opinions . Perhaps the most impressive feat of this story is the cleverly intertwined detail which is revealed through very concise, general storytelling. This contrast allows for a broad set of emotions to be evaluated under a much more magnified level, and in a more engaging way.
At first, I was confused with the beginning of "The Cask of the Amontillado" because I was not sure why the narrator, Montresor, was talking about revenge on Fortunado. When I got to the end of the story, everything clicked, and I realized that the narrator is retelling the story of his revenge. I thought it was smart of the author to start out with the narrator discussing the fact that he committed an act of revenge while excluding any details because it leaves readers wanting to find out what exactly he did. Because of the first person perspective, we are not sure whether the narrator is the "good guy" or if he is seeking revenge for something trivial. Also, the narrator never mentions what exactly Fortunado did to deserve the fate he suffers, so we can't be sure if the narrator had justifiable reasons. The narrator could possibly be overreacting to something minor that Fortunado did, therefore he could really be the "bad guy" of the story. In my opinion, Montresor does not seem to be a completely evil character, even though he did trap Fortunado. There are some parts where it seems that the narrator wants to back out on his plan or may regret his actions. At the end, the narrator feels sick when he finishes enclosing Fortunado. At other times, based on Montresor's thoughts and descriptions of his feelings, it seems as if he feels guilty about his revenge. I think that the narration of this story is affective in allowing us to see and feel what the narrator feels, but it leaves me to wonder who the villain really is and why Montresor killed Fortunado.
In "Hills Like White Elephants" I noticed that the use of like portrays both characters feelings pertaining to the upcoming abortion. In the story, the description of "white elephant" symbolizes the idea of burden. When the girl describes the hills to look like white elephants, she is describing only the surface level of the hill and not the hill in its entirety alluding to the idea that things can be made out to what they actually are not. While the origional idea of something can seem like a burden, in this case an abortion, there can be other opposite outcomes that are not seen at the first level glance. Then, the boy goes on to say that he has never looked at a white elephant, which in a sense describes that he has never experienced a burden. In this scenario, his claim makes sense because ultimately he is the one initiating the abortion that the girl clearly is uncomfortable going forward with. Lastly, the girl decribes that the hill does not actually look like a white elephant although they do have the same coloring. This connects to her previous statement for it is not actually a burden, just disguised as one. Her main point is for the boy to understand that although a baby can seem like a huge burden, it has actually the opposite outcome. While it literally describes the mountains in relation to white elephants, the use of the word "look" depicts the valuea and characteristics of the individuals regarding the abortion that is scheduled to happen.
In terms of narration, "Hills Like White Elephants" is third person objective, which allows for some of the ambiguity and the portrayal of the characters. By not showing the emotions of either character, Hemingway is able to hide the topic of the discussion, and instead focus on the interaction between the man and women. Throughout the story, both sides play manipulative mind games to get what they want. The man plays the passive aggressive card, mentioning that "It's the best thing to do. But I don't want you to do it if you don't really want to." He clearly supports the operation (abortion) and really wants it in no other way, but he acts passive aggressive to make the girl think she's not being forced into and abortion, when she clearly is. As the man plays his manipulative hand, the girl quickly counters by mentioning that she'll "do it. Because I don't care about me." When she does that, she blatantly calls out the man on being a selfish schemer. As the dialogue continues, the man continues his manipulating actions while the girl grows frustrated. Hemingway intentionally picks an ambiguous and objective voice to zone in on the basic interaction between the american man and the girl.
I think that Ernest Hemingway's short story "Hills Like White Elephants" clearly expresses the miscommunication between the American and the female main character. Hemingway purposely reveals minimal information about the two characters to highlight the couple's lack of understanding for each other. He leaves the details of the relationship for interpretation, however, he does suggest that the American wants the girl to have an abortion, or "operation". Later on he convinces the girl that he will support however she wants to handle the situation. This sense of complacency from the American is almost more aggregating towards the woman than if he indicated a strong opinion about the unexpected pregnancy. Through Hemingway's work we are able to view the unstable and troubled state of the girl. It seems that she is questioning the American's love for her because of his suggestion to abort the child. The use of third person enhances Hemingway's piece because of the limited information provided about the characters. We do not see much emotion or personality from either of the two characters. At the same time, the short dialogue adequately expresses enough information to fully understand the issue at hand.
Hemingway's elusive narrative of "Hills Like White Elephants" contributes to the piece's overall integrity and purpose. No aspect of the story is ever fully revealed, as one is left to question what the operation the boy and girl are discussing entails, where they may be taking the train to, and how each individual truly feels about the other and the situation at hand. Through inference one can conclude that the subject under deliberation is whether or not the girl should undergo an abortion, even though Hemingway never deliberately uses this word. By stripping away all of the extraneous details and delivering only the bare essentials of story-telling, Hemmingway allots for a greater sense of self discovery through the story. Its tactful ambiguity forces one to utilize the scarce information given to the best of their ability and go forth to draw their own personal conclusions; whereas a more conventional narrative reveals as much as possible, so one is left to analyze the story’s purpose by dissecting every minute detail. The simplicity with which Hemmingway narrates makes the piece seem very ordinary at first surveillance, however the symbolism of “white elephants” is crucial evidence of the underlying complexity of the situation. “Hills Like White Elephants” exceeds a mere discussion between an “American boy” and a “girl”- Hemmingway barely characterizes either one of them intentionally- in that it investigates a serious dilemma and the flippancy that can coincide with executing a significant decision.
I found that the details (or lack thereof) within "Hills Like White Elephants" allows the reader to understand the couple's struggle while still leaving room for imagination to fill in the blanks. The first reference to "White Elephants" is made in a comparison the girl makes to the mountains out the window. Quickly the man disagrees and sparks an argument. The argument soon turns from the shallow matter of the mountain's shape to the impending operation at the end of their long trip. The abortion being the "elephant in the room", neither the man nor the woman address the operation point blank. Although this, the conflict of the story, can be easily understood, the fine details in between the facts are left up to interpretation. In calling the male character a "man" and the female character a "girl", it can be assumed that the female is planning on getting the abortion because of her age. In another sense, perhaps Hemingway refers to her as a "girl" rather than a "woman" because he does not agree with her decision; perhaps the demotion in title is in place as if to say her actions handling this pregnancy are childish. Lacking a backstory of the couple's situation allows for the reader to interpret their own motive for the operation, and their own interpretation of the relationship being presented. Hemingway nearly create's a "choose your own adventure story" by leaving out key details; each read yields a different interpretation and experience.
I found the most interesting of the stories to be "How" by Lorrie Moore. It is so rare that you find a story written in the second person. Writing in the second person is very difficult and can only work in certain context. In this piece I thought it fit perfectly, and was effective in creating an interactive story. The author used quick and sharp images to create a mechanical feeling to the piece, but would also make many references to a culture an audience could identify with. She also gave the audience the liberty of deciding what happened in the story. She would often leave a scene undecided like when she wrote "Maybe he'll say something like: Christ, what's wrong? Maybe he won't" (137). This gave the audience the ability to decide for themselves what would happen in that situation, creating a connection between the audience and the work. The second person narration made the work as a whole more personal.
One of the more interesting things that I discovered while reading "Hills Like White Elephants" was the way the conversation started between the two people. To some the conversation isn't much more than a simple back and forth between two people, but if you look into the text with a closer eye you see how Hemingway is using these two characters to create a bit of reader interpretation throughout the text. What I found was that Hemingway took away all the details, and left the piece as it is with the bare essentials that the reader needs to depict the overall plot and narrative. Toward the end of the reading i discovered that the setting has a lot to do with the overall meaning of the text itself. The American and the girl being at a train station indicates that the relationship between the two is at a crossroad, just lingering somewhere in the middle of their desired destinations.
The first person perspective in The Cask of Amontillado demonstrates a degree of respect and aspiration Montressor sees in his victim. Quickly, Montressor establishes that he "did not differ from him materially" (127) in the manner of old wines. Although he claims to be an equal, Montressor earlier admits to have faced "The thousand injuries of Fortunato" (127) before taking action return. This initially passive resistance implies that Fortunato is higher in prestige as to be able to commit these acts. Montressor, wanting to think of himself as better than he is or not wanting to admit such a shortcoming, does not address this directly and hopes to elevate himself. However, the other (in my opinion, more fascinating) side of this lies in the unreliability of the crime itself, since it is unlikely that anybody could be drunk enough to subject themselves to such a burial. However, Fortunato is on decline from the beginning. He begins with a "severe cold" (128), a disease that connects to the wasting away of one's spirit. Even more tellingly, he is a connoisseur of wine, which also represents moral decay with its toxifying effect. Even the vaults where Montressor is supposed to have kept the wine includes "the dampness of the catacombs" (131). The "dampness" reinforces the idea of rotting further, and "catacombs" is where such deterioration culminates in death. Combining with the actual, restrained murder scene and the aforementioned "injuries", the perspective gives rise to the possibility that Montressor merely tells a personal story about overcoming Fortunato as a symbol. While complete invention also seems implausible, various scenarios arise, such as one in which Montressor merely sees Fortunato to his death as a figure of luck and circumstance that forsakes Montressor, and Montressor announces his independence from it. While Montressor certainly seems to be in a good spot, it is still lower than Fortunato's, and the actual "insult" (127) which Montressor may wish to avenge is the higher standing a sick and dying Fortunato still has over him. Whether or not Montressor truly gets past the shadow is subject to further analysis, it is still fascinating how Poe's use of a first person perspective allows for this distorted reflection.
I thought that the narration style of “The Cask of Amontillado” was very unique and essential to capture the powerful psychological effect that the story had. The story is told in first person. Since we are familiar with the outcome of the story in the beginning, it is easy to connect and understand the emotions because of the narrator’s voice even though we weren't technically introduced yet. The use of the first personal narrative made me connect emotionally to him and be bias to his views and made me feel more personally connected. I also think that the first person narrative was important to this story because it allowed me to pick up on certain ironies that wouldn't have made sense if it was not in first person. In addition, the narrator’s tone throughout the story was very friendly and calm which ironically did not match his final actions in the story. The only ambiguity that I found in the end of the story is that because of the narration it seems as though Montresor is the villain because he killed Fortunado. Because we only get the story from one perspective it made me unsure who the villain of the story really is.
“The Cask of Amontillado” is told in the first person by Montresor, providing the reader with a limited focus. The effect of this is that the reader is seeing things from the villain’s point of view, and experiences his the cold-heartedness firsthand. This is shown from the beginning, when Montresor conceives a plan to “not only punish but punish with impunity” (127), to the end, when he pauses from building the wall to listen to the noise of Fortunato clanking his chains. The reader’s understanding of Montresor’s true evilness is amplified by the fact that he only once expresses any type of emotion or regret over what he is doing, and even then he chooses to blame it on “the dampness of the catacombs”(131), rather than the horror of his crime. Otherwise, however, the narrator seems completely unmoved and even seems to take joy in his crime, as his observations are limited to detached or ironic ones about Fortunato’s emotional state, rather than his own. This creates the ironic situation in that the reader is more aware of Fortunato’s emotions and feelings than those of Montresor, the narrator. This method shows Montresor’s aloof, vicious state of mind indirectly, which is far more effective than a direct description of his feelings would be. By choosing to narrate this story in the first person from the point of view of the villain, Poe manages to create a story that has a similar allure to the reader as murder did to Montresor. --Gauri Narayan
In the short story, "Hills Like White Elephants" by Ernest Hemingway, the narration is done completely in third person. In typical Hemingway fashion the reader is not given much detail about what exactly the characters in the story are discussing. Hemingway gives little detail to the reader about who the characters are other than their basic outlines. By using third person narration it gives the story a sense of freedom in they way the reader dissects the dialect. Without using extensive detail Hemingway still creates a story with a deep rooted meaning to it. One can perceive the story in any which way they would like but there is a clear sense of disconnect between the American and the girl. Without a direction from the narrator at the end of the story Hemingway leaves the reader's wondering, "What is next?" The tense conversation happening between the two while on a train is also symbolic. Instead of writing outwardly about what is happening through narration; Hemingway does this through symbolism. One could even go so far as to state that another form of narration used by Hemingway in "Hills Like White Elephants" is symbolism. Despite the complex subject that Hemingway tackles in such few words the narration of the piece plays a huge role in the entirety of the short story.
In Edgar Allan Poe's "The Cask of Armontillado," the reader is left questioning many aspects of the story due to the unreliable narrator. From the very beginning of the story, the narrator gives very little insight into why he is actually mad at Fortunato. The narrator says, "The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could, but when he ventured upon insult I vowed my revenge." Although the reader knows that Montresor is angered by Fortunato's insults, the reader may question whether Montresor's actions were justified. Because Montresor is an unreliable narrator, the reader is left with many questions at the end of the text.
I was very interested by Lorrie Moore's "How". Her use of narration and fragmented stlye made what easily could have been an average story significantly more exciting. Her regular use of allusion also drastically enhances her story by adding complexity and literary value. She recounts a series of loveless interactions and relationships through her cold point of view. The narrator's personality strongly comes through the Moore's writing. The use of narration in this story completely transforms a decent or mediocre story into an intriguing story that started from the regular literary template for similar stories.
I agree with Jack's interpretation of Moore's "How." Lorrie Moore's narration style choice was original and unexpected. It made a simple story that much more in depth and significant, allowing for a greater width for interpretation of the text. The syntax and word choice further allowed a more in-depth look into a simple plot.
I thought the most interesting part of "The Cask of Amontillado" was Edgar Allen Poe's use of irony. To begin with, Fortunato's name in itself is ironic. It implies that he is fortunate, but really the whole story is leading up to his murder. It is also ironic that this death is occurring at a time when a carnival is going on, which is usually surrounded by happiness. When Montresor first meets Fortunato, he smiles and tells him he is "luckily met", which is ironic because the smile is actually one of evil and Fortunato is not going to be lucky. Later, Fortunato toasts to the dead in the catacombs, little does he know that he is toasting to his own death soon too. Poe's use of inroy contributes to the dark and mysterious effect of the entire story.
ReplyDeleteI thought that the title was appropriate for Hemingway's "Hills Like White Elephants". Throughout the story a man and a woman are discussing the woman getting an operation, an abortion, with the operation being the "elephant in the room" as neither of them address it outright. Additionally, although the woman initially states that the hills look like white elephants she later retracts her comment.It is significant that she refers to the hills as white elephants. White elephants are seen as a symbol of something burdensome and unwanted.The woman taking back her statement about the hills highlights the woman's indecisiveness and hints that she may change her mind about having the operation. While at first the woman sees the hills, and the child as something undesirable, a white elephant, she later thinks that having a child might actually be lovely. Incorporating elephants into the title illuminates the significance of what was a seemingly irrelevant comment.
ReplyDeleteIn keeping in line with the apparent pattern of writing about the three different stories in descending chronological order "How" is a vastly different approach to the same idea of "Hills like White Elephants", the idea of connecting with the reader through a specific piece of the plot being generic. In "How" Moore speaks directly to the reader asking what we would do and even though we are not middle aged women it is hard not to ask what we would do in any one of the situations. By the end of the story it becomes unclear wether this is a clever game littered with the difficulty of living through and past indecisive decisions or a parody of a self help book asking the reader sarcastically "what would you do".
ReplyDeleteWhen I first started reading "The Cask of Amontillado" I was a little confused, but after really focusing on what I was reading, I started to like it a lot more. The dark, mysterious tone is what pulled me in. Throughout the short story Poe uses a lot of irony and symbolism which adds to the story. The first thing that I noticed was the way Fortunato is dressed. It is described that "he had on a tight-fitting parti-stripped dress, and his head was surmounted by the conical cap and bells," so from the start Poe creates this foolish character. Another thing that I found interesting was Montresor's family motto, which means "No one provokes me with impunity". Basically this motto is saying that he will get revenge on anyone who crosses him, and when he tells Fortunato this he responds with "Good!" which I found humorous. By adding these comical aspects to the story the mood is lightened a little, but it is made clear from the start that Fortunato is doomed.
ReplyDeleteThe first person point of view was interesting considering it was narrated by the murderer. Since Fortunato is already dead when Montresor tells the tale, we only have an unreliable narrator to tell the story since we do not have any other witnesses. Furthermore, Montresor does not explicitly state what it was that Fortunato did to make him feel the need to be avenged. The narrator tries to defend himself by stating that "it must be understood that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good will." Montresor does not view himself as a villain, but rather a person seeking justice. In order to make himself appear as a better person, he introduces Fortunato as a drunk ignorant fool dressed in a "parti-striped dress." In addition, Montresor mentions how Fortunato constantly mentions "Amontillado," perhaps to show Fortunato as a greedy drunkard. The narrator also makes sure to mention how Fortunato has a cold and how the narrator asks if he still wants to continue further in the "nitre" to highlight himself in a better light. Montresor even states "I implore you to return" as a way to justify that it was Fortunato's fault for his own death. In addition, after Montresor kills Fortunato and he receives no answer when he calls for him, "[Montresor's] heart grew sick; it was the dampness of the catacombs that made it so." Montresor does not blame himself for the killing, but rather the damp setting and Fortunato's cold.
ReplyDeleteI think it is interesting that in the short story "Hills Like White Elephants", the entire story revolves around the title in a both physical and metaphorical way. The girl points out that the mountains resemble white elephants from afar. The American boy disagrees which introduces a conflict between the two. Later, the boy advocates for an operation, which we can infer is an abortion, that he wishes the girl would get. They are discussing this matter in a bar which I found somewhat ironic because they are evaluating an intensely serious situation while being surrounded by a stereotypically casual atmosphere. The "white elephant" in this situation directly represents this conflict. I believe that the narration in this short story is intriguing for it intentionally aims to draw curiosity. The characters express themselves through conversation and are represented through dialogue, but the true thoughts and intentions of these characters are impossible to unveil. This adds an effect of suspense because it is difficult to predict what will happen next in the story. For example, when the American wandered off a bit, I was hesitant to believe that he would return or even whether the girl would still be there when he returned.
ReplyDeleteThe narration in "Hills like White Elephants" by Ernest Hemingway, was unlike any other. The third-person narrator takes a fly-on-the-wall point of view and even leaves out descriptors of the characters simple referring to each as "the girl" or "the man". He doesn't say what they are thinking or feeling, simply what they are saying. The way that the story is told in past tense makes it feel like the narrator is describing a mere memory. By not revealing the character's intimate thoughts, Hemingway leaves room for readers to interpret the text themselves. This goes a long way when reading the short story and I think it really conveys the purpose of the work as a whole, the purpose being to let us, the readers, in on the situation as if we were overhearing the conversation on the train ourselves. -Gabriela Eckensberger
ReplyDeleteThe short story "How" was my favorite of the three stories. I think that the way it was written, in short sentences, gets across the purpose—that happiness is not always found where it should be. Although this woman should be in love with this seemingly nice and loving man, she is not. The short, less descriptive sentences show the pain that the woman feels in not loving the man, even though she knows she should, and wants to. The fact that the narration is in second person is also interesting because it states what will happen rather than having the woman contemplate it. Overall I think that the narration develops interest to the story, making it more fun to read and adding purpose to the story.
ReplyDeleteThe use of second-person narrative in “How” by Lorrie Moore allows for great speculation in a number of areas. Because the story is directed at “you” it generalizes the plot enough to allow for the story to be adjusted with “your” own personal situations. In this way Lorrie Moore successfully adapts the mode of an instructional guide in order to convey a story; the story of “you” (the reader). In addition, Moore has manipulated this “you” to also fit the persona of the main character. Though on the surface it clearly illustrates the young woman’s growing apathy towards her partner, it also helps to elaborate on her clear ambivalence towards love in general. She spends a great amount of time reflecting on the faults of her partner in comparison with others, rather than addressing the origin of her dissatisfaction which is her own cynical nature. I think this piece was really interesting as it not only creates a connection between the reader and narrator, but also allows readers to question “How” their own personal relationships are affected, not by the actions of others, but rather their own feelings and opinions . Perhaps the most impressive feat of this story is the cleverly intertwined detail which is revealed through very concise, general storytelling. This contrast allows for a broad set of emotions to be evaluated under a much more magnified level, and in a more engaging way.
ReplyDeleteAt first, I was confused with the beginning of "The Cask of the Amontillado" because I was not sure why the narrator, Montresor, was talking about revenge on Fortunado. When I got to the end of the story, everything clicked, and I realized that the narrator is retelling the story of his revenge. I thought it was smart of the author to start out with the narrator discussing the fact that he committed an act of revenge while excluding any details because it leaves readers wanting to find out what exactly he did. Because of the first person perspective, we are not sure whether the narrator is the "good guy" or if he is seeking revenge for something trivial. Also, the narrator never mentions what exactly Fortunado did to deserve the fate he suffers, so we can't be sure if the narrator had justifiable reasons. The narrator could possibly be overreacting to something minor that Fortunado did, therefore he could really be the "bad guy" of the story. In my opinion, Montresor does not seem to be a completely evil character, even though he did trap Fortunado. There are some parts where it seems that the narrator wants to back out on his plan or may regret his actions. At the end, the narrator feels sick when he finishes enclosing Fortunado. At other times, based on Montresor's thoughts and descriptions of his feelings, it seems as if he feels guilty about his revenge. I think that the narration of this story is affective in allowing us to see and feel what the narrator feels, but it leaves me to wonder who the villain really is and why Montresor killed Fortunado.
ReplyDeleteIn "Hills Like White Elephants" I noticed that the use of like portrays both characters feelings pertaining to the upcoming abortion. In the story, the description of "white elephant" symbolizes the idea of burden. When the girl describes the hills to look like white elephants, she is describing only the surface level of the hill and not the hill in its entirety alluding to the idea that things can be made out to what they actually are not. While the origional idea of something can seem like a burden, in this case an abortion, there can be other opposite outcomes that are not seen at the first level glance. Then, the boy goes on to say that he has never looked at a white elephant, which in a sense describes that he has never experienced a burden. In this scenario, his claim makes sense because ultimately he is the one initiating the abortion that the girl clearly is uncomfortable going forward with. Lastly, the girl decribes that the hill does not actually look like a white elephant although they do have the same coloring. This connects to her previous statement for it is not actually a burden, just disguised as one. Her main point is for the boy to understand that although a baby can seem like a huge burden, it has actually the opposite outcome. While it literally describes the mountains in relation to white elephants, the use of the word "look" depicts the valuea and characteristics of the individuals regarding the abortion that is scheduled to happen.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of narration, "Hills Like White Elephants" is third person objective, which allows for some of the ambiguity and the portrayal of the characters. By not showing the emotions of either character, Hemingway is able to hide the topic of the discussion, and instead focus on the interaction between the man and women. Throughout the story, both sides play manipulative mind games to get what they want. The man plays the passive aggressive card, mentioning that "It's the best thing to do. But I don't want you to do it if you don't really want to." He clearly supports the operation (abortion) and really wants it in no other way, but he acts passive aggressive to make the girl think she's not being forced into and abortion, when she clearly is. As the man plays his manipulative hand, the girl quickly counters by mentioning that she'll "do it. Because I don't care about me." When she does that, she blatantly calls out the man on being a selfish schemer. As the dialogue continues, the man continues his manipulating actions while the girl grows frustrated. Hemingway intentionally picks an ambiguous and objective voice to zone in on the basic interaction between the american man and the girl.
ReplyDeleteI think that Ernest Hemingway's short story "Hills Like White Elephants" clearly expresses the miscommunication between the American and the female main character. Hemingway purposely reveals minimal information about the two characters to highlight the couple's lack of understanding for each other. He leaves the details of the relationship for interpretation, however, he does suggest that the American wants the girl to have an abortion, or "operation". Later on he convinces the girl that he will support however she wants to handle the situation. This sense of complacency from the American is almost more aggregating towards the woman than if he indicated a strong opinion about the unexpected pregnancy. Through Hemingway's work we are able to view the unstable and troubled state of the girl. It seems that she is questioning the American's love for her because of his suggestion to abort the child. The use of third person enhances Hemingway's piece because of the limited information provided about the characters. We do not see much emotion or personality from either of the two characters. At the same time, the short dialogue adequately expresses enough information to fully understand the issue at hand.
ReplyDeleteHemingway's elusive narrative of "Hills Like White Elephants" contributes to the piece's overall integrity and purpose. No aspect of the story is ever fully revealed, as one is left to question what the operation the boy and girl are discussing entails, where they may be taking the train to, and how each individual truly feels about the other and the situation at hand. Through inference one can conclude that the subject under deliberation is whether or not the girl should undergo an abortion, even though Hemingway never deliberately uses this word. By stripping away all of the extraneous details and delivering only the bare essentials of story-telling, Hemmingway allots for a greater sense of self discovery through the story. Its tactful ambiguity forces one to utilize the scarce information given to the best of their ability and go forth to draw their own personal conclusions; whereas a more conventional narrative reveals as much as possible, so one is left to analyze the story’s purpose by dissecting every minute detail. The simplicity with which Hemmingway narrates makes the piece seem very ordinary at first surveillance, however the symbolism of “white elephants” is crucial evidence of the underlying complexity of the situation. “Hills Like White Elephants” exceeds a mere discussion between an “American boy” and a “girl”- Hemmingway barely characterizes either one of them intentionally- in that it investigates a serious dilemma and the flippancy that can coincide with executing a significant decision.
ReplyDeleteI found that the details (or lack thereof) within "Hills Like White Elephants" allows the reader to understand the couple's struggle while still leaving room for imagination to fill in the blanks. The first reference to "White Elephants" is made in a comparison the girl makes to the mountains out the window. Quickly the man disagrees and sparks an argument. The argument soon turns from the shallow matter of the mountain's shape to the impending operation at the end of their long trip. The abortion being the "elephant in the room", neither the man nor the woman address the operation point blank. Although this, the conflict of the story, can be easily understood, the fine details in between the facts are left up to interpretation. In calling the male character a "man" and the female character a "girl", it can be assumed that the female is planning on getting the abortion because of her age. In another sense, perhaps Hemingway refers to her as a "girl" rather than a "woman" because he does not agree with her decision; perhaps the demotion in title is in place as if to say her actions handling this pregnancy are childish. Lacking a backstory of the couple's situation allows for the reader to interpret their own motive for the operation, and their own interpretation of the relationship being presented. Hemingway nearly create's a "choose your own adventure story" by leaving out key details; each read yields a different interpretation and experience.
ReplyDeleteI found the most interesting of the stories to be "How" by Lorrie Moore. It is so rare that you find a story written in the second person. Writing in the second person is very difficult and can only work in certain context. In this piece I thought it fit perfectly, and was effective in creating an interactive story. The author used quick and sharp images to create a mechanical feeling to the piece, but would also make many references to a culture an audience could identify with. She also gave the audience the liberty of deciding what happened in the story. She would often leave a scene undecided like when she wrote "Maybe he'll say something like: Christ, what's wrong? Maybe he won't" (137). This gave the audience the ability to decide for themselves what would happen in that situation, creating a connection between the audience and the work. The second person narration made the work as a whole more personal.
ReplyDeleteOne of the more interesting things that I discovered while reading "Hills Like White Elephants" was the way the conversation started between the two people. To some the conversation isn't much more than a simple back and forth between two people, but if you look into the text with a closer eye you see how Hemingway is using these two characters to create a bit of reader interpretation throughout the text. What I found was that Hemingway took away all the details, and left the piece as it is with the bare essentials that the reader needs to depict the overall plot and narrative. Toward the end of the reading i discovered that the setting has a lot to do with the overall meaning of the text itself. The American and the girl being at a train station indicates that the relationship between the two is at a crossroad, just lingering somewhere in the middle of their desired destinations.
ReplyDeleteThe first person perspective in The Cask of Amontillado demonstrates a degree of respect and aspiration Montressor sees in his victim. Quickly, Montressor establishes that he "did not differ from him materially" (127) in the manner of old wines. Although he claims to be an equal, Montressor earlier admits to have faced "The thousand injuries of Fortunato" (127) before taking action return. This initially passive resistance implies that Fortunato is higher in prestige as to be able to commit these acts. Montressor, wanting to think of himself as better than he is or not wanting to admit such a shortcoming, does not address this directly and hopes to elevate himself. However, the other (in my opinion, more fascinating) side of this lies in the unreliability of the crime itself, since it is unlikely that anybody could be drunk enough to subject themselves to such a burial. However, Fortunato is on decline from the beginning. He begins with a "severe cold" (128), a disease that connects to the wasting away of one's spirit. Even more tellingly, he is a connoisseur of wine, which also represents moral decay with its toxifying effect. Even the vaults where Montressor is supposed to have kept the wine includes "the dampness of the catacombs" (131). The "dampness" reinforces the idea of rotting further, and "catacombs" is where such deterioration culminates in death. Combining with the actual, restrained murder scene and the aforementioned "injuries", the perspective gives rise to the possibility that Montressor merely tells a personal story about overcoming Fortunato as a symbol. While complete invention also seems implausible, various scenarios arise, such as one in which Montressor merely sees Fortunato to his death as a figure of luck and circumstance that forsakes Montressor, and Montressor announces his independence from it. While Montressor certainly seems to be in a good spot, it is still lower than Fortunato's, and the actual "insult" (127) which Montressor may wish to avenge is the higher standing a sick and dying Fortunato still has over him. Whether or not Montressor truly gets past the shadow is subject to further analysis, it is still fascinating how Poe's use of a first person perspective allows for this distorted reflection.
ReplyDeleteI thought that the narration style of “The Cask of Amontillado” was very unique and essential to capture the powerful psychological effect that the story had. The story is told in first person. Since we are familiar with the outcome of the story in the beginning, it is easy to connect and understand the emotions because of the narrator’s voice even though we weren't technically introduced yet. The use of the first personal narrative made me connect emotionally to him and be bias to his views and made me feel more personally connected. I also think that the first person narrative was important to this story because it allowed me to pick up on certain ironies that wouldn't have made sense if it was not in first person. In addition, the narrator’s tone throughout the story was very friendly and calm which ironically did not match his final actions in the story. The only ambiguity that I found in the end of the story is that because of the narration it seems as though Montresor is the villain because he killed Fortunado. Because we only get the story from one perspective it made me unsure who the villain of the story really is.
ReplyDelete“The Cask of Amontillado” is told in the first person by Montresor, providing the reader with a limited focus. The effect of this is that the reader is seeing things from the villain’s point of view, and experiences his the cold-heartedness firsthand. This is shown from the beginning, when Montresor conceives a plan to “not only punish but punish with impunity” (127), to the end, when he pauses from building the wall to listen to the noise of Fortunato clanking his chains. The reader’s understanding of Montresor’s true evilness is amplified by the fact that he only once expresses any type of emotion or regret over what he is doing, and even then he chooses to blame it on “the dampness of the catacombs”(131), rather than the horror of his crime. Otherwise, however, the narrator seems completely unmoved and even seems to take joy in his crime, as his observations are limited to detached or ironic ones about Fortunato’s emotional state, rather than his own. This creates the ironic situation in that the reader is more aware of Fortunato’s emotions and feelings than those of Montresor, the narrator. This method shows Montresor’s aloof, vicious state of mind indirectly, which is far more effective than a direct description of his feelings would be. By choosing to narrate this story in the first person from the point of view of the villain, Poe manages to create a story that has a similar allure to the reader as murder did to Montresor.
ReplyDelete--Gauri Narayan
In the short story, "Hills Like White Elephants" by Ernest Hemingway, the narration is done completely in third person. In typical Hemingway fashion the reader is not given much detail about what exactly the characters in the story are discussing. Hemingway gives little detail to the reader about who the characters are other than their basic outlines. By using third person narration it gives the story a sense of freedom in they way the reader dissects the dialect. Without using extensive detail Hemingway still creates a story with a deep rooted meaning to it. One can perceive the story in any which way they would like but there is a clear sense of disconnect between the American and the girl. Without a direction from the narrator at the end of the story Hemingway leaves the reader's wondering, "What is next?" The tense conversation happening between the two while on a train is also symbolic. Instead of writing outwardly about what is happening through narration; Hemingway does this through symbolism. One could even go so far as to state that another form of narration used by Hemingway in "Hills Like White Elephants" is symbolism. Despite the complex subject that Hemingway tackles in such few words the narration of the piece plays a huge role in the entirety of the short story.
ReplyDeleteIn Edgar Allan Poe's "The Cask of Armontillado," the reader is left questioning many aspects of the story due to the unreliable narrator. From the very beginning of the story, the narrator gives very little insight into why he is actually mad at Fortunato. The narrator says, "The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could, but when he ventured upon insult I vowed my revenge." Although the reader knows that Montresor is angered by Fortunato's insults, the reader may question whether Montresor's actions were justified. Because Montresor is an unreliable narrator, the reader is left with many questions at the end of the text.
ReplyDeleteI was very interested by Lorrie Moore's "How". Her use of narration and fragmented stlye made what easily could have been an average story significantly more exciting. Her regular use of allusion also drastically enhances her story by adding complexity and literary value. She recounts a series of loveless interactions and relationships through her cold point of view. The narrator's personality strongly comes through the Moore's writing. The use of narration in this story completely transforms a decent or mediocre story into an intriguing story that started from the regular literary template for similar stories.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jack's interpretation of Moore's "How." Lorrie Moore's narration style choice was original and unexpected. It made a simple story that much more in depth and significant, allowing for a greater width for interpretation of the text. The syntax and word choice further allowed a more in-depth look into a simple plot.
ReplyDelete