Here are the guidelines:
- Reading responses must be AT LEAST 250 words.
- Include your full name at the end of your comments. Unnamed comments will be deleted.
- From the "Comment As" drop-down menu, choose Anonymous, then click "Publish."
- Reading responses are due by midnight on the night PRIOR to our discussion of the required reading.
Ch. 4
ReplyDeleteAlice LaPlante overall describes a short story with a sense of wholeness and understanding. The more of them you read, the easier it is to identify them. I understood that in a simple sense, a short story includes a beginning, middle, and an end. But instead of focusing on the whole story, the short story resembles a novella. The novella focuses on a character or two and goes in depth about them. The short story not only focuses on certain characters, but it magnifies into one point in time, or event of the characters. It doesn't event had to focus on one single character, but it can focus on a moment in time, an epiphany of some sort like Samuel Beckett's "First Love."
Fiesta, 1980
This short story by Junot Diaz is a perfect example for this chapter. Not only does it focus on the character Yunior, but it focuses on a certain time of his life during a family party. It has the villian, which I took as the dad. The dad is that one dad who will whip you if you sneeze, and the fact that he's cheating on the mom, it gave bad vibes from the start. Yunior talks about the event like a recollecting his old memories of the time when his family was still together. The story was altogether a good read. I resonated with the hispanic slang and the Spanish phrases used. The story was a good novella, he's cheating on the mother, setting. It left me wondering if Yunior ended up telling the mom or if the mom eventually caught on. novella, he's cheating on the mother, setting.
Kassandra Salas
This is my response
ReplyDeleteIn Junot Diaz “Fiesta, 1980” it fits under a short story, but a really good one. I really liked how short it was and how it still has a really good story to it. It had the beginning, middle, and end. The author uses “yunior” as the protagonist. I liked the slang and how they call him Yunior instead of Junior. It gives off the connection to their culture and who they are. I loved all the spanish helped me connect to them as characters. At first I wasn’t sure why yunior was throwing up in the car, but when reading towards the end I understood why. The thought of the father having an affair with the puerto rican girl made him physically ill. The thought of him not telling his mother about the affair was really starting to affect him. Lets not forget how bad of a father his dad is as well. The way yunior is treated in the story is horrible as well. I enjoyed how the story played out. At the end of the story I liked how he kept it a mystery and I had to imagine what happened.
In chapter it talks about structure and beginnings. These both readings connected well in that sense.Its mentions about the short stories and how to understand them. I have been reading short stories in another class, and I have had a better understanding to these types of work. Like Fiesta it was short but it gave the reader everything it needed. The characters to me were great the way he made them all important in his writing, and without making it so long. The two readings were really good.
Lizette Garcia
Isaac J McCoy
ReplyDeleteResponse One
I do not understand this chapter very well, but I understand the concept of creating conflicts within a story. Without conflict or problems in a story, the characters cannot grow or develop any further than where they start off from. I realize that characters need to grow in order to develop a good story, but I do not think this is always true about stories. Surely there are more than one way to write good stories, they must not all have to be dictated by one authors idea of a well written story. I feel as though a good story can only be written by a good writer, writing is not valued by what is in it rather than how it is written. Use of language and metaphors, I think, has a greater impact on whether a story is well written or not than by what conflicts arise within the story. Again, I realize this s just my personal opinion, but I think that Laplante is also just stating her opinion. Just because she is published does not mean she has any weight to add upon the significance of a good story. Stories are defined by the culture they enter, the time periods which occur when they are published, public opinion on various subjects, and an endless array of other factors. The idea that what she is presenting, regardless of how many others agree with her, is the right way is very arrogant in my mind to be exemplifying in a book on writing.
Response Two
I like the ungrammatical language used within the narration, it gives the narrator a more unique appearance in my mind. It makes the narrator stand out as a person and not just as a voice from nowhere describing what is going on in the story. I am not sure why there was a varying cussword in the story, it made the narrator seem dirtier than the image had created in my mind and disrupted my train of thought when I saw the vulgarity. A lot of the culture of the protagonist’s and family was unfamiliar to me, which, and I know this sounds bad, does not make me interested whatsoever in reading deeper into it. I typically will only read what interests me, unless for homework or extracurricular research, and none of this story interested me. While I can, as I said before, appreciate the unique dialogue and speech patterns between the characters; I do not find anything else in the story which would cause me to continue perusing the story, nothing that stirs a desire to care. Like I said, I realize this is a horrible reason, personality trait, but this is mine and I see nothing socially abnormal with it.
Maybe I didn’t understand the chapter well enough (I fully admit I’m not the brightest at understanding things) but it seemed to me like LaPlante was arguing that there is no right way of writing fiction. It’s as if everyone is looking at each other before shrugging when asked “what makes a short story a short story?” If she is proposing a proper “way” to do things, then I would say it is the way of no way (yeah, not the first Bruce Lee reference we’ll have this week). Reading Francine Prose’s essay led to the same conclusion. It seemed like both LaPlante and Prose both stated normal conventions on how to write a “proper” short story, but then break that convention by stating that a certain great work didn’t follow that convention – which is why I feel she included that segment “On Not Becoming Slaves to Theory”; we will be told what is the “proper” method on writing short stories but in reality we are just trying to figure out the art form which we all love so much. I agree with this idea of not falling victim of convention, and if this is truly what LaPlante is arguing for, than I need to buy her a drink.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed Diaz’s “Fiesta 1980” because I could identify with some of the Latino elements in the story. I liked how Diaz associated Yunior’s vomiting with his knowledge of his dad’s affair - that was a nice touch. Also, wow! The dad was a real asshat.
-Chano Martinez
In regards to the chapter, I enjoyed the various approaches or structures that a short story had to follow. Essentially, I found glimpses of there being a sort of tug of war between the left side of a writer’s brain and the right side. The left side which is the side in which logic and structure is controlled compared to the right side in which this portion is in control of creativity. The textbook annotated emphasis on the Freitag Triangle which is to promote a model of writing a short story which follows the conflict, crisis, and then ends off with a resolution. However, the author makes it very clear when stated that, “You do not have to write to this conventional method.” Initially, the Freitag Triangle and the author approaches to writing a short story are not the mandatory methods to crafting one. If anything, these tactics can be used as a sort of crutch to assist aspiring or beginner writers to help get their thoughts down before they actually start writing. Usually, I found that artists have mixed reception to giving structure to their art since it is not “free expression”. Although I feel that different stories may ask for different approaches. A writer can combine both structure and freeform, but it isn’t set in stone like the commandments. That’s the beauty of writing, you are what you make of the story, let the pen glide and guide.
ReplyDeleteWith correlation of the story by Junot Diaz was interesting to say the least. I can see why the author of this textbook chose this specific piece for this respective chapter. In my opinion, I felt the story was an idyllic example of showing that our protagonists do not necessarily need to have an epiphany or have their problems magically solved. As stated by LaPlante, “Perhaps our job is simply to render what their predicament is, rather than solving their problems for them?” This instance is clearly depicted in the work since the resolution is not exactly a resolution, it is simply a standoff of what occurred due to the affair. On a side note, I thought it was interesting that none of the dialogue had any quotation marks, it may be written in this manner to show that something is not necessarily right within the story. Also, it could be a tool used to show the informality that is taken place at the party and how the family interacts with one another.
Patricio Hernandez (P.J.)
This chapter is probably my least favorite from all the ones that were assigned. The chapter only, I really enjoyed the short story, though. The reason I didn’t like this chapter is because LaPlante completely disregards “formulas” that other writers use. While I agree that people shouldn’t use a formula, I am not completely cynical about it. For example, when she mentioned the ABCDE formula and said it was useful but shouldn’t be used every single time, it was a bit annoying to read. Everyone writes differently! Sure, because she has been published she knows better, but there are people who are comfortable with a formula and make great stories! While I do not use a formula, I wouldn’t discourage people not to use them either. This chapter doesn’t seem helpful in my opinion because it seems like LaPlante wants writers to write in one way and not use formulas. While I did enjoy the quotes from other writers like Flannery O’Conner, their quotes aren’t harsh like LaPlante’s “If you wanted formulas, you’d be reading a mathematics or chemistry textbook, not this one.” That particular quote could discourage beginning writers or anybody. Only one thing I enjoyed from this chapter is the analysis of the conflict-crisis-resolution model.
ReplyDeleteWhile I particularly disliked this chapter, I really loved the short story. If anything, the short story made this chapter bearable. To begin with, this is a Latin writer with a Latin story and I love reading these because I love to see representation in the writing profession. While the story focuses on Yunior, the protagonist, this story is structured in an interesting way. The audience is being guided through the dysfunctional family of Yunior even though the setting is at a party. The Spanish dialogue and slang, the affair, and the way the story is structured makes this short story one of my favorites.
Emily D'Gyves
I found this chapter to be really helpful, yet again… Personally I love, prefer, and -try- to emulate in my own writing Brander Matthews’s opinion on how short stories should be told—concise, every word fulfills its purpose to move the story forward. LaPlante also mentions the dangers of forcing your characters to have epiphanies as a resolution to the story, and I liked that. Generally I like hearing (reading) that LaPlante is in favor of restoring writing to a creative activity rather than a mathematical one, with formulas you must obey.
ReplyDeleteAll throughout high school and even in some of my past college creative writing courses, the Freitag triangle has been drilled, over and over again. It’s good to know, but I don’t think stories should be dissected and forced to fit a certain model. I love being told that it’s ok to disregard the triangle, because it stifles creativity and potentially revolutionary writing and turns storytelling into a sort of jigsaw puzzle where you just deposit scenes in the conflict, crisis, and resolution points in the triangle.
That said, “Fiesta, 1980” had a conflict, crisis, and resolution, but the resolution wasn’t a resolution in that anything was resolved—I appreciated that nothing was resolved because that makes the story more true-to-life. But the resolution was satisfying in the way that LaPlante mentioned that J.C. Oates’s “Where Are you Going, Where Have You Been?” had a resolution even though it seems on the surface that the story is unfinished.
-Nicole Hawke
Chapter 4 was very good and useful, and it sort of agreed with me on the aspect that I’ve always believed that some forms of art such as writing, or even drawing, they don’t necessarily have to follow a specific format/formula. As the book says, if this were the case, then we’ll be at the wrong place because such formulas belong to a chemistry or math class. I also agree with what LePlante says about using diagrams such as the Freitag as a form of exercise to guide your writing. Also, I appreciate what Rick DeMarinis had to say in his The Art of the Craft of the Short Story because in that tiny excerpt there was everything I’ve always thought which some teachers I’ve had in the past would say was not correct. I think everyone has their own style which means their own unique means of writing which not only takes the writer, but the reader places. Another cool topic the chapter discusses was about rescuing characters, we don’t have to save them or solve their problems. As per the short story, it was an incredibly upsetting story because of the plot, the story. I see what LePlante meant about following a specific diagram, which this story does not follow, yet it’s a great story. There was also the flashbacks thrown into the story which were added and went very well with the short story overall. I appreciated the way everything was put together, even the end, not satisfying, as I wanted more.
ReplyDeleteLizbet Cantu
As I read the chapter, I remembered my high school days when my English teachers would make us write out a plot diagram. Oh I despised the things because I don't think that there is ever a fully right answer. It varies by the level of understanding of what was read. I liked the part where LaPlante creates the "earthquake model," it fits stories much better. My absolute favorite part of the chapter was that it specified that we don't have to follow a formula to write great stories. I personally hate being told specifically what to do, I need liberty. I can do with an outline, but liberty gives me the ability to create something new that reflects what I have learned through experiences. What caught my attention was the part about epiphanies. I had not realized that they had become so common. It is nice when a character has an epiphany, but no change can also benefit the story. There is always the "what if?" It makes a story more life like because we go through the same situations through our lives.
ReplyDeleteThe story stood out for me because it flowed, it demonstrated authenticity without having to be in order. The author really hit home when he demonstrated what many Latino men are like with their wives and children. I noticed that the author never really used quotation marks while any of the characters spoke, the language that he used also resonated authenticity. I feel that the story blew up, little by little. Every situation added a new dimension which immersed me deeply into what was going to happen next.
-Daniela Hernandez
It took me a little while to somewhat understand what the chapter was talking about. I do understand, however, that there are different ways to write fiction, and that to try and force certain conventions upon other writers as if they were set-in-stone rules will almost always be detrimental. While they may work for some people, they certainly won’t work for others. I think that this chapter is trying to say that fiction is a matter of perspective. We decide which conventions are crucial in making a short story, and which ones are not. There’s no true formula for writing good fiction, as it solely depends on the author, what he/she wishes to convey, and in what manner.
ReplyDeleteThe section on Epiphanies was perhaps my favorite of the chapter, as it emphasized that characters within your narrative do not need to attain a greater understanding of the situation they are involved in to become better people, or look at life in a different perspective. They can remain the same, without any “movement” to their character, while the readers reach that epiphany, and their views are affected. We, as writers, do not need to solve the problems within the narrative. We can just “render what their predicament is”, and let the readers formulate their own conclusions and interpretations.
“Fiesta, 1980” was an odd little thing. It exemplifies what I said in the above paragraph about epiphanies, and that resolution isn’t exactly necessary. It also portrays the convoluted nature of familial interactions, and how there is no set formula for “rising tension” or “climax”. It is more like the “earthquake model” LaPlante mentioned in the chapter, with certain situations taking center stage while future situations are brewed in the background. For a moment, I had thought that the narrator was a girl, until I started seeing Mami and Papi referring to the narrator as him, and I saw the name Yunior. It was an enjoyable little piece, confusing in its convolutedness, and a believable representation of some Latino families.
Pedro Cano
Chapter 4 mentions that great stories are anecdotes and Fiesta, 1980 is a perfect example of what the chapter is about. Although the story has a beginning, middle and end, it doesn’t necessarily reflect around the plot or climax of the story. This short story focuses on one purpose and that is the protagonist, Yunior, and his problem with throwing up on car rides. Fiesta revolves around the party and with the use of flashbacks it is made clear why Yunior always vomits on car rides. It is the car his dad uses to take him to his mistress house and he can’t stand the feeling of betraying his mother it literally makes him sick. The dialect used in this story was my favorite part because it immerses the reader into the culture of the characters. The situation between the parents is something common that happens in hispanic households. The dominant male has an affair and although it is the elephant in the room it is never to be spoken of. It shows the type of effect that scenarios like this happen to children involved. Gender roles also plays a part in this story. “About two hours later the women laid out the food and like always nobody but the kids thanked them.” Although the story ends without a clear understanding on how it turns out for the family in the long wrong, the message of the story is made clear.
ReplyDeleteMayela Montenegro
This was the hardest chapter for me to understand. Usually the examples LePlantes includes are super helpful but the ones in this chapter just made me more confused. I understood it was about the importance of when to show and when to tell in a story’s narrative. What I wasn’t too sure about was what is considered telling and what is showing. I had to read the chapter twice before I was able to differentiate between the two. My favorite part of this chapter was that it was explained that teachers tell us to show and not tell because not everyone is able to “tell” correctly. I thought this was interesting, and I liked the reasons why teachers and professors think that way. LePlante doesn’t discourage the reader from showing and not telling, but to experiment with both. She even gives us examples of stories that range from using mostly the telling method to the showing method, and everything in between. “Brownies” was an interesting story. Thanks to what I learned in the chapter previously I could tell that the author was telling than showing. I thought it was a cute story about the mentality of young children. My favorite part was the comedic break when Janice comes out of the bathroom stall when she was supposed to be fighting with the white girls. I didn’t like the conclusion of the short story as it left the reader with a lot of questions, but I guess that wasn’t the point of this story.
ReplyDeleteFlavio Hernandez