Most recent public comments by Hayley Bifulco Hayley Bifulco https://nowcomment.com/users/12978 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25279?scroll_to=330004 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25279?scroll_to=330004 The scene as in the weather. It's cold and damp (all year round in London, really). I'm sure it's more gloomy in the Fall and Winter. That influences the drama of Plath's last days. Personally, I keep visualizing Gwenyth Paltrow as Sylvia and the gloomy mood in that movie. In the narrative, Plath is active. This active voice pumps the drama. Her battle with writing and being published or rejected is an underdog-type story. You want her to overcome with every piece of writing and succeed especially before time runs out. Mon, 20 Apr 2015 10:34:50 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25279?scroll_to=329995 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25279?scroll_to=329995 Plath's death is so infamous and upsetting. The choice of words here really help to show and not tell her death. "Prepared to die" opens up so much. She prepared, she premeditated, she will commit suicide and she's thought about how to do it in an uncommon way. Her whole suicide is dependent on preparation. The drama comes from the story behind "prepared." She loves her children so she left food for them and opened a window. She sealed the kitchen, not only to keep the gas in, but also to not let it seep out to reach her children. You could've chose to describe what happens when Plath's head goes into the oven or how gas affects the body. But the simplicity of the last sentence, because of the diction, allows the reader to visualize themselves how they want to. It leaves room for imagination, but is specific. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:48 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=325725 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=325725 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:44 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=325724 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=325724 This analysis derives from what Sontag shared about her love for Curie. The biographer took his knowledge about the type of person Sontag is, one who imagines herself doing great things, and what Sontag has told him, about admiration for Curie, and connected them. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:44 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=321696 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=321696 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:35 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=321629 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=321629 A disadvantage of diary-style narrative is a limited first person perspective. What the reader learns is through the retelling of the writer. If you read two separate diary entries from two different writers about the same event, the entries are going to be different. One of them may have remembered a detail completely different than the other and then the reader is unsure of which detail is true. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:33 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316573 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316573 Well Ishmael's life wasn't so great. The wife of his father, Sarah, despised Hagar and Ishmael. Sarah demanded Abraham that Hagar and Ishmael would be sent away. Ishmael's life sounds like it was set up to be miserable, but the biblical story of Ishmael goes on to say that God remained with him as he grew up. Ishmael's daughter marries Esau who steals Jacob's inheritance. So maybe the connection here is that the narrator, declaring his name Ishmael, comes from a dysfunctional background. Life was never easy or smooth for him. He's leaving his family because maybe someone doesn't want him around. He'll start over by going to sea, whether he knows it or not. He's always been "second best" compared to a sibling just as biblical Ishmael had been. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:54 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316269 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316269 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:26 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316268 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316268 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:36 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316267 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316267 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:54 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316069 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316069 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:26 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316068 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316068 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:36 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316067 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316067 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:54 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316066 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=316066 Ishmael says he has no money or anything that's keeping him to live on land. I suspect the subtext here has to do with Ishmael battling depression. Lack of money is an excuse to sail and his little interest to what's "on shore" has to do with his little interest to live. This is supported by the following sentence with him pausing at coffin warehouses and his soul feels damp and cold. Going to sea is a second chance at living for him, maybe. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:54 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315642 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315642 Dialogue intertwines with the narrative. Dialogue gives the interviewees their own voice and not the biographer's interpretation or paraphrase of what they say. In some dialogue's the tone of their voice is added by the biographer such as when describing Mervyn's dismay in his voice. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:24 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315641 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315641 The biographer is the first person narrator. There's a sequence of events, though not in chronological order. Different events that have a common thread about Michael or Jill. There's suspense. I want to know how Jill died. What happens to Michael now. What other secrets are there? It's written in the active voice. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:24 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315640 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315640 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:24 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315639 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315639 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:24 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315638 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315638 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:24 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315637 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315637 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:24 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315635 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315635 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:24 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315634 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315634 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:23 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315633 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315633 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:23 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315632 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315632 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:23 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315514 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315514 Julie saying that Michael realized he hadn't "worshipped Jill as he should have done" is what she thinks. It's pure perception based on how she infers what he says. Also this reveals how Julie thinks a woman, like her mother, should be worshipped. However that should be, it's not how Michael did it. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315510 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315510 The decision to publish something and not publish something can affect the story that is trying to be told. Publishing something against someone's permission can damage a relationship. But not adding certain details can taint the story in a way that could reflect poorly on the subject. In this case, I was surprised to read that Michael had an affair because the quotes from Julie kind of made him sound like he wouldn't do that. But adding this paragraph revealed Jill's nature. Julie had kept saying how her mom was sexy and confident, but then for Julie to admit how upset and vulnerable she was from this affair. It makes her more human and is valuable to the story of the biographer trying to write Jill's biography. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315509 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315509 So far it seems that Julie keeps going back to how Michael was not sexually competent for Jill and how Julie is open with talking about that. Whereas Michael seems to talk about his relationship with Jill on a different level. Julie's voice, the quotes and details the biographer chooses to use from her, admits details about Michael that Micael would probably never talk about. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315508 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315508 Julie is adding a dimension to Michael's point of view. She's not opposing it, but her perception is different. She's part of the "clashes of perceptions." She saw Michael as irritating, but kind and thoughtful. Her point of view of her mother is different than how Michael talks about Jill. This is obvious. Jill is her mom, she would see her in a different light. Also, Julie talks about Michael and Jill in a way that is clearly different from the biographer's perception of them. Perceptions are different because of the relationships they all had with one another and the factors of life that impacted those relationships. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315502 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315502 It seems that Julie is very direct and honest about her mother and Michael, from the way she sees it. Michael, when it comes to tougher topics, answers brief, offers another source to ask, or sends his encouraging dismissal. Her blunt honesty may have some tension behind it based on whatever type of relationship she had with Jill and Michael. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315495 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315495 The details of the house reflected Jill's personality. It was messy, which she probably was not, but it was messy at her approval. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315398 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315398 The biographer had a good relationship with Jill. To write about Michael is personal, which is probably why the biographer chose to write in this fashion. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315397 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315397 This switch to another room contrasts to the first room and to an old time. The subject of the paragraph is the writer. By using "I" and placing himself in the scene directly, he is introduced. It establishes what connects the writer to Michael. In this case it's from researching for an old biography. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315395 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315395 The place is a mess. Though I infer that Michael and Jill ... or at least Michael, knows where everything is, maybe. The description of the cluttered room reveals the relationship between Michael and Jill. He's a bit messy and she's not, but she's tolerant of him. He teases her by mimicking her reprimands. I could only imagine her reprimands were constant, but not so serious. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315394 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315394 The wondering can imply that this type of biography of this type of person may be the first of its kind. The reader would assume that the biographer did some research by reading other biographies about British political and literary figures. That the "revealing" that will take place is something daring and honest. To say "I wonder" sets the standard for the biography. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315393 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315393 Like Jona said above, a biographer would traditionally take his journey out of the narrative and write "objectively" about the subject. Since this will be about the biographer, his interactions with others about the subject is crucial to the story. In a sense, those that clash in perception become characters in this story. Exposing different points of view of the subject will only expand the reader's view of the subject. Adding the discrepancies juxtaposes the biographer's point of view (though they are his recordings of others' perceptions). Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:26 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315391 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315391 I just explained this in my comment to the first question. I'll try to elaborate more. The biographer becomes a character, the first person narrator. It's his journey that the reader is really reading about. So it's his story, which centers around the subject. The reader will form a certain opinion of the biographer (Professor Rollyson in this case) and of how he went about his research and reporting. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315388 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30636?scroll_to=315388 A biography connects the raw findings together through narrative. At its completion, the biography becomes a source for someone else as an overall depiction of a person. A raw record will show the process or the investigation that the author took in order to discover the subject. In a sense, the author becomes a character: the first person narrator. The raw record will evoke a different feeling than a traditional biography would. The reader is discovering the subject with the narrator. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314314 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314314 Just like time, human nature is cyclic yet evolving. In humanity's change, its roots of its nature are ever present. The selfish need for more and humans relationship with nature. And yet, nature will remain the nature its always been. Most of nature's impacted by humans in humanity's attempt to take over. Maybe parts of nature that is like the heath will outlive the follies of human nature. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:20 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314312 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314312 I think this is referring to when the heath decides to just take complete control. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:20 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314311 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314311 Rome is known for its long lasting infrastructure such as the coliseum. While Rome had control over Britain, I'm sure Romans left landmarks that still stand there today. These infrastructures that have lasted hundreds of years are like the heath. They don't fall, though they do change in appearance. That's like when the heath went from being charming to haggard. Hardy personifies the heath. The heath faces interaction with humans and elements and the pressure to change. I think Hardy's story will go beyond the heath. The narrative will be about the the natural superseding humanity or just outliving it. Human characters will come into play and face conflict with the heath's presence, directly or indirectly. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:20 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314310 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314310 Time, space, change in earth's elements and weather patterns cannot affect the shape or behavior of Egdon. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:20 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314308 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314308 This is the return of the native. Civilization strayed away from its origins in order to reach satisfaction, which will never be reached. Nature, and the heath, have remained wearing its same layer that produced from its initial vegetation. What differs between the two is the awareness that nature holds against civilization. "In its venerable one coat lay a certain vein of satire on human vanity in clothes." The simplicity of nature exposes civilization's failed attempt to be simple when simplicity is laying under its feet. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:20 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314306 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314306 Domesday is the final day of earth's existence. At first I thought this was ironic because it's as if time and space take over the heath to bring it to its final days. Now I wonder if it's that the heath cannot be diminished as Hardy writes "that the area of Egdon down to the present day has but little diminished." Everywhere else is subject to Domesday, but not the heath. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:20 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314304 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314304 Egdon Heath takes on an omniscient role in the second paragraph. It takes control over time and space. The heath was a place that was once full of happiness and beauty. The heath is now exhausted and has become haggard because of the attention it had once received. Appealing to those that visit the heath wore the heath out in a sense. Maybe being in control of space and time helps the heath block out the charm and fairness that it used to emit. The darkness it takes on early, isolates it and narrows in on that "subtler and scarcer instinct." Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:20 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314303 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314303 Hardy uses space and time to describe the heath. Space and time are very ambiguous. There's no exact measurement for either, just the construct that man assigned to them. In the second sentence, Hardy writes that long before night was supposed to arrive, in accordance with time told by the stars, the heath was dressed with darkness that is correlated with night. Therefore, the heath was covered in night. Hardy is manipulating time here. Night is arriving early on the heath "while day stood distinct in the sky." Darkness and light are being divided that it would confuse a furze-cutter. Time and space is centered around the heath. We don't know the size of the heath or the amount of space open around it. It must be large because it adds half an hour, according to Hardy. The heath controls time's behavior. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:20 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314301 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=314301 The Native could refer to a person or a setting. The title excites curiosity. Who or what is the Native? Let's say the Native is a person, where did he go? Why did he go? Why is he returning? What or where is he returning to? The title could mean that the prose will be about the return itself or about the journey the Native takes to return. "A Face on Which Time Makes but Little Impression" leads me to think that the Native is a person. A person who hasn't aged though he has been gone for a considerable length of time, perhaps. The titles leave a lot of open-ended questions without a lot of answers, which will probably be in the text. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:20 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312230 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312230 I wonder if having an editor that has a similar style to the writer, or a preference to the writer's style, would be more beneficial than having an editor that has a different preference or style compared to the writer. I guess it all goes back to what kind of audience the writing is for. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:15 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312134 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312134 1. Dig 2. Read, Read, Read 3. Don't worry about making other people happy 4. Stick to your own style 5. Write one word at a time 6. Writing is about getting happy 7. You become a writer simply by reading and writing 8. There are two secrets to success 9. Write for yourself, then worry about your audience 10. Leave out the boring parts and kill your darlings 11. The research shouldn't overshadow the story 12. Take a break 13. Eliminate distraction 14. Turn off the TV 15. You have three months 16. Don't obsess over perfect grammar 17. Avoid adverbs 18. Avoid adverbs after "he said" and "she said" 19. Don't use passive voice 20. The magic is in you I would add a rule about focusing on characters. I think the most appealing characters, even if the reader hates them, are the ones that make readers think of someone they know. Strong character development is essential. Spending a lot of time creating characters with specific wants, desires and behaviors is critical. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:19 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312133 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312133 I think when King talks about digging, he means digging for the truth. Truth is at the heart of a story. In order to dig for a story, you have to dig for the truth. They go hand-in-hand. By truth, I don't mean actual events or a written fact. I mean a greater truth, something philosophical or psychological or spiritual. Mon, 20 Apr 2015 10:34:49 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312121 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312121 Being truthful is dangerous. Being able to tell the truth through writing makes a great writer. This is because writers that are honest or expose a reality, that others are too afraid to admit, stand out. This truthfulness has to obviously be written in an articulate manner, but the risk of being vulnerable and perhaps facing adversity for for it challenges readers to accept the content or spark deep discussion about it. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:18 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312120 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312120 To expand on this rule, I think it's important to read a variety of styles and genres through different authors. Otherwise a writer may have assumed that there's a certain way to write. For example, a writer might think that any narrative has to be filled with poetic descriptions of every single little detail of a scene every paragraph. By reading a variety of styles, writers are exposed to different tools and ideas to create their own style as this rule suggests. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:18 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312117 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312117 Whether the narrator is first person or third person, limited or omniscient, the passive voice should be avoided. Using passive voice rids urgency that any narrative should use. Even if the narrative is a slow-paced story or relaxed, an active voice will move it along and create the suspense required for the reader to keep reading. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:18 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312116 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=312116 This first rule makes me think of what we discussed in class about Faulkner not accommodating the reader. When we looked at the first paragraph of Absalom, Absalom! we discussed that his choice of diction was meant to make the story universal rather than appealing to one group of readers. I think depending on the context of why a writer writes a certain story, this rule is flexible. If you're writing for a target group, then accommodating the details and the language of the story from the initial draft would be appropriate. There's also the argument that a writer should write in the way he or she wants to tell it regardless of the reader. The reader should accommodate to the text. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:18 -0500