Story Skeletons in the Closet

I think a very important point about "In a Grove" is that we are hampered in our understanding by our lack of knowledge of the culture that the story comes from, so we have to do our best with the information that we have. Of course, the Internet is a valuable source of information that you used – as I did to supply you with a link to the concept of saving face.

 

 Unlike the "couples stories" or co-biographical stories that Schank and Abelson refer to, in “In a Grove” the

  characters are not disagreeing in what they remember as much as changing the “facts” in order to save their reputations. That’s why there are three different versions of how the husband meets his death. Schank and Abelson’s concepts of “the Influence of the listener” and “Telling Negative Stories” as well as “Stories Based on Shared Experience” are relevant here.

 

It is possible then to interpret “In A Grove”   in several different ways. In your papers I’m not looking for a “correct” answer (I’m not sure there is one) so much as an ability to argue your case, supporting it from the texts. Be sure, though that you take all the evidence into account. Do not conveniently leave something out just because it doesn't fit your idea. 

 

 

 Week Four

This week Schenk and Abelson go into greater depth on the problem of competing versions of events, focusing for part of the section on the ever-popular topic of  “divorce stories.”  I'll give you links or handouts to two short stories involving competing versions of a marriage "break-up,"  “Shiloh” by Bobbie Ann Mason and   “The Disappearance” by Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni . You get to choose one of them to respond to and eventually write about.  We'll continue with our study of fallacies as well.