In my story retelling, I have chosen âThe Story of An Hourâ by Kate Chopin. The short fiction story involves four major characters: Mrs. Mallard, her sister Josephine, her husband Brently and her husbandâs friend Richards. The background of the story is that great care was taken to break the news to Mrs. Mallard about her husbandâs death. In the beginning of the story, Mrs. Mallard was expressing tremendous sadness and deep grief caused by the loss of her husband. Suddenly, the grief turned into happiness and joy after she discovered the missing piece of the puzzle which she didn’t know before the death of her husband. She discovered that she can be free and in control of her own acts. In the original story, Chopin shows more than she tells. The point of view is from Mrs. Mallard but the author uses third person assuming Chopin knows Mrs. Mallard thoughts but does not give the reader full access to her thoughts. I retold the story using first person narration and chose Mrs. Mallard is the narrator. However, I believe that this model of narration gives more access to Mrs. Mallardâs thoughts and can give the reader access to more rooms in the storyâs action.
Chopin mentions in the fifth paragraph the transition of Mrs. Mallardâs feelings from grief and sadness to freedom and happiness. âShe could see in the open square before her house the tops of trees that were all aquiver with the new spring life. The delicious breath of rain was in the air.â (P. 5). In the original story, the writer shows symbolic scenes more than telling about Mrs. Mallardâs thoughts. It is noticeable that rain, blue sky and spring life are tangible things that can be seen. The description of the scene where Mrs. Mallard was sitting and looking out of the window helps us to visualize and feel with our senses the future of Mrs. Mallard without her husband.
In the story retelling, speaking of Mrs. Mallard; her inner thoughts are illuminated when she mentions âI was looking through my open window to see high trees, blue sky and birds flying and singing freely. I could feel the freshness of spring and smell the fresh dirt after rain falls over it. The view out of my window resuscitated me and I have to accept the facts and move onâ (P. 4). Using the first person narration to express these inside feelings gives more access to Mrs. Mallardâs thoughts. It also builds up trust in the readerâs perception. In this version of Mrs. Mallard telling the story herself we can understand better these symbolic events and interpret them as feelings instead of looking at them as objects such as the blue sky and flying birds that give a sense of Mrs. Mallardâs freedom and her new life without constraints from her husband.
In Chopinâs story when Mrs. Mallard opened the door to her sister Josephine, it wasnât clear whether Mrs. Mallardâs tears meant happiness or sadness. It was mentioned âThere was a feverish triumph in her eyesâ (P. 17). Since the story was told in third person, the reader does not get an evident image of Mrs. Mallardâs expressions. In contrast, these expressions are mentioned in the retelling story where Mrs. Mallard says âI opened the door to my sister, I hugged her with a wide open arms. I felt the joy of freedomâ (P. 7). It is obvious from this version which was told using first person narration where the narrator is the character itself that Mrs. Mallard was expressing her joy of freedom to her sister Josephine. The reader can have full understanding of the scene.
Towards the end of the story, Mrs. Mallard got an emotional hit from seeing her husband opening the door. According to Chopin in the original story Mrs. Mallard had a heart attack from the joy that kills and the writer mentions âWhen the doctors came they said she had died of heart disease–of the joy that killsâ (P. 19). Reading this news with third person narration does not give a serious impression of the harshness of the impact taken by Mrs. Mallard. But using first person narration to retell the story when Mrs. Mallard says âI passed out and they thought that was the joy that makes people unconsciousâ. (P.8) is helpful to bring the readerâs attention to the seriousness of the event and the truth behind Mrs. Mallardâs heart attack.
Finally, the original and retelling story versions give deeper meaning to different scenes and passages. I find that when a story is told in the first person, it is more accessible to the reader and grabs their attention and it gives clear senses and feelings. In comparison third person narration can make it harder to gain the readerâs trust throughout the story. Additionally, third person narration rarely uses a narrator who is one of the storyâs characters- having Mrs. Mallard as a first person narrator opens up her thoughts and feelings for a reader to experience.
Category Archives: Project #1
Retelling comparison of “The Cottagette”
Although âThe Cottagetteâ conveys a woman’s view on what is a perfect or ideal household and marriage. My version âMy Artist Soulâ, showed in the perspective of Ford Matthews shows the views of man when it comes to true love and a perfect household. However, in both of these stories towards the ending it shows that there is not a particular way to someones heart. In addition, household labor performed by the woman does not define her femininity and a women should not be confined to the household. This promote the equality of the roles of women and men in society and the household.
âThe Cottagetteâ as well as my retelling of it suggests a practical solution to domestic inequality by expanding the areas occupied by women. Seeing that Mr. Ford Matthews desired Malda to expand her horizon beyond the household and express her artistic views. Not confining her to the everyday household labors of cooking, cleaning, and dusting but encouraging her to work on her drawings as they were not as good as her previous works. Towards the ending of the story as well as my retelling it states,
“I want to marry you, Malda,–because I love you–because you are young and strong and beautiful–because you are wild and sweet and–fragrant, and–elusive, like the wild flowers you love. Because you are so truly an artist in your special way, seeing beauty and giving it to others. I love you because of all this, because you are rational and high minded and capable of friendship,–and in spite of your cooking!”
In this quote, Matthews sees Malda beyond people views of the idealistic woman. He explains to her that their relationship was not based on being a homemaker, but Malda being different and her true self. He tells her all things he loves about her which has nothing to do with her cooking. He wants her to be the true person he knows her to be which is being a true artist.
Due to the fact that the story I made was retold in the point of view of Mr. Ford, certain points from other characters are unable to be mentioned. For instance, the point of view of Maldaâs friends Lois, when it comes to an idealistic woman was not shown because she was talking to Malda directly while Ford Matthews was absent.
“Don’t be foolish, child,” said Lois, “this is serious. What they care for most after all is domesticity. Of course they’ll fall in love with anything; but what they want to marry is a homemaker.â
Since Malda felt as though Lois had the experience of marriage she felt as though she should trust what her dear friend has told her. Although Lois has experience when it comes to marriage, she also has experience when it comes to divorce. From this information, I infer that Lois may not have complete knowledge as to everything required to keep a healthy marriage. Malda should have kept this in mind and known that Mr. Matthews loved her for who she truly is and not what she does in the household.
In my retold version to promote the equality of Ford and Malda in their relationship, I had Ford suggest that they complete a project together showing that both of their artistic views are of high quality.
âMalda always shows a way of how passionate she was as an artist…We all like music, which was a powerful statement to us. I asked her if she would work with me on a piece for a project about her interest in art. But, it never came about.â
In this quote, it shows that Mr.Matthews was interested in Maldaâs intellect. He admits that he likes her work by wanting to work with her. This was a way they both have similar or mutual work ethnicity. He did not worry about if she was able to cook and clean, he liked Malda because she had a desire of making something out of her life. As stated towards the ending of both of the stories. He technically tells her that he would love her unconditionally or no matter what she does, but he would prefer she would follow her dreams at being an artist and showing her talent to the world. In both versions he told her about his experience with domestic work and he wouldn’t give up following his artistic dream to cook and he wouldnât want her to either. He goes on to say
âWhat would you think of me if I gave up my hard long years of writing for the easy competence of a well-paid cook!”
In conclusion, there are noticeable differences between the retold version and the original version. Most of these differences stem from the change in narration from Maldaâs point of view to Fordâs point of view. By changing the point of view, we are able to enhance the understanding of Fordâs feelings towards Malda for the reader. In both versions we see the different relationships with Lois. In addition, with the retold version you are able to get a better sense of understanding from another characterâs perspective about what they have been thinking or wondering from another angle.
Comparison of “A Rose For Emily” and retelling
âFarewell to My Dutyâ is a rewrite of William Faulknerâs story âA Rose for Emilyâ in different point of view. The protagonist of the stories is Miss Emily. While the original story is narrated by the town people as in first person plural, the new versionâs point of view is only one person, Tobe. In the original story, because the narrator is the town people, the story is developed by the facts that they observe outside of the house, and the thoughts how they feel about Miss Emily. However in the rewrite, the narrator is Tobe who lives together with Emily, probably for a long time, and who is able to observe her even inside of the house. The new narrator here, Tobe, is probably the one who knows about Miss Emily the most, therefore the way how he describes about Miss Emily would be different from the town peopleâs point of view.
The point of view of the new version is Miss Emilyâs closest person. In the original story, the town people talk about Miss Emily as a neighbor in their town, but Tobe is Miss Emilyâs closest person; Tobe supposed to know more about Miss Emily. Therefore the original story shows the relationship between other people in the town, but the new version describes the relationship with her closest person Tobe as well as with the town people.
For the town peopleâs point of view, âMiss Emily had been a tradition, a duty, and a care; a sort of hereditary obligation upon the townâ because Miss Emily didnât pay tax after her father passed away (section 1, paragraph 3). Even though most of the neighbor didnât like her, they eager to know about Miss Emily just out of curiosity; some felt pity for her; some expected downfall of the Grierson. In the original story, the relationship between Miss Emily and the town people is well-described. The town people care about what was happening to Miss Emily not because they really concerned about her health and comfort, but because they were just curious about her. People in the town considered her as some unsolved topic which they can gossip in gathering over years. Throughout the story, the neighbors knew all the details about Emily. For example, in section 3 paragraph 1, the narrator described the appearance of Miss Emily and Homer Barron with details. âPresently we began to see him and Miss Emily on Sunday afternoons driving in the yellow-wheeled buggy and the matched team of bays from the livery stable.â Also the town people knew that she bought arsenic and that she ordered a manâs toilet set and clothing. As we can see in the original story, the whole town have interests in her but just out of curiosity. Even though she didnât interact with the people at all, they knew about Miss Emily quite well.
In the story, the town assumed that Tobe would know everything about Miss Emily and tried to get some information about her from him. However they gave up asking him about her later. The narrator in the original story says âHe[Tobe] talked to no one, probably not even to her, for his voice had grown harsh and rusty, as if from disuseâ (section 4 second to the last paragraph). The only clue of their thoughts about the relationship between Miss Emily and Tobe was his voice; it was rusty from not using it and people can conclude that he doesnât even talk to Emily. In the new version of the story, however, there are more details which describe the relationship between them. When Tobe found out that Miss Emily bought arsenic, he questioned to himself âIs she going to kill herself?â (paragraph 2) But soon he assumed that she would not kill herself because of a Northern laborer guy. Later even when she ordered a manâs toilet set and outfit, Tobe was wondering about the reason why she bought them, but he never asked her. He did not have any conversation with her not because he did not care about her, but because he trusted her. Also he knew he was ânot in the positionâ to ask or tell her what to do (paragraph 2). Miss Emily was Tobeâs duty to take care of, but at the same time he also felt loyalty and compassion to her. He was the only one who really had respect for her and cared about Miss Emily. He says in the second paragraph; âluckily, regardless of my concern, she didnât use the poison for herself.â Lastly, when Tobe as a narrator talks about the scene when Miss Emily greeted Homer Barron at dusk in paragraph 4, he describes Miss Emilyâs greeting âwith sad smile on her faceâ. He already knew Miss Emily had bought a poison and furnished Homer Barronâs room as for a bridal. Also he knew âsome other corpse is still in the abandoned roomâ because he never saw Homer Barron again after he went inside the room. He still didnât mention it to anybody because of the duty to protect Miss Emily. Yet, it was stressful and gloomy staying in the âdreadful houseâ, but he still had respect for her and admitted that âshe had been a tradition, a history, and the last real lady in this town.â (last paragraph).
To conclude, the original storyâs narrator focuses on the relationship between the town people and Miss Emily, whereas the new versionâs narrator describes the relationship between Tobe and Miss Emily more effectively. Each point of view can provide us different information even though it is a same story.
Retelling Comparison “A Rose For Emily”
The original story, “A Rose For Emily” is told in first person plural, my retelling is told in first person singular. The retelling gives a clearer view of Miss Emily and her servant Tobe’s relationship. The retelling is in Tobe’s point of view. I felt Tobe was an important character in the original story because the town didn’t know much about him, also he was the only one around Miss Emily at all times. The retelling is told in order of the events that’s happened.
The original is told in first person plural, specifically in the town’s point of view. Since it’s first person plural, the reader only knows what the town people know. We didn’t know much about both Miss Emily and Tobe. The town even thought his voice has faded because he never spoke. “He talked to no one, probably not even to her, for his voice had grown harsh and rusty, as if from disuse.” The retelling is told in Tobe’s point of view that way the reader has an idea of what type of relationship Miss Emily and Tobe had. Also so the reader has somewhat an idea of both of they’re personalities. Miss Emily in the original story, is a difficult character because we don’t know if she’s the way she is because of everything she’s been through or it’s just the way she is. “She carried her head high enough–even when we believed that she was fallen. It was as if she demanded more than ever the recognition of her dignity as the last grierson, as if it had wanted that touch of earthiness to reaffirm her imperviousness.”
In the retelling, Miss Emily’s negro servant, Tobe, is the narrator in the story. I thought it would be great for readers to know a little a bit about both of them. Mostly Tobe because no one knew anything about him, aside from knowing that he worked for Miss Emily, and walked in and out of her house with a market basket. Tobe is a mystery to the town. Miss Emily on the other hand the whole town knows as a “Grierson”, the woman who didn’t have to pay taxes. In the original story, the reader has limited access to what Miss Emily thinks and feels because she doesn’t talk to anyone in the town. With tobe as the narrator, the retelling explores thought’s and feelings of not only Tobe and Miss Emily, but some people from the town as well. In the retelling, Tobe doesn’t talk to anyone from town, just like in the original, but we have access to conversation he overhears. Â In my story, Tobe and Miss Emily get along with each other. Its more than a servant, house owner relationship. Tobe has been there for Miss Emily for years, and comforted her when she needed it. The original is a bit limited so the reader doesn’t know Miss Emily and Tobe’s relationship. William Faulkner touches on alot of detail, for example, “It was a big, frame house that had once been white, decorated with cupolas and spires and scrolled balconies in the heavily light some style of the seventies, set on what had once been the best street.” Faulkner has alot of details in the original story when it comes to objects, and Miss Emily’s figure. But we don’t know what Tobe looks like aside from being black.
There’s not much of a difference between the original and the retelling except we see more of Tobe. Although Tobe is black and a servant, In my retelling, Miss Emily treated him as an equal. I personally didn’t like the story being told with the events all over the place. In the retelling, i told my story in the right order, not the same order as the original. I did it like that because i didn’t want to create confusion for the reader. First time i read the original piece, i was kind of confused a little because it starts off with the towns people going to Miss Emily’s funeral to show respect for her death. Would of been better to start off with the agreement Colonel Sartoris and Mr. Greirson had. One thing i did like about the original, was the detailing Faulkner described. “She looked bloated, like a body long submerged in motionless water, and of that pallid hue. Her eyes, lost in the fatty ridges of her face, looked like two small pieces of coal pressed into a lump of dough as they moved from one face to another while the visitors stated their errand.” In my retelling, i tried using a bit of detailing as well. ” I heard chatter that concerned Mr. Baron. There were two light skinned women, one was wearing a light blue dress with a matching hat, the other had a yellow dress, with matching ribbons in her hair.”
To conclude this project, my idea was to give the reader a chance to look into Tobe’s character since we don’t know much about him. I gave him a voice that only Miss Emily has heard. I gave him thoughts so that my readers can know what he’s thinking.
Comparison Essay on “The Day Gregor Samsa Revealed to his Parents that he was a Bug” and “The Metamorphosis”
In, The Metamorphosis, the narrator, which is a third-person limited narrator (mainly heterodiegetic narrator), tells the story about Gregor waking up as an enormous bug. The narrator describes Gregorâs thoughts, feelings of his transformation, and analyzes what is going on outside of Gregorâs mind. However, this narration is only limited to Gregorâs thoughts. I was not able to hear the thoughts of Gregorâs father, mother, and the chief clerk. I also was not able to experience how these characters felt when they encountered Gregor as a bug for the first time. The narrator just simply spoke about what she/he saw and these characters reactions but I was not able to get access to each characterâs mind. Therefore, by retelling the the story from a third-person limited narrator to a third-person omniscient narrator (heterodiegetic narrator), I received access to the undesirable and frightful thoughts and feelings of the mother, father, and chief clerk as opposed to the original text.
In the retelling, The Day Gregor Samsa Revealed to his Parents that he was a Bug, the mother is portrayed as being very distraught of Gregorâs newly transformed body. When the mother had her first encounter with Gregor as a bug, she immediately âfell unconscious to the floor.â The narrator describes Mrs. Samsaâs unconsciousness as âanguish for her son turning into a household pestâ and that she felt astonished and depressed for Gregorâs situation. In, The Metamorphosis, when the mother encountered Gregor as a bug for the first time, the narrator only describes how the mother âsank to the floor into her skirts,â how the motherâs âskirt spread themselves outâ as she laid on the floor, and how her âhead disappeared down into her breastâ (Page 2, p. 2). These were all observations from the narrator of the motherâs reactions but there were no descriptions of her feelings. Moreover, in, The Day Gregor Samsa Revealed to his Parents that he was a Bug, when the mother witnessed her son falling on the ground and landing on his ânumerous, hairy legs,â the narrator got access to the motherâs thoughts by showing her reminiscing on âGregorâs face as a young boy, then as a mature man.â The retelling of the story showed us that Mrs. Samsa really cared about her son and that she wanted Gregorâs old body to return, unlike the father. However, in The Metamorphosis, when the mother saw her son crouched on the ground with his numerous little legs, the narrator just states that she âwas engrossed in herself.â The narrator does not state what she was thinking instead she/he shows the mother screaming after she has witnessed Gregorâs new body.
As for Gregorâs father, he looked very appalled and unaccepting of Gregorâs newly transformed body in both the retelling and original story, however, in, The Day Gregor Samsa Revealed to his Parents that he was a Bug, the fatherâs feelings were well represented with his dissenting actions. When the father encountered Gregor as a bug for the first time, all he could think about was himself and the financial burden of the familyâs needs such as, âHow was the family going to be taken cared of?â âWhat he was going to?â âHow the vermin (Gregor) was going to take care of him?â He was not stating, what happened to my beloved son? Instead he was âhostileâ and did not want to accept that Gregor had turned into an insect. In, The Metamorphosis, the narrator merely states âhe looked hostile and that his fist was clenched as if he wanted to knock Gregor back into his roomâ (Page 20, p.2). The narrator did not state the fatherâs feelings and I was not able to know what the father was thinking as he was weeping (Page 20, p.2). Moreover, in, The Day Gregor Samsa Revealed to his Parents that he was a Bug, the fatherâs disgust for his son is clearly seen when the narrator states that the âfather no longer considered Gregor as a son but as a repulsive pest that needed to die.â As the father was chasing Gregor with the chief clerkâs stick, all he was stating was, âget out, get out, get out you filthy pest.â When I read this scene from the rewrite, it showed that the father really despised Gregor, that he had no sympathy for his sonâs dreary situation, and that he had no love for Gregor. As opposed to the original text, the father is continually shown as being very angry with Gregor without any explanation for his hostility. In, The Metamorphosis, the narrator explains how Gregor was fearful of getting a âlethal blow in his head or back with the stick that was in his fatherâs hand and how he was getting confused by the loud hissingâ that was being done by his father when he was trying to return to his room (Page 22, p. 2 & Page 23, p.1), however, there were no feelings and thoughts of the father being portrayed in this scene.
With the chief clerk, I was able to get a recollection of his past in, The Day Gregor Samsa Revealed to his Parents that he was a Bug. When the chief clerk saw Gregor as a bug for the first time, he started to think âback on his youth and how he detested insects for their dreadful appearance.â The rewrite allowed me to get to know the chief clerk personally by reminiscing on the things that he dreaded as a child. In, The Metamorphosis, the chief clerkâs simply puts his hands on his open mouth as he slowly backs away from seeing Gregorâs newly transformed body (Page 20, p.2). Another detail that the rewrite gave was with, the chief clerk giving a thorough description of what Gregorâs new body looked like to him. For example, the chief clerk described Gregor as having a âbig stature, numerous, hairy legs, moving in all directions, and an antenna moving back and forth like a pendulum of a clock.â Although, the description of Gregorâs new body was being told throughout the original story, it was nice to hear it from another characterâs point of view. Also, in, The Day Gregor Samsa Revealed to his Parents that he was a Bug, the chief clerkâs frightful thoughts were shown when he thinks that Gregor was going to âconsume every part of his fleshâ and that âhe did not want to be touched by the hideous creature (Gregor Samsa).â As opposed to, The Metamorphosis, the narrator does not state the chief clerkâs thoughts or feeling for the situation, he merely is seen as trying to get to the entrance hall of Gregorâs home in order to escape (Page 21, p.2).
In conclusion, the retelling of The Metamorphosis from third-person limited to third-person omniscient shows readers that Gregorâs mother still acknowledged her son, although, she was frightened and did not know how to deal with his new body. As for the chief clerk, he was depicted as frightened and that he saw Gregor as a âhideous creature,â rather than being Gregor Samsa. And finally, the father was repulsed at Gregor and did not âconsider him as a son but as a repulsive pestâ. The omniscient narrator gave readers more insight on the other characters and gave each characterâs different point of view to reflect on.
RETELLING COMPARISON ESSAY: “A STORY OF AN HOUR” AND “THE PULSE OF LOVE AND EMOTION”
âA Story of An Hourâ and âThe Pulse of Love and Emotionsâ are two stories of the same kind. In other words, both share the same story however, each tell that story differently; that being the Point of View (POV). âA Story of An Hourâ by Kate Chopin is told in a Third Person Limited perspective and the narration is limited to Mrs. Mallard. My retelling, âThe Pulse of Love and Emotionsâ is told in First Person and is told in the eyes and mind of Mrs. Mallard herself.
In the original story, it was mentioned that Mrs. Mallard âwas afflicted with a heart troubleâŠâ Using that fact, I decided to use it as a recurring theme. Since the exact diagnosis of her heart wasnât mentioned, I decided to diagnose her with a heart condition that is triggered through emotions. Throughout the retelling (mainly in the end of each paragraph), there will be a sentence or two that mentions the state of her heart. To simplify things, in each of these sentences, her emotional state is the trigger and her heart rate is the shot from the trigger.
The first two paragraphs of my retelling was a setting setter and pretty much an introduction of what is to come. These two paragraphs were additional scenes and werenât seen in the original story. The opening sentence however, is a direct setting that can be found in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the original. I also added Mrs. Mallardâs thoughts about her husband. The last sentence of the first paragraph was a rewording to âAnd yet she had loved him — sometimes.â I reworded that and used it to go in sync with my recurring theme. Part of the setting setter, there was a âcommotionâ that I added. This commotion is the result of the news that came to Josephine and Richards. This commotion also is what leads to the start of the original story.
Since the news was something depressing, I made Josephineâs image look depressing as well. Josephine had âthe eyes of a slothâ. When it was time to break the news, in both stories, Josephine tells Mrs. Mallard in broken sentences. After finding about the death of her husband, Mrs. Mallard goes up and locks herself in her room. From this point on, the differences between each story become more evident. The Chopinâs original was third person limited so we really didnât get to see what was going on Mrs. Mallardâs mind. In my retelling, we get to go in Mrs. Mallardâs mind and see what sheâs seeing.
Mrs. Mallard in the retelling once again describes the scene that she saw. âThe scenery was peaceful, the paragon of the spring season. Trees were blooming with new life while the spring rain was pleasurable redolent of that familiar scent.â Â She was motionless like the original and as we move more into the story, we see her realize that her husbandâs death can be beneficial to her life. She thought of her husbandâs death as an opportunity to do whatever she pleases. She repeated âFree, Free, Free!â At this point, her emotions were all filled with happiness and the recurring theme comes back again to tell us that her heart is accelerating.
Mrs. Mallard acknowledges her new form of loneliness however this loneliness is only something she can look forward to. With Mrs. Mallard now being engulfed with happiness and excitement, she now enters her own world. In the original, we only see her actions however, we donât see her thoughts. Since the retelling is in first person, we can see what she sees. The world she enters is now visible to the readers. This part defines the differences between the original and the retelling because we are seeing something that we couldnât see in the original. The world she entered was her utopia; A world that she can be free in with no limits. The chains that held her back were released and the ideal spring weather she loved is present. I made this paragraph sound more like the opening scene of the Disney classic, Cinderella. Sparrows were chirping as the fields were filled were springing with spring life. This world is what defined what was to come in her future. âThis is what freedom looks likeâŠ.My World, the real world, and now the beat of my heart now resonated as they begin to fuse.â
The worlds of dreams and reality now were fused. Mrs. Mallard was ready to take in this new world. As a result, she proceeded to finally go out to Josephine who was waiting outside her door. We saw in the original that she had âa feverish triumph in her eyesâ. I reworded that a little bit to make her sound more victorious. âI looked at her with the eyes of a soldier who came back from a victorious battle.â Once again, I brought the recurring theme, saying that her heart âraced faster than a Kentucky Saddler.â A Kentucky Saddler is a really fast horse that was often used in races.
The final part came with many additions to make the ending sound more dramatic. I added more sound and imagery to it. One example would be the light that came in when the door was opening. The light was a blinding light that we didnât see in the original. Once again, this scene was purely just to add more drama. The light came with a shadow; that being Brentley Mallard, her husband. We knew that Mrs. Mallard was full of shock so to add to that shock, more interior thoughts were added. âDonât tell me what I think it is.â âNo no no no!â Little thoughts liked that I felt add more drama. In the original, we didnât know how she was feeling at the time so the extras also added more thought for the readers. Mrs. Mallard felt weak and her heart was racing faster. As a result, she collapsed and like the original, we hear the âpiercingâ scream of Josephine and we also see Brently Mallard (this time in her eyes). There, her life ended. Since itâs first person, she wouldnât see the doctorâs evaluation (sheâs dead) so I decided to make her final words, their diagnosis. âIt was the joy that kills.â
In conclusion, my retelling closely followed the original story except that I added more details to add to the drama. Since I was turning something Third Person to First Person, my goal was to go into the mind of Mrs. Mallard and bring out more of her emotions. I also wanted to add more details along with making the things not known, known. In other words, I wanted to make the story more easier to understand. By adding more details, I felt that the story was more easier to understand. In the end, we saw what was in Mrs. Mallardâs mind the whole time and we saw what she felt in her final minutes.
Project#1 Two Men in My life
Retelling of the story âA Rose for Emilyâ in First person singular narrator
Two Men in My Life
I am Emily and I live in a small town down south where my father has influent in his old generation and he is also influent my life when I am in younger age by not allowing any young men in town to approach me. Because of him, many town people in the community believe I am pride and stubbornness. Some saw me as very distant person and living in the past. I believe I am a very strong person that follows the tradition of my family and care of generation value and inheritance.
I love my father because he is the only man that I meet in life until his death  and at the same time I hate him so much for bringing me up so lonely and not thinking long enough for my future if he is unable to accompany me one day. I am still single at the age of thirty because he believes that none of the young men are quite good enough for me. I believe my father is alive with me even he is dead and I refuse to bury him at first. The ministers and doctors persuade me to depose of his body. I break down when he is laid to rest. Now, I am all alone by myself in this old house with nothing left after his death. âHow should I do with this big old house with no one to talk to?” The complex feeling of love and hatred to my father strike me so hard that causes me sick and emotional unstable for a longtime after his death. Although I have two cousins in Alabama, My family does not too close to them due to the estate of my great aunt Wyatt when my father is alive. Furthermore, they do not even show up at my fatherâs funeral and I am not close enough to them to talk about my feelings. The fears, the loneliness and sleepless night cause me sick for a long time but I do not want the town people to see my weakness since my family has a reputation in town and I donât want people take advantage on me since I am alone and I have to protect the dignity of my familyâs tradition and myself.
I meet him in the summer after my fatherâs death. His name is Homer Barron. He is a Yankee–big, dark skinned with a loud voice. He is a construction foreman who comes to the town with the construction company for pavement of the town sidewalks. After I meet him, I feel myself like a different person and the most enjoyable time of my life. The most memorable time for me is spending the time with him on Sunday afternoon driving in the yellow-wheeled buggy around the town despite of the gossip of the town people and the warning of the minister that I make a bad example to the young people. He also gave me the type of joy that I ever had and I am dreaming and planning of the upcoming my wedding. My two female cousins come to visit me after the ministerâs wife write about my relationship.
The street sidewalk construction has been finished and he also leaves the town. My cousins stay for a week and leave the house. I am wishful thinking that he gives me opportunity to talk with my two female cousins about my relationship with him and he will be back within a couple days for preparing our wedding. He does come back the town after three days my cousins left.
All my dreams and happiness are not last for too long after my cousinsâ visit and after he back the town. I also learn his remark that âhe likes men, he enjoys drinking with young men in the Club and he is not the type of marrying personâ. He is the man that I love most in my life after my father. I hate him as if I never meet him in my life and at the same time I donât want to lose him forever as I lose my father. They are the men that I love in my life. I must decide to do something so he will be with me the rest of my life. I get the best available poison from the drug store. The druggist ask me that the local law requires buyer to tell the purpose of use, I do not  answer his question but then I see âfor ratsâ on the package.
I have prepared one room above the stair for our wedding. Inside the room, everything is set up for bridal including rose color curtains, rose-shaded lights, dressing table, and manâs toilet silver sets with the letter H.B., manâs outfit clothing including the nightshirt. Â I want the man I love to see my bridal room that I have prepared for him. I wish him to be with me forever whether I love or hate him. Since my health gets deteriorating and I know I donât have too much time left, but I still want to keep secret about the poison that I bought and the corpse of the man in my bridal room.
Project #2 â Comparison Essay
First person narration can be written in two forms: first person singular and first person plural. The original version of âA Rose for Emilyâ was written in first person plural point of view which was the view of a town person or a group of town people who was telling the story about Miss Emily from a distant position. In the new version of retelling the story about Miss Emilyâ Two men in my lifeâ I used first person singular as point of view of Miss Emily self which was described as she  was written a journal about all the experiences, thoughts and feelings of self. Written in first person singular is more limited or restricted in giving information to the readers but have more close relationship to the reader than written in first person plural point of view.
In first person plural point of view which uses the pronouns âWeâ as the form of telling a story from the perspectives of a town people or a group of town people and which can provide  the readers a larger groupâs point of view. In the story the views of the townâs people for Miss Emily makes the readers to believe that the narrator seems more reliable because of the group of the town people see and think the same thing about Miss Emily and giving the fact that this might be true for her as many people believe that can see in the paragraph of âWe did not say she was crazy then. We believed she had to do that. We remembered all the young men her father had driven away, and we knew that with nothing left, she would have to cling to that which had robbed her, as people willâ. Then the readers will think that probably this is the reason why Miss Emily told the town people with no trace of grief on her face that her father was not dead and refused to bury her father.
In first person singular or major point of view which uses the word âIâ as the form of telling a story usually the narrator is the main character who is talking about own story.  In new version of retelling the story by the main character can give the readers a full perspective view of what emotional experiences, thoughts and feelings of the character as in my new version of the story about Miss Emily. In this new version, the readers know in depth about her inner thoughts such as how she feels about her father, Mr. Barron and her complex emotional experiences of love and hatred than the original version without guessing it as in the text â I love my father because he is the only man that I meet in life until his death and at the same time I hate him so much for bringing me up so lonely and not thinking long enough for my further if he is unable to accompany me one dayâ and  âI meet him in the summer after my fatherâs death. His name is Homer Barron. After I met him, I feel myself like a different person and the most enjoyable time of my lifeâ.
Another advantage of writing in first person singular is that feeling closeness and directness between the readers and the character/ narrator by using the word âIâ and the readers has a lot to get to know the character by describing the opinions, thoughts and feelings by listening to the voice of the character as in the textâ The most memorable time for me is spending the time with him on Sunday afternoon driving in the yellow wheeled buggy around the town despite of the gossip of the town people and the warning of the minister that I make a bad example to the young people. He also gave me the type of joy that I ever had and I am dreaming of and planning of the upcoming my weddingâ. In the origin version, the usage of the word âweâ gives the readers the feeling of the outsider who are observing and guessing the action of the character without having chance of listening to the inner thoughts of the character as in the text of âSo the next day we all said, âShe will kill herselfâ; and we said it would be the best thing. When she had first begun to be seen with Homer Barron, we had said, âShe will marry himâ Then we said, âShe will persuade him yetâ and âLater we said, âPoor Emilyâ behind the jalousies as they passed on Sunday afternoon in the glittering buggy. Miss Emily with her head high and Homer Barron with his hat cocked and a cigar in his teeth reins and whip in a yellow gloveâ.
One disadvantage about writing in first person major point of view is that it limits the scope of the story because the readers can only get to know about the point of views of the main character Miss Emily alone and lacks the point of views of others of her surroundings. It is also a lot harder for the narrator to provide more information to the readers from the personal perspective of the main character alone without getting into the views of the others. It is less restricted or limited if the story is written as in distant position as in original version than the story is written by the main character due to the fact that they are speaking on behalf of the view of more than a person usually a group of people as we can see in text as â At first we were glad that Miss Emily would have an interest, because the ladies all said, âOf course a Grierson would not think seriously of a Northerner, a day laborer. â But there were still others, older people said that even grief could not cause a real lady to forget noblesse obligeâwithout calling it nobles oblige. They just said, âPoor Emilyâ.
In conclusion, even though written in first person singular gives the readers a full perspective view of the characterâs inner thoughts, closeness and directness of the readers and the character, drawback for written in this type of point of view is the limitation of the scope of the story without including the views of others. On the other hand, first person plural seems more reliable and less limited than singular form.
Retelling Comparison – A Story of an Hour
For the retelling I picked âThe Story of an Hourâ by Kate Chopin, where Mrs. Mallard is told about the death of her husband. In the original story, we get to know the thought process of Mrs. Mallard only and the other characters actions or thought process is just left out in thin air. For the retelling I told the story in the view of how Mrs. Mallard sister Josephine would be feeling in such a situation.
In the original story, we first learn that Mrs. Mallard is told about the death of her husband and how she is feeling when is told about the news. In my retelling I start by showing what kind of day it is and how Josephine learns the news about the death of her sisterâs husband. I also show how Josephine feels at the time that she learns the news and how she is approaching the situation. We donât get to know how Josephine is feeling prior to her telling the news to her sister in the original story, so we cannot assume what she is going through or what kind of feelings are being shown by her.
In the retelling, the part where Josephine is telling the news to Mrs. Mallard there are small details that get added such as how Josephine is feeling really nervous and does not know how to tell her sister about the death of the husband. We also get to know that to calm herself down and tell her sister about the news, she drinks tea and takes her time in telling her in order to not greatly affect her health, in which she has a heart problem. From the retelling, we get to know what kind of character Josephine is instead of not knowing at all in the original story.
After Mrs. Mallard knows about the death of her husband she goes into her room and sits in a chair near the window. In the original story, we get to know how the room is like and what Mrs. Mallard is doing while sitting in that chair. We get to know how Mrs. Mallard is going through the pain of losing her husband to getting happy that she gets to live her life the way she wants to; now that her husband is dead.
In the retelling, we get to see a different view of how the other characters are responding to Mrs. Mallard locking herself in her room. We are first presented that when Mrs. Mallard goes to room to be alone is a standard respond to knowing that a loved one has past away. We get to see the different views when they try to talk to Mrs. Mallard when she is in the room and does not get an answer from her.
In the original story, we know that Mrs. Mallard is going through the process of accepting the death of her husband and how she is going to live her life now. In the retelling of the story, we get to see that the other characters assume that this type of action taken by Mrs. Mallard can lead to one that hurts herself because of her health problems. The only action that is taken in the original story that we know is Josephine calling out to Mrs. Mallard to come out of the room. In the retelling, we get to know that more action other than calling out to Mrs. Mallard is taken. Josephine tells Richard to call the doctor and find a way to open the door. From that we can tell that the other characters are worried to what is happening to Mrs. Mallard in the room since they only thing they know is that she is sitting in a chair without and response from her. From the retelling we get to see the emotions that Josephine is feeling from the moment Mrs. Mallard goes into her room to when she leaves it. We get to know that they took early action in calling the doctor in case something happens to Mrs. Mallard and that they tried to get access into the room instead of leaving her alone in the room.
In the final part of the story, both the original and retelling show is a similar view, when Mrs. Mallard comes out of her room and she goes down the stairs to see her husband which causes her to have a heart attack. The only thing we get to see more in the retelling is how Josephine felt when she saw Mrs. Mallard leave her room and the face she has. We get to see the emotion of Josephine from being worried of what happening to her sister to feeling relieved that she came out of her room just fine. We also get to see that when they walk down the stairs, the emotion that goes on when they see the husband is not dead and the facial expression that Mrs. Mallard express at that moment.
With the retelling of this story, we get to know more about the emotions that the other characters felt during this situation. The goal of this retelling was to show that Mrs. Mallard was not the only one that had to face this painful experience, but the other characters also faced one of their own with how to deal with Mrs. Mallard actions in response to the husband deaths.
Comparative Essay – “The Story of An Hour” and “My Short Lived Happy Ending”
âThe Story of An Hourâ and âMy Short Lived Happy Endingâ both tell the same story, but with different narration styles. âThe Story of An Hourâ gives the reader a third person narration. In âMy Short Lived Happy Ending,â the reader is given an autodiegetic first person narration. The difference in the narration can change how each story is interpreted. In the original story, âThe Story of An Hour,â the third person limited narrator actually shows the death of Mrs. Mallard, gives access to some of her thoughts, and a view of more than one room in the story, while in the retelling, âMy Short Lived Happy Ending,â the first person autodiegetic narrator shows the reason of Mrs. Mallardâs death without actually showing her death, gives access to her thoughts, and a view of only the rooms that she is in.
In both the original and retelling the death of Louise was depicted differently. The original states, âIt was Brently Mallard who entered, a little travel-stained, composedly carrying his grip-sack and umbrella. He had been far from the scene of the accident, and did not even know there had been one. He stood amazed at Josephine’s piercing cry; at Richards’ quick motion to screen him from the view of his wife. When the doctors came they said she had died of heart disease–of the joy that kills.â In this quotation, the narrator is showing the death of Louise, but the characters of the story think she died of a heart attack caused by the joy of seeing her husband alive. The retelling states otherwise. âThen, as we reached the bottom stair, someone opened the front door with a key. My terror returned at the sight of the figure that entered. It was Brently. My heart begins to race and I feel a horrible pain in my chest. I grab my chest and fall, then just pure darkness.â At the sight of her husband, Louiseâs heart began to race. She died of fear. Fear that her freedom will be taken away from her once more, since her husband wasnât actually dead. âMy heart begins to race and I feel a horrible pain in my chest. I grab my chest and fall, then just pure darkness.â This line was used to represent Mrs. Mallardâs death. It was difficult to include her death into the retelling, but her heart beginning to race and her chest pain was used to symbolize her dying from the heart disease which she had.
In the retelling, there is access to all of Louiseâs thoughts during the course of the story. This shows her true feelings about her husbandâs death. âNow that my husband is gone, I have no one to limit me on my actions. I rise from the chair, and fall back down. I begin to feel empowerment, excitement even. Most women that I know would never feel such a way after their husbandâs death. âFree, free, free!â I begin to whisper. My pulses start to race. The terror which had overwhelmed me has dissolvedâ With this access, the reader can interpret that her relationship with her husband wasnât something that made her happy. It held her back from living her life. In the original, âNow her bosom rose and fell tumultuously. She was beginning to recognize this thing that was approaching to possess her, and she was striving to beat it back with her will–as powerless as her two white slender hands would have been. When she abandoned herself a little whispered word escaped her slightly parted lips. She said it over and over under the breath: “free, free, free!” The vacant stare and the look of terror that had followed it went from her eyes. They stayed keen and bright. Her pulses beat fast, and the coursing blood warmed and relaxed every inch of her body.â The reader is given Mrs. Mallardâs thoughts, but only to some extent. Theyâre told that after the death of her husband, Mrs. Mallard comes to realization that sheâs finally free. In both stories, the narrator shows the reader that Mrs. Mallard is full of joy after her husbandâs death. One difference is that the retelling shows that joy in more detail.
The main differences between these two stories are the type of narrations. âThe Story of An Hour,â is written in third person limited, allowing the reader to know whatâs going on in multiple places of the story. âJosephine was kneeling before the closed door with her lips to the keyhold, imploring for admission. âLouise, open the door! I beg; open the door–you will make yourself ill. What are you doing, Louise? For heaven’s sake open the door.” “Go away. I am not making myself ill.” No; she was drinking in a very elixir of life through that open window.â In âMy Short Lived Happy Ending,â this part is told in a different view,â Josephine was behind the door shouting,â Louise, open the door! You will make yourself ill!â I ignore her warning. I am not making myself ill. My husband was who made me ill. âGo away! I am not making myself ill!â I shout in reply.â From Louiseâs point of view she doesnât know that her sister is kneeling behind the door, she only sees the room that she’s in. In the original, the reader is shown both inside and outside of the room.
In writing the retelling of âThe Story of An Hour,â the main goal was to give the reader Mrs. Mallardâs point of view. This helps clear up any confusion about what sheâs actually feeling, or the reason for her death. Although, the original shows this, itâs not from Mrs. Mallardâs point of view. Her point of view allows the reader to fully understand her true feelings that she develops after she grieved her husband.
Retelling Comparison “A Rose For Emily”
The original story, A Rose for Emilyâ = 1st person plural, which transitioned to a 3rd person Omniscient retelling. The writings in the retold piece had very few changes in comparison to the original story. But most importantly the perception varied through intro and remains constant during high facts and important details. The retold gave Miss. Emily the honor she deserves and most of all treated her like the GODLY character she is depicted as by the other members of her town. But the retelling only focused on the first paragraph; the setting events leading to understanding Miss Emily.
The original story was written in a way in which reader must define words to get a clear understanding. From a 3rd person you can easily see the character and understand whom is talking at any given moment based on context. The original story kept Miss Emily life a secret. Miss Emily the main character played a very important role in the story. It may seem as if the story is being told by someone in her vicinity at all-time; yet, never gave any true feeling or show any affection towards Miss Emily. Miss Emily role represent a scroll, special in a way that she must be cared for and treated with sympathy. Readers can easily notice that Emily is a very hard character tot access.
Tobe, her servant created amnesty for us, the readers. I believe Tobe played importantly as a server and has the narrator of this story. The reason for this is because, fourth paragraph he had full access to the room that the Alderman met Emily in. It depicts exactly how she was position and most of all the description of the room setup, including the Alderman. This insight is from someone at the scene that knows how to describe Emily. Paragraph sixth, âthey rose when she entered- a small, fat woman in black, with a thin gold chain descending to her waist and vanishing into her belt, leaning on an ebony cane with a tarnished gold head. Her skeleton was small and spare; perhaps that was why what would have been merely plumpness in another was obesity in herâ. This description explains a lot about Miss Emily, it may seem as if the narrator was checking her out, when the comparison was made.
The retelling mainly focuses on changing text to acquire the point of view of the writer. The writer narrowly executed this by focusing on the understanding of 3rd person Omniscient. Emily went from being a character of interest, to understanding why sheâs the character of interest. Paragraph two, âIt was a big, frame house that had once been white, decorated with cupolas and spires and scrolled balconies in the heavily lightsome style of the seventies, set on what had once been the best street. But due to development of garages and cotton gins even the august names of that neighborhood have vanished; only her house was left, lifting its stubborn and coquettish decay above the cotton wagons and the gasoline pumps-a degradable sight to seeâ. The writer found it necessary to spare is readers the details and cut straight to chase. In the retelling, the writer main focus was changing the reader perspective, and importantly giving Tobe a role as a character without any race association. With that being said, it can either create a problem later on in the story or cause confusion. As the writer I want to changed Tobe role from Negro to just servant primarily because, if Tobe was the narrator has everyone may think, would his perception changed from how Emily was described in the sixth paragraph?
The story started in both pieces the same way. As a writer changing views there was not any significance or words to emulate a similar understanding; so I utilize caution during retelling. What Iâve done was portray Emily as the person of importance with the support of Tobe, just like the original piece. Tobe in the retelling change drastically as a character, he became someone that can attain respect due to the fact that he was no longer a Negro, and he was just a servant. That detail alone creates a new story line. Tobe can now speak freely if needed to and most of all represent Miss Emily more whenever necessary. The Negro in the south does not stand a chance in society alone. So Emily servant was safe as long as Emily was alive; but the story started with Emily being buried in a cedar- bemused cemetery. Not only was the story told in flashback, but it also creates a diversion for important details and how it shall be play out.
To conclude, the first section retelling seem somewhat complex due to the fact that the reader revisit for information during the story due to the flashback effect by William Faulkner. The author brought the reader on a twist before given them a clue that other events led to all of this. But most of all my retelling gave Tobe life. He was no longer a Negro with a negative cognizant for the time period. The retelling gave Tobe a second chance cause now if we think about it, does Tobe still have to run after the burial; when the whole town was digging through the big, squarish frame house that once house the most feared lady of Jefferson or can he obtain documentation to get the house in his name and live his own life.
