Unformatted Attachment Preview
1984 by George Orwell
&
What we talk about
1.
Do you think the other couples in “What We Talk About...” will be like the old couple in 30
years? Why or why not?
A)
I don’t think they will be like the old couple. The younger couples had both been married before
and Mel questioned the couples love for each other. Mel had even said that if he didn’t have
Terri and his best friend had not been his best friend, then he alluded to the fact that he would
have tried to steal Laura or win her over. Mel had said that he must have loved his ex-wife, was
sure he had loved her, but now he hates her. Mel’s love is so fickle that he had said that if either
himself or Terri died before the other, he was certain that, after a grieving period, they would
move on and find someone else to love.
B)
I don't think the couples in the story will end up like the old couple in 30 years. From what the
story says, these couples do not possess the genuine love for one another like the old couple
does. The old couple likely treated each other the exact same way and with the exact same
amount of respect for each other that they do in their old age. Their love is so true that it remains
strong throughout a lifetime. I do not see a bond between the other two couples that even comes
remotely close to that of the old couple.
C)
I don't think the couples in the story will be exactly like the old couple that's talked about in the
story. The reason I believe that this is because of how the old couple is described. The old couple
is told to love each other so much, that the husband starts to get depressed because he can't look
at his wife, do to the cast he is wearing from the accident. The old man seems to have no eye for
another woman. Mel, one of the characters in the story, states that he would be with Laura,
another character that isn't his wife. If he says this in a joking manner or not, I believe this is one
sign that the couples aren't going to be like the old couple.
2.
How is the old couple's relationship in “What We Talk About...” different from the others
in the story? Give examples.
A)
The old couples relationship is different because they had a different way of showing love, care
and affection towards each other then Mel and Terri. I could see Nick's character doing
something like this for Laura, for example in page 135 Nick raises Laura's hands to his lips and
kisses it. The older couple seems to still have there sparks going just like Nick and Laura do. Mel
and Terri may love each other but don't have the sort of feelings that the older couple does. Terri
also states in the story that her and Mel are passed the honeymoon stage.
B)
The old couple’s relationship is significantly different than both of the other two
relationships. The older man is deeply depressed when all he wants to do is look at his
wife. Even if this means he has to see her in a full body cast, he wants nothing more. These two
people make one unit. Without the other, it ceases to continue. It’s not mentioned, but I suspect
the older couple are similar to the new relationship, but on a much deeper and intellectual
level. I also suspect the old couple does not purposely jab at each other and get on each other’s
nerves like the middle couple does.
C)
The old couple’s relationship is a special one in which they are still in love; as if it was the first
day they have been together. With the old man getting so upset wanting to see his wife touches
our hearts that you feel that connection in new love as well as old love. With Nick and Laura it is
still new love because they haven’t had time in their relationship to develop a stronger bond like
the old couple. I believe that Terri is stuck in the same type of love she had with her first
husband and doesn’t realize what new love and real love feels like.
3.
Who is telling “What we talk about…”? What point of view is that called? How do you
know?
A)
In the short story "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" Nick is telling the story.
He is telling it in first person point of view. The way we know this is because he uses "I" a few
times in the story. We also see everything from his perspective. He is telling us what everyone is
saying. Nick also tells us how it feels to be there by describing the room every once in a while.
But he doesn't tell us how everyone else sees the room. For example he says "The afternoon sun
was like a presence in this room, the spacious light of ease and generosity." (P. 135) Another
way to know that the short story is in first person point of view is because Nick is telling us his
experience. We know how he feels and what he is thinking. But we are not told what any of the
other characters are feeling or thinking.
B)
“What we talk about when. . “ is being told by one of the characters, Nick. This is called first
person narrative or first person point of view. We know this because throughout the story he
refers to himself as “I”, and at some points in the story other characters refer to him by name. We
can also tell because while Nick does tell us what the other characters are doing and their
expressions, we are not entirely aware of what their emotions and feelings are. We are seeing the
story from his perspective so we can be told how he feels and understand his reactions, but other
than what he gives away about the actions of others, we are in the dark about their feelings.
C)
Nick is the narrator for the story for "What we talk about.....". And he tells the story in First
Person, which uses "I", only reports on what can be observed, and can either be involved in the
action, or telling the story from the peripher. Which Nick does all three of this examples. First
line starts out as "My friend...." and he continues to use "us" and "I" throughout the story. He
observes Mel and relays how he tells his views of the many subjects that come up. And lastly, he
doesn't say or do much in this story - he's out on the boundaries of this story, but just there
enough to tell it.
4.
Find a place in one of these two stories where the narrator or central consciousness
differs from our view of reality or fails to see important truths that we or other characters
see.
A)
When Nick in “what we talk about when we talk about love” at the end of the story describes
feeling everyone’s heart that alters what reality really is. Although he may say he can hear
everyone’s heart because he now has this insight on love and can see how it affects his friends it
is not reality because as this story is a prime example of not actually knowing what love is and
how love is always changing and is different from person to person. In the story “a small, good
thing” when the boy wakes from sleep or his shock the narrator brings hope in this moment but
in the room itself is great sorrow knowing that the boy is not ok and is in fact dead. Reading
about it we learn shortly after what happened but in that time we carry hope that he will be ok
but if we were there in person we would see he was not ok.
B)
In Small Good Thing, we know who is placing the call to Mrs. Weiss and why. Mr. Weiss
assumes it’s the driver of the car that hit his son calling to torture them for some unknown
reason. Mrs. Weiss, her mind on her son, doesn’t even think about the baker or the cake. We
have clues from the very beginning that the baker might either be not a social person, speaking
little and briefly, or it hints that English might be a second language. The way he phrases his
sentences in the phone calls and at the end, elude to the possibilities. We know it is the baker
calling because we have the prelude to the accident with Mrs. Weiss, something Mr. Weiss does
not have.
C)
when the Baker was calling for the mother to go and pick the cake for the birthday that she did
not even realize. The reader had realized already who was calling and the reason as to why he
was calling while the parents could not comprehend the reason for calling. The husband too
could not understand the reason as to why a man was calling and mentioning their ill son's
name.
5.
Use parts of “A Small Good Thing” as examples to explain what Third Person
Omniscient Point of View is.
A)
In this story A small good thing had a third person point of view due to using he, she or it. The
characters actually had names to so they avoided using you or I in the story. The author of this
story tells the story about a boy and how he was going to have this birthday party but the
accident happened which led him to pass out and in the hospital for days. The story kept going
on with all the characters revolving around him doing their thing while being there for him and
being unconscious. He then finally woke up. This story involves a lot of feelings and emotions
such as; when the negro kid died in the surgery, it was emotional for the mom because her son
was in the hospital hoping it doesn't happen to her son and to see what that kids family went
through.
B)
In Third Person Omniscient POV, the story is written so that the reader knows the thoughts and
feelings of all the characters. Comparatively, in a Third Person Limited POV, the reader usually
only knows the feelings of a single character. "A Small Good Thing" is a clear example of Third
Person Omniscient because the story fluctuates between the thoughts and emotions of both the
mother and the father. Starting out in the mothers perspective, Carver details her trip to the
bakery, letting us know how standoffish she found the baker to be. After the accident, we're
introduced to the child's father and his thoughts start to become more detailed. The mother, I
feel, is the more focused on character, and her feelings as time progresses get more and more
real, and I found myself reading faster and faster, in tune to her quickened heartbeat that Carver
allowed me to imagine with his descriptions.
C)
Third person omniscient point of view is when someone knows everything. Say, the narrator, for
example. the narrator knows everything about all the characters in the story even thought the
characters do not know about one another. It give the reader more info and paints a more detailed
picture. One example is when Ann (the mother) was ordering the cake. The narrator states that
there were no pleasantries between them, just the minimum exchange of words. It says that he (
the baker) made her feel uncomfortable. Well how would we know this if the narrator didn't
know everything to help us out with the bigger picture. Even something as small as describing a
nurse as a big Scandinavian woman with an accent. That really is unimportant to the story but it
does give the audience a description to help us get a picture of what the characters see and notice
to make us relate somehow with them. We also know that when the baker tells them about his
life before him being a baker, how he was childless all these years and that he just worked
endlessly empty.
6.
Is Nick a reliable narrator? Why or why not?
A)
Reading this story from the perspective of Nick, I had a firm grasp of what was being discussed.
I think from the start of the story, the reader was able to read and see in their mind what the
setting was, all sitting around the kitchen table at Mel Mcginnis house, and what they were doing
at the time, such as drinking gin.
Nick as the narrator includes what each character says and keeps the flow of the conversation
moving. Most of the reading was about what the other characters were saying and not just what
Nick had to say. In fact, it seemed more of what Nick was observing from the conversation.
Which in turn gives the reader a more in depth of the conversation and what each one had to say.
This gave the story more depth and made Nick a good narrator of the story.
B)
I do think Nick is a reliable narrator. Overall, I think he presents the characters well and
continues presenting them accurately as their intoxication increases. Nick doesn’t take the liberty
of talking about what he thinks other people mean by what they say. For the most part, Nick is
not a large part of the story. He doesn’t speak much and focuses more on what others say and do.
I think this lends to his credibility as a narrator in that he keeps the story about others. Also,
when he does speak, he asks questions such as when he asks about Terri’s former husbands
suicide.
C)
I personally don't think Nick is a reliable narrator due to being first person in the story. He is
newly in love, and is involved in a lot of action in this story line. But the only problem is that he
doesn't say much so he's kind of a flat character and don't know much about his personality. So
therefore I don't think he is a good narrator because good narrators tell the story and he doesn't
do that. There are some characters in the story talk more than him and easy for the reader to
understand their characters and their role in the story.
7.
Why is “A Small Good Thing” told with such a detached POV? Why aren’t the
characters referred to by name much?
A)
In the story "A Small Good Thing" a detached point of view is used to keep the story to the
basics of what happened to the boy and allowing the reader to feel how the time moves slowly
for the child’s parents, and also allows us to really feel the emotions and thoughts that are going
through their heads. The story is told from a third person point of view, with lots of details given
in the beginning to set up a strong story line. I think the characters not being referred to by name
often, except for the little boy is so we only get attached to the boy and have more reaction to his
death at the end.
B)
The story feels detached because it is told from a Third Person Omniscient point of view. This
means that the narrator does not interact with any of the characters and has no stake in how they
feel or what they do. Instead, the narrator simply tells us the events. In this story in particular, we
are simply being told facts as they happen. I think that characters are not often referred to by
name to give emphasis to those whose names are used. For example, Ann and Howard seem to
be the central figures, thus, their names are used most often. Although Scotty is not very active in
the story, his accident, hospitalization, and subsequent death are the central focus of this
narrative. Finally, Dr. Francis is not a great character but his interaction with Ann and Howard
drives much of the suspense. I believe that this is because he is the bearer of concrete
information while all the other hospital staff are simply passersby.
C)
I think this story is told with a detached point of view because the focus is not on one specific
thing, event, or person. I think the story speaks to how things connect and everything runs
together. For example, the story talks about how the husband and wife are in the fight for their
son together, how the wife finally realizes she is glad to be married to her husband, and how the
wife feels connected with Franklin’s family. I think the reason the characters aren’t referred to
by name so much is because the author does not want us to focus on that individual character as
much as the story as a whole.