Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Who needs an iPod when you've got boombox pants?

"A Rose for Emily" by William Faulkner

What are the advantages of first-person plural point of view in this story? What would be lost if it were told in first-person singular, by one of the townspeople, or in third-person limited point of view?

Please note, all questions asked are, in fact, questions. Second, the real advantage I see in using first-person plural is to be all fancy and artsy and "oh I wonder what will happen if I write something in an obscure point of view? Oh, I'll get the Nobel Prize!" Pretentious is what I see. What would be lost if it were told any other way would be some confusing elements and a Nobel Prize. The person might be cool because then you'd get into Emily's inner thoughts...yeah, I'd like to be there. Stream of Consciousness. Pretty sweet. Oh, and can we read a story that isn't incredibly sexual? I know we're all trying to pretend to be mature, but now it's just getting annoying. This has been your time with Kim Iverson....I mean...you know. =D



She talks about sexual things too....=/
Emoticons.

1 comment: