Writing
for Story gave me quite a few things to think about as I approach the
upcoming profile assignment. I was
especially interested in Franklin’s suggestions about structure as far as
framing every story with a complication and resolution. Looking back, I don’t know if I have ever
knowingly did this, but in many cases it definitely would have helped me. I think my personal essay definitely could
have benefited from me using this organizational tactic.
I was intrigued by Franklin’s
ability to turn a sad story into one of triumph just by rewording the
complication and resolution on which the story was based. In Mrs.
Kelly’s Monster he tells the sad story of Mrs. Kelly’s death, but by
focusing on the internal struggle within Dr. Ducker instead Franklin makes it a
story about resolve instead. I will
certainly keep this strategy in mind when I am writing my profile in the event
that I uncover something really sad and unfortunate.
Lastly, I was struck by Franklin’s
ability to detect a good untold story and I definitely wanted to talk more
about this in class. So, my discussion
questions;
1)
What sort of starting questions can lead us to
the real story when interviewing someone? Should we go in with some sort of
strategy or let the conversation grow organically?
2)
Franklin says to leave character until as the
very end of writing. Do you agree? Disagree?
3)
Franklin talks about always having a positive
resolution. Looking back at our other
readings, what sort of resolution was there in the story Trina and Trina? Does that
work have a positive ending? Did the
complication and resolution focus on Trina or the narrator?
I think that Franklin's positive resolution in "Trina and Trina" is similar to the resolution in "Mrs. Kelly's Monster." Just as Franklin focuses on Dr. Ducker rather than Mrs. Kelly, Leblanc focuses on herself rather than Trina. Both secondary characters serve to provide a conflict for the main character. The ending of "Trina and Trina" would have been devastating had the piece been laser-focused on Trina, but it's really the story of a toxic relationship between Trina and the narrator. So even though the ending is heartbreaking, it's still positive, because the narrator is ultimately freed from Trina (it feels awful to write that, but it's true).
ReplyDeleteGreat answer, Trev.
ReplyDeleteAnd great questions, Cassie!
So direct! Everyone seems to be right about now; I think I'll call the condition "Franklin's Monster."
ReplyDeleteFranklin did compel a voracious attention to detail in his profile "Ballad of Old Man Peters," that yelps right at the upcoming assignment, but I didn't feel the same way about the sad endings you did--being an avoidable part of the story.
I probably disagree with Franklin, too. Avoiding the bog just so we can see the sun doesn't mean it ain't there, possum.
But weird possum metaphor aside, it felt like Mrs. Kelly was just a sub-story--just like how Ballad was written by someone else first, just from a different perspective, Mrs. Kelly could have been the focus the whole time.
It just would have been darker, bloodier, with a hint of emptiness at the end (possibly).
As for a good untold story, that seems to be what we make of it. When Franklin said that luck wasn't a part of it, I'd be happy to disagree. What if the old man really did just have an affinity for languages? He found something, and went with it. Burrowed deep, but not in the wrong place. Saying that there is a divining rod for a good story seems a little belittling.
Thanks for the provocation. Sorry for my rambling.