Monday, April 30, 2012
Slaughterhouse-Five: Overall Reflection
I really enjoyed this book the whole way through. The frequent flashes to different points in time in Billy's memory were really entertaining for me. In addition to this, I really enjoyed the overall message the book had. It didn't have a polarizing view on war, but rather a balanced one that brought about certain aspects of it in social commentary. Vonnegut really portrayed the horrors of war in a different light that I was not used to. I really enjoyed this, even if it was revealed to me through unrealistic techniques. So overall, I would say that this and Frankenstein were my favorite works of the year. I'm glad I chose this book and am also glad to be finished with these blogs.
Slaughterhouse-Five: Happiest Moment
"Later on in life, the Tralfamadorians would advise Billy to concentrate on the happy moments of his life, and to ignore the unhappy ones- to stare only at pretty things as eternity failed to go by. If this sort of selectivity had been possible for Billy, he might have chosen as his happiest moment his sundrenched snooze in the back of the wagon." p.195
I think this quote reveals a lot about the work. The war has just ended. In this moment, Billy describes it as the happiest time in his life. He isn't doing anything but sleeping, yet he is happy. Through this, I think Vonnegut is stressing the significance of peace. Billy's attitude towards the newly discovered sense of peace contrasts the horrors of war. If doing nothing but experiencing peace can be the happiest moment in someone's life, war must then be horrible. Maybe I just looked too deeply into this quote, but I really think that is what the author is trying to convey through it. I'm interested to see whether others agree or disagree with my interpretation of Billy's description.
I think this quote reveals a lot about the work. The war has just ended. In this moment, Billy describes it as the happiest time in his life. He isn't doing anything but sleeping, yet he is happy. Through this, I think Vonnegut is stressing the significance of peace. Billy's attitude towards the newly discovered sense of peace contrasts the horrors of war. If doing nothing but experiencing peace can be the happiest moment in someone's life, war must then be horrible. Maybe I just looked too deeply into this quote, but I really think that is what the author is trying to convey through it. I'm interested to see whether others agree or disagree with my interpretation of Billy's description.
Slaughterhouse-Five: Extended Metaphor
"Trout, incidentally, had written a book about a money tree. It had twenty-dollar bills for leaves. Its flowers were government bonds. Its fruit was diamonds. It attracted human beings who killed each other around the roots and made very good fertilizer. So it goes." p.167
The quote above is an extended metaphor for war. The metaphor above is a book written by Trout which describes the nature of war. This is yet another one of Vonnegut's social commentaries that communicate the overall meaning of the work. In the metaphor, each part of the tree represents a part of the cycle between greed and war. Both are related and dependent upon each other to exist. The greedy people who kill each other for the fruit of the tree, in turn, end up fertilizing the tree to bear more fruit for more greedy humans to seek after. Vonnegut describes the nature of war through this metaphor, which I found very powerful and profound in meaning. Through it, he is able to communicate his own personal views on the origins of war and also the inhumanities that exist within it derived from greed.
The quote above is an extended metaphor for war. The metaphor above is a book written by Trout which describes the nature of war. This is yet another one of Vonnegut's social commentaries that communicate the overall meaning of the work. In the metaphor, each part of the tree represents a part of the cycle between greed and war. Both are related and dependent upon each other to exist. The greedy people who kill each other for the fruit of the tree, in turn, end up fertilizing the tree to bear more fruit for more greedy humans to seek after. Vonnegut describes the nature of war through this metaphor, which I found very powerful and profound in meaning. Through it, he is able to communicate his own personal views on the origins of war and also the inhumanities that exist within it derived from greed.
Slaughterhouse-Five: Balance
"She asked Gluck if he wasn't awfully young to be in the army. He admitted that he was. She asked Edgar Derby if he wasn't awfully old to be in the army. He said he was." p.159
I found this quote very interesting. It seems as though the author is making a direct social commentary on the war and the nature of war in general. It is apparent that Slaughterhouse-Five is written as an anti-war book. This quote above really reflects the book's nature in its comments regarding the issue with society and war. The answers Gluck and Derby give in response to the question, to me, sound like Vonnegut's protest of the way society sees war. Both men know that they don't belong in the war because they are unfit at both ends of the age spectrum. I don't think it was coincidence that Derby and Gluck both represent these age demographics. Through utilizing balance the author was able to convey the importance of the message seen in the quote above. In it, I think Vonnegut is protesting how society treats people and forces them into situations in which they don't belong. However, these men had to face the reality of society's demand and fight for their country even though they knew they were unfit to. This idea seems to be present throughout the book and adds to its overall anti-war message.
I found this quote very interesting. It seems as though the author is making a direct social commentary on the war and the nature of war in general. It is apparent that Slaughterhouse-Five is written as an anti-war book. This quote above really reflects the book's nature in its comments regarding the issue with society and war. The answers Gluck and Derby give in response to the question, to me, sound like Vonnegut's protest of the way society sees war. Both men know that they don't belong in the war because they are unfit at both ends of the age spectrum. I don't think it was coincidence that Derby and Gluck both represent these age demographics. Through utilizing balance the author was able to convey the importance of the message seen in the quote above. In it, I think Vonnegut is protesting how society treats people and forces them into situations in which they don't belong. However, these men had to face the reality of society's demand and fight for their country even though they knew they were unfit to. This idea seems to be present throughout the book and adds to its overall anti-war message.
Slaughterhouse-Five: Imagery
"He was enchanted by the architecture of the city. Merry amoretti wove garlands above windows. Roguish fauns and naked nymphs peeked down at Billy from festooned cornices. Stone monkeys frisked among scrolls and seashells and bamboo." p.150
Vonnegut uses very vivid imagery in this quote that stuck out to me. Most of the structure of the book is of simple and dull language. However, this quote reveals an upbeat and energetic description of the city of Dresden. The quote reflects Billy's attitude upon his arrival to the city. One thing that I find interesting and a little confusing is why Vonnegut described Dresden in this manner. Was this not the place of the death of 130,000 people? I don't understand why he would describe it like this unless he is using it as a paradox to contrast the horrors that took place there. It really didn't seem like this to me, so I wonder what other's think of such a vivid and happy description of the city where such horrible things took place.
Vonnegut uses very vivid imagery in this quote that stuck out to me. Most of the structure of the book is of simple and dull language. However, this quote reveals an upbeat and energetic description of the city of Dresden. The quote reflects Billy's attitude upon his arrival to the city. One thing that I find interesting and a little confusing is why Vonnegut described Dresden in this manner. Was this not the place of the death of 130,000 people? I don't understand why he would describe it like this unless he is using it as a paradox to contrast the horrors that took place there. It really didn't seem like this to me, so I wonder what other's think of such a vivid and happy description of the city where such horrible things took place.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Slaughterhouse-Five: Personal Reflection
Overall, I have really enjoyed reading this book so far. It is definitely very unique and different from the rest of the works we've read this year, or really anything I've ever read for that matter. To me, that's a good thing. Vonnegut's frequent anecdotes and rapid transitions to different settings in time really hooked me as a reader. I found this book especially hard to put down to do these blogs. For about the first time ever, I've actually read a little ahead simply because I want to know what happens. I'm really interested to see how the book unfolds and to understand the key themes Vonnegut reveals in it. So far, this is actually one of my favorite books I've ever read, and I really hope I enjoy the second half as much as the first.
Slaughterhouse-Five: "So it Goes"
"After Edgar Derby, the high school teacher, was shot in Dresden later on, a doctor pronounced him dead and snapped his dogtag in two. So it goes." p.92
This is probably the one hundredth time "so it goes" has been written so I figured I'd give it a well-deserved blog. Obviously, with this being repeated so often, it is connected somehow with the theme. So far from the story, I haven't been able to identify a key theme, but I really think this reoccurring phrase has some connection. It really captures the laid-back atmosphere within the progression of the story. Everything seems to be happening almost without care. Billy seems to have no control on the actions in his own life as he drifts through time. The phrase "so it goes" influences the reader to come to understand things in the way Billy perceives them. It implies that everything must be taken as it is because it simply does not change. I hope this analysis is on the right track. I'm interested to see what other's thought of the repetition of this phrase.
This is probably the one hundredth time "so it goes" has been written so I figured I'd give it a well-deserved blog. Obviously, with this being repeated so often, it is connected somehow with the theme. So far from the story, I haven't been able to identify a key theme, but I really think this reoccurring phrase has some connection. It really captures the laid-back atmosphere within the progression of the story. Everything seems to be happening almost without care. Billy seems to have no control on the actions in his own life as he drifts through time. The phrase "so it goes" influences the reader to come to understand things in the way Billy perceives them. It implies that everything must be taken as it is because it simply does not change. I hope this analysis is on the right track. I'm interested to see what other's thought of the repetition of this phrase.
Slaughterhouse-Five: Anecdotes
"Overhead he heard the cry of what might have been, a melodious owl, but it wasn't a melodious owl, It was a flying saucer from Tralfamadore, navigating in both space and time, therefore seeming to Billy Pilgrim to have come from nowhere at once." p.75
I'm beginning to question whether Billy is simply insane or this is supposed to be actually happening. I know a mental hospital was referenced somewhere in the text which led me to question this. However, it seems to be what is actually supposed to be happening though. This excerpt is yet another anecdote shared within the frame story. Billy's life jumps from places in time at random. Thus, the book also follows this pattern, giving the reader various insights to his life through the frequent and wide-ranging anecdotes. I'm actually enjoying all these frequent shifts in settings and events. The book has very unique structure in regards to the way it changes from time periods in Billy's life, yet is somehow actually the present. I don't understand it, but I'm also not crazy like Billy seems to be.
I'm beginning to question whether Billy is simply insane or this is supposed to be actually happening. I know a mental hospital was referenced somewhere in the text which led me to question this. However, it seems to be what is actually supposed to be happening though. This excerpt is yet another anecdote shared within the frame story. Billy's life jumps from places in time at random. Thus, the book also follows this pattern, giving the reader various insights to his life through the frequent and wide-ranging anecdotes. I'm actually enjoying all these frequent shifts in settings and events. The book has very unique structure in regards to the way it changes from time periods in Billy's life, yet is somehow actually the present. I don't understand it, but I'm also not crazy like Billy seems to be.
Slaughterhouse-Five: Indirect Characterization
"Billy is spastic in time, has no control over where he is going next, and the trips aren't necessarily fun. He is in a constant state of stage fright, he says, because he never knows what part of his life he is going to have to act in next... He was a funny-looking child who became a funny-looking youth-tall and weak." p.23
One thing that is prevalent in the book is indirect characterization. Vonnegut contributes the traits of characters largely through descriptions of events and circumstances. Throughout the story, almost all of Billy's character has been developed through the actions that have happened to him. However, I chose this quote for a specific purpose. Vonnegut describes Billy as being in a constant state of stage fright. This brief characterization of him as being perpetually frightened has yet to be shown so far in the frame story. So far, it seems as though Billy has accepted time travel as a normal thing that happens and is yet to protest or fear such things. As of now, he seems to just have a "so it goes" attitude towards the happenings of events in his life. I'm interested to see how Billy's views of such things change throughout the book up to the present in which Vonnegut is telling the story.
One thing that is prevalent in the book is indirect characterization. Vonnegut contributes the traits of characters largely through descriptions of events and circumstances. Throughout the story, almost all of Billy's character has been developed through the actions that have happened to him. However, I chose this quote for a specific purpose. Vonnegut describes Billy as being in a constant state of stage fright. This brief characterization of him as being perpetually frightened has yet to be shown so far in the frame story. So far, it seems as though Billy has accepted time travel as a normal thing that happens and is yet to protest or fear such things. As of now, he seems to just have a "so it goes" attitude towards the happenings of events in his life. I'm interested to see how Billy's views of such things change throughout the book up to the present in which Vonnegut is telling the story.
Slaughter-House-Five: Frame Story
"I've finished my war book now. The next one I write is going to be fun. This one is a failure, and had to be, since it was written by a pillar of salt. It begins like this:..." p.22
This quote illuminates the set up of the book Slaughterhouse-Five. Just like Frankenstein, the majority of the plot is a frame story. The author is the first-person narrator of the story who is writing a book relating to his past experience from World War 2. The main character is introduced as Billy, who I plan on highlighting in the next blog. To go off on a personal rant, I really enjoy frame story formats for some reason. It's like there's always action happening inside and outside of what is the perceived present. Anyway, this story has a unique structure that constantly jumps around with Billy's time travel. I have found it very interesting thus far, as the frame story and frequent anecdote format has kept me hooked on reading it. One thing that I want to learn in group discussion tomorrow is that if Kurt Vonnegut is supposed to be the actual narrator of the story since I think I may have missed it awhile back.
This quote illuminates the set up of the book Slaughterhouse-Five. Just like Frankenstein, the majority of the plot is a frame story. The author is the first-person narrator of the story who is writing a book relating to his past experience from World War 2. The main character is introduced as Billy, who I plan on highlighting in the next blog. To go off on a personal rant, I really enjoy frame story formats for some reason. It's like there's always action happening inside and outside of what is the perceived present. Anyway, this story has a unique structure that constantly jumps around with Billy's time travel. I have found it very interesting thus far, as the frame story and frequent anecdote format has kept me hooked on reading it. One thing that I want to learn in group discussion tomorrow is that if Kurt Vonnegut is supposed to be the actual narrator of the story since I think I may have missed it awhile back.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Frankenstein: Ending
I know most people were disappointed with the way the story ended. However, I actually enjoyed it. I don't know if it's weird to enjoy such a depressing ending but for some reason I liked it. I felt as though everything was resolved. While it may have been anti-climactic, Frankenstein dies in torment like the creature thought he wanted, and the creature dies like Victor would have wanted. The ending may not have been resolved like the way I expected, but I was satisfied with the result of the story. I really enjoyed seeing the revelation the creature had at the end. The ending really showed that deep down, the creature had been a good person but was just the target of hatred by society. Overall, I really enjoyed Frankenstein as it was my favorite work we've read so far, and I look forward to reading one of the novels we have been able to select.
Frankenstein vs. The Creature
"What does it avail that I now ask pardon of thee." p.163
Throughout this novel, I found myself sympathizing with both characters. However, if it came down to just choosing one character's side, I would have to go with the creature. All the creature wanted was just the slightest joy in his life and really never got any. Being constantly neglected and hurt would do the same to anyone in his shoes. Really, the fact that the creature was still sorry for what he did in the end after all the pain he'd been through conveys his inherently good nature. While I do think many of Victor's actions were commendable, his constant abuse towards his creation really seems to go against his values. Victor is flawed in this regard whereas the creature never had an inherent flaw. After simply being sick of seeing happiness around him and experiencing none, the creature became evil. Frankenstein was the cause for this which is why I find myself sympathizing with the creature more.
Throughout this novel, I found myself sympathizing with both characters. However, if it came down to just choosing one character's side, I would have to go with the creature. All the creature wanted was just the slightest joy in his life and really never got any. Being constantly neglected and hurt would do the same to anyone in his shoes. Really, the fact that the creature was still sorry for what he did in the end after all the pain he'd been through conveys his inherently good nature. While I do think many of Victor's actions were commendable, his constant abuse towards his creation really seems to go against his values. Victor is flawed in this regard whereas the creature never had an inherent flaw. After simply being sick of seeing happiness around him and experiencing none, the creature became evil. Frankenstein was the cause for this which is why I find myself sympathizing with the creature more.
Frankenstein: Irony and Suspense!
"I shall be with you on your wedding night" p.123
Oh the irony! This obviously is an indication that the creature is going after Elizabeth. It almost seems unrealistic that Shelley would not have Victor realize this. Anyway, this situation could simply be the definition of irony. The reader knows exactly who the creature will be after, yet Frankenstein has not the slightest clue. In addition to the irony in this quote, this really creates a lot of suspense in the book. I don't want to get too crazy with this blog entry with two literary devices, but this quote really does exhibit characteristics for both. As a reader, I was kept relatively interested throughout the book, however, when the creature said this, I couldn't wait to find out what would happen. This creepy quote from the creature really added to my enjoyment of the novel as well as to its excitement.
Oh the irony! This obviously is an indication that the creature is going after Elizabeth. It almost seems unrealistic that Shelley would not have Victor realize this. Anyway, this situation could simply be the definition of irony. The reader knows exactly who the creature will be after, yet Frankenstein has not the slightest clue. In addition to the irony in this quote, this really creates a lot of suspense in the book. I don't want to get too crazy with this blog entry with two literary devices, but this quote really does exhibit characteristics for both. As a reader, I was kept relatively interested throughout the book, however, when the creature said this, I couldn't wait to find out what would happen. This creepy quote from the creature really added to my enjoyment of the novel as well as to its excitement.
Dynamic Character
"A race of devils would be propagated upon the earth, who might make the very existence of the species of man a condition precarious and full of terror." p. 121
I think this is pretty obvious that Victor is a dynamic character in the story. There are many shifts and important changes that can be marked in his history. However, I feel as though one sticks out the most in significance. At the moment described in the quote above, Victor abandons his quest to create a second creature. This marks a turning point in the novel when Victor decides to transcend above a life of servitude for his own creation. Though it ends in his demise, this change in his character was key. He no longer cared about his own happiness but rather the well-being of the world. He thought it was now his duty to protect everyone around him. While the creature, it seems, had no evil plans with the second creation, Victor thought this may be the case and was willing to make sacrifices in order to attempt to protect others. Victor's dynamic shift elevates him from the slave-like control the creature previously had on him.
I think this is pretty obvious that Victor is a dynamic character in the story. There are many shifts and important changes that can be marked in his history. However, I feel as though one sticks out the most in significance. At the moment described in the quote above, Victor abandons his quest to create a second creature. This marks a turning point in the novel when Victor decides to transcend above a life of servitude for his own creation. Though it ends in his demise, this change in his character was key. He no longer cared about his own happiness but rather the well-being of the world. He thought it was now his duty to protect everyone around him. While the creature, it seems, had no evil plans with the second creation, Victor thought this may be the case and was willing to make sacrifices in order to attempt to protect others. Victor's dynamic shift elevates him from the slave-like control the creature previously had on him.
Frankenstein: Indirect Characterization
"I beheld a countenance of angelic beauty and expression. Her hair of a shining raven black, and curiously braided; her eyes were dark but gentle, although animated; her features of a regular proportion, and her complexion wondrously fair, each cheek tinged with a lovely pink." p.82
Indirect characterization is frequently the way in which Mary Shelley conveys the nature of the characters in the book. In the quote above, the creature is referring to the new found lady at the cottage named Safie. Safie conveniently is Turkish and, therefore, has yet to learn French. As the creature studies the habits of the cottagers, he is able to pick up on language much more quickly than before. This eventually gives him the opportunity to try his luck in friendship with the cottagers. The introduction and characterization was a key method in linking the history of the creature with his present being. While Safie is a brief and somewhat uninvolved character, she is key to the story. Through her, Shelley is able to progress the story through developing the creature's language as well as his outlook towards humanity. Because of this, Safie really does play a key role in advancing the story.
Indirect characterization is frequently the way in which Mary Shelley conveys the nature of the characters in the book. In the quote above, the creature is referring to the new found lady at the cottage named Safie. Safie conveniently is Turkish and, therefore, has yet to learn French. As the creature studies the habits of the cottagers, he is able to pick up on language much more quickly than before. This eventually gives him the opportunity to try his luck in friendship with the cottagers. The introduction and characterization was a key method in linking the history of the creature with his present being. While Safie is a brief and somewhat uninvolved character, she is key to the story. Through her, Shelley is able to progress the story through developing the creature's language as well as his outlook towards humanity. Because of this, Safie really does play a key role in advancing the story.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Frankenstein: My Opinion so far
I'm not the biggest fan of dedicating a lot of my time to books in general, but this book is by far the best we have read so far. I could actually see myself reading this outside of class shockingly... as long as I didn't have to take notes. I really have enjoyed the suspense and cliffhangers that close every chapter though. It definitely is a lot more interesting than any Shakespeare or plays we have read. So if it means anything to Mary Shelley, she gets a positive review from me. I'm really interested and intrigued as to how this story will unfold though. I especially want to know how it ends up getting to the point of a dogsled chase near the north pole. Obviously Victor and his creation never work things out, but I really want to see what happens next between them. So as it stands now, I'm really enjoying reading this book and hope I continue to do so.
Frankenstein: Allusion
"I ought to by thy Adam, but I am rather thy fallen angel, whom thou drivest from joy for no misdeed." p.69
How did Frankenstein's creature reference a witty biblical allusion at age 2? That is the first question that comes to my mind. Obviously, he is a quick learner. However, this allusion is very significant in the story. It introduces the idea of God or creator/creation. In a way, Frankenstein should be obligated to take care of his creation like God. However, when the creation alludes to this, he twists it and shows how Victor has not done so. This really demonizes Victor in the mind of the reader for being so judgmental on the creature's appearance. Mary Shelley utilizes this such allusion to really change the readers initial perspective on these two characters in the story. I really am interested to see how significant a role this idea of creator/creation will play in the rest of the story and whether it will change Victor's current outlook on his creation at all.
How did Frankenstein's creature reference a witty biblical allusion at age 2? That is the first question that comes to my mind. Obviously, he is a quick learner. However, this allusion is very significant in the story. It introduces the idea of God or creator/creation. In a way, Frankenstein should be obligated to take care of his creation like God. However, when the creation alludes to this, he twists it and shows how Victor has not done so. This really demonizes Victor in the mind of the reader for being so judgmental on the creature's appearance. Mary Shelley utilizes this such allusion to really change the readers initial perspective on these two characters in the story. I really am interested to see how significant a role this idea of creator/creation will play in the rest of the story and whether it will change Victor's current outlook on his creation at all.
Frankenstein: Why is Victor so mean???
One thing that I have noticed is that Victor just seems like a horrible person. His so called wretched creature just wants a little compassion and Victor refuses it. At first, he doesn't even try to listen to his story and even tries to attack him. All his so far nameless creature wants is a little respect and dignity, yet Victor refuses any. I just think this doesn't bode too well for Victor's character in the court of my opinion. His creation seems like a good guy. I don't see why he won't just give him a chance. Because of this, I really find myself sympathizing with the creature and not really liking Victor anymore.
Frankenstein: Motif
"Poor William! He was our darling and our pride." p. 52
"Victory says that he knows who was the murderer of poor William." p. 53
Just like we witnessed in Othello with honest Iago, another motif arises in Frankenstein. Both quotes above display such motifs. Mary Shelley frequently has characters refer to William as poor William. This creates an aspect of additional innocence to William's already delicate and adolescent character. By using this motif, Shelley is able to create an atmosphere of increased tragedy from the already tragic nature of the event. This affects the reader in recognizing the horrid nature of such an action and creates an irreconcilable villain out of the murderer. With this, the reader can associate an evil nature with who is the actual murderer or even that of the accused. When Victor associates his creation with the murder, it immediately creates a demonic nature to the creature until this is later reconciled when they meet.
"Victory says that he knows who was the murderer of poor William." p. 53
Just like we witnessed in Othello with honest Iago, another motif arises in Frankenstein. Both quotes above display such motifs. Mary Shelley frequently has characters refer to William as poor William. This creates an aspect of additional innocence to William's already delicate and adolescent character. By using this motif, Shelley is able to create an atmosphere of increased tragedy from the already tragic nature of the event. This affects the reader in recognizing the horrid nature of such an action and creates an irreconcilable villain out of the murderer. With this, the reader can associate an evil nature with who is the actual murderer or even that of the accused. When Victor associates his creation with the murder, it immediately creates a demonic nature to the creature until this is later reconciled when they meet.
Frankenstein: Frame Story
"Strange and harrowing must be his story, frightful the storm which embraced the gallant vessel on its course and wrecked it- thus!" p.14
The quote above serves as the introduction/transition into Frankenstein's tale. This serves to illustrate and create a frame story format in which the plot is conveyed to the reader. As the book starts with letters, it transitions to the present and then to Victor's story. I'm interested to see if there will be a frame story within Victor's tale, but it doesn't look like this will be the case at least so far. However, I really enjoy this format of story. It always seems as though so much is happening and keeps my attention. There hasn't really been a lull in the progression of plot as I am always wondering what will unfold next. This frame story format really creates suspense and anticipation for the reader, especially in my case. I thought Shelly implamented this technique very well in attracting me, the reader, into the depth of the novel. I think this has been key to the success and popularity of the book in general throughout its history.
The quote above serves as the introduction/transition into Frankenstein's tale. This serves to illustrate and create a frame story format in which the plot is conveyed to the reader. As the book starts with letters, it transitions to the present and then to Victor's story. I'm interested to see if there will be a frame story within Victor's tale, but it doesn't look like this will be the case at least so far. However, I really enjoy this format of story. It always seems as though so much is happening and keeps my attention. There hasn't really been a lull in the progression of plot as I am always wondering what will unfold next. This frame story format really creates suspense and anticipation for the reader, especially in my case. I thought Shelly implamented this technique very well in attracting me, the reader, into the depth of the novel. I think this has been key to the success and popularity of the book in general throughout its history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)