"The Dentist"
"Sweetheart of Song Tra Bong"
Does "Sweetheart of Song Tra Bong" conform to storytelling conventions or "rules," or does it break them? Explain.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Does "Sweetheart of Song Tra Bong" conform to storytelling conventions or "rules," or does it break them? Explain.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It conforms to the rules of storytelling because Rat is telling the story and it actually happened (or so he says) so he isn't just making up something and saying it's a true story.
ReplyDeleteDoes it ever reach a point, however, where you realize that Rat MUST be lying, even if he says it's true?
DeleteMitchell Sanders comments and says that "It's against the rules to tell a story that you don't know the ending to. It conforms to rules because it seems to be all true, and even parts that do not seem all there make sense because of how he is telling it.
ReplyDeleteDo we have different "rules" for stories that are told aloud versus stories that we read? Can oral storytelling stretch our sense of believability more?
DeleteIt conforms to the rules because most of the stories they tell they are telling the truth because they were there when it happened. The way the soldiers tell stories they make them sound true even if they aren't. You just have to want to believe it yourself.
ReplyDeleteThe "rule" is this case could be that when an author introduces something early in a book, that something should reappear later. Otherwise, it's like foreshadowing without any follow-through. But life isn't really that way, is it?
DeleteThe story does not conform to the conventional rules of story telling because the ending is not known. Mitchell Sanders states that it is, "Against human nature", to tell story that the ending is not known. Therefore, this story does not conform to the conventional rules, at least in Mitchell Sanders' opinion.
ReplyDeleteIn one way, we all know the end of our life story. In another way, however, we don't know exactly how we will get to that ending. Is the "Sweetheart" story more realistic because we DON'T know how it ends? (I recognize that it may be less satisfying.)
DeleteSanders says that you can't tell a story that you don't know the answer to. This chapter seems to break the conventional story telling rules since it doesn't really tell the ending, and has holes in it.
ReplyDelete"Answer" or "ending"? What are some of the holes in the story told in this section?
DeleteOne of the comments that Mitchell Sanders said to indicate that they are aware of how stories are supposed to operate is “Whenever he told the story, Rat had the tendency to stop now and then, interrupting the flow, inserting little clarifications or bits of analysis and personal opinion.” The story does not conform to the conventional rules of storytelling because the ending is unclear to the audience. Rat is unsure of the ending and only tells what he thinks happened. The audience is still left with questions when the story ends.
ReplyDeleteDoes Rat's starting and stopping to clarify add to this story or detract from it? And by "story," I'm referring to the entire section, not the story that Rat tells inside it.
DeleteSanders says that you can't tell a story that you don't know the ending to. It doesn't conform to to the conventional rules of story telling because the ending of it is unclear. Rat doesn't know the ending, so no one is really sure what happened. So according to Mitchell Sanders it doesn't follow the rules.
ReplyDeleteHow do you feel about it, Amber? Do you like open-ended stories where the fates of the characters are left to the imagination of the reader?
DeleteSander comments that you can't tell a story if you don't know the ending. The ending doesn't really conform to these rules because the story is told by what Rat thinks happened.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point, Evan. All any storyteller can do is tell the tale from his or her perspective, even when the storyteller attempts an omniscient POV.
DeleteIt says that a story cannot be told unless you know the ending, so the story does not conform because the ending was not really there.
ReplyDeleteDoes that make it less of a story in your eyes, Jake? Can a story still be rewarding without an ending? Or is the lack of an ending still an ending, if you know what I mean?
DeleteMitchell Sanders talks about how you cannot recite a story if you have no idea what the ending. The ending does not conform because Rat has no idea how the story truly went and he is telling it how he thought it was. The ending is very unclear to the audience and it's hard to follow the story and know what is going on.
ReplyDeleteDo you get the impression that Rat doesn't know the ending, or that he can't think of one? Maybe his imagination has failed him, despite claims that the story is true.
DeleteIn the book it says a story can't be told with an unknown ending, therefore it doesn't conform because the ending doesn't exist.
ReplyDeleteDo you agree? I've read interviews with many writers who claim not to know the end of their stories as they're writing them, but an ending occurs to them as they go along. They are still telling their story, right? :)
DeleteThe story does not conform to the rules because Sanders doesn't even know the end in himself. He hears it from someone and just believes its true. Who knows if Mary Ann went into the woods or not. Nobody seen her do it. The rule is you have to know the ending to a story and sanders does not.
ReplyDeleteDo you believe that Sanders really believes that the story is true? Isn't that part of the storyteller's job — to convince us that the story is "real," even if it isn't?
DeleteAlong with the comments about the Green Berets being included at the beginning of the story, many of the soldiers ridicule Rat Kiley for "interrupting his own story" with his own commentary and pauses to explain details. The other soldiers say that this disrupts the flow of the story and eliminates the mysterious undertone of the whole thing. These observations made by the other soldiers show that they understand how a story is "supposed" to work. Rat Kiley's version of the story conforms to most of the standard "story-telling rules". It follows these "rules" because there is foreshadowing in the story (the explanation of the Green Berets early in the story) and there are many different elements such as a good plot and character development and it shows growth/change in some characters, while others are static. Although the ending to this story is a bit grey and the listeners have obvious doubts of its validity, and the rest of the story's validity for that matter, it is an ending nonetheless. I find this ending to actually be appropriate for this story. It fits well with the whole demeanor and mood of Rat's story of Mary Ann. The ending is very mysterious and makes the reader take a whole new perspective of 'Nam, the soldiers, and women.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, in the story told by O'Brien, characters DO interrupt the flow of Kiley's story, but it's still a "story," albeit one that violates the rules of stories as given by characters IN the story. Oh, my head hurts.
DeleteSanders says it's against the rules to tell a story when you don't know the ending. This story does not conform because we don't know how it ends. Is Mary Anne Alive? Is she a hobo in the mountains now? Or dead in some village?
ReplyDeleteDo you agree with Sanders? Aren't our lives all stories without a definite ending?
DeleteIn the story sander says that it is against the rules to tell a story and you don't know the ending to it. it is like telling a joke and forgetting the punchline. The story does not fit the rules of story telling because their was no ending. Some stories with no ending are the best because it leaves the last page blank for you to write your own ending in
ReplyDeleteVery profound, Grant. :)
ReplyDeleteI don't think there's a definite set of rules that can be put on storytelling. Stories are usually made up, as is most of this book, and the point is to get you to believe even if it is only for the imagination. However, if we are to follow Sanders' story rules, then yes, Kiley's story does break the rules because there is no definite ending. While it isn't satisfying, I find it fitting to Kiley's personality. He always seems to go about his actions spur of the moment. As with the buffalo and the story about Mary Anne, he doesn't know where he's headed until he gets there, or, in this case, doesn't get there. He's a lot like life that way, generally speaking.
ReplyDeleteSome writers say this is the only way they "plot" their stories — just make it up as they go. Stephen King, for example, believes that readers will be genuinely surprised by the ending of his novels because he is genuinely surprised, as well.
ReplyDelete