Search

The article presents a case study in authorship, focusing on the author's creation of an unreliable narrator in her 2011 novella "Will Martin." Details are given describing the story's historical background, charting an 18th-century voyage to New South Wales. The dynamics between theoretical and historical research seen in several drafts are analyzed. Comments are also given regarding the blurred lines between fictionalization of history and the ambiguity of narrative historical records.

The article discusses focalization theory in the context of digital fiction. The author analyzes two digital fiction stories "The Lair of the Marrow Monkey” by Erik Loyer and “The Last Day of Betty Nkomo” by Young-Hae Chang Heavy Industries. He explains focalization in print narratives, describes how digital fiction incorporates focalization, and explores the concepts of cybernetic narration and point of action.

The article focuses on the mimetic epistemology violations of fictional narratives. It examines the consequences of naturalizing and narrativizing the narratives. The possibilities and limitations of the narrativization based on assumptions of literary scholar James Phelan are discussed. It also presents a tentative typology of paraleptic narrators in first person narrative fiction. These include the illusory paralepsis, humorous paralepsis, mnemonic paralepsis, global paralepsis and local paralepsis.

The article discusses the widespread shift of narrative technique in the American short stories. Accordingly, the efforts to theorize the short stories focuses on the sense of unity in the story to the familiarity of an individual's point of view. It mentions the waning Uncle Charles Principle or UCP technique and the A&P Principle. It states that by pinpointing both the waning principle and the strategy, it is not only tracing the literary evolution, but also locate the significance in the place occupied by fiction and by other forms of narrative.

An essay is presented on the conceptual view of the first person plural narrative. It relates the philosophical debates of Brian Richardson and Uri Margolin about the uses of the term "we" which had contradicted in other ways. The author demonstrated that the use of the first person plural narration depends on the philosophical, social-political and political norms.

The article focuses on London, England born writer-director Christopher Nolan's recent film "Memento" (2000) which addresses the complexities of surviving trauma. While watching the film is not identical to living through a trauma, responses to an initial viewing often bear witness to a cinematic experience marked by profound disruption of expectation. The disruptiveness of the film is not limited to its making problematic the desire of the viewer to put events in proper order. Equally unsettling is the fact that no character's point of view can be considered reliable. "Memento" thus draws from viewers a response to missing that mimics the response of its repetition-bound central character. Indeed, the film might be said to bear multiple marks of traumatic experience. Trauma could be considered the psychological equivalent of a domestic break-in. Its violent disruption creates in the psyche an experience of what might be called radical disappointment. The themes of intruding, making up, repeating, burning, and sleeping are all on graphic display in treatment of his skin by the character of Leonard in the movie.

The analyses and discussions in this article are all aimed at clarifying a question that most people don't even ask because the answer seems self-evident: "Who narrates in first-person narrative fiction?" The author hypothesises, that in literary fiction, as opposed to oral narrative, one cannot be certain that it is the person referred to as "I" who speaks or narrates, and therefore that there is a need to posit an impersonal voice of the narrative. This phenomenon can be observed whenever something is narrated that the "narrating-I" cannot possibly know, as happens in Moby Dick, The Great Gatsby, and other fictional narratives, some of which I'll examine later. The article begins with a brief review of some contemporary discussions of voice in literature. It then proceeds to use the authors proposal to examine passages of first-person fiction that seem difficult to explain without the concept of the impersonal voice. Finally, the author compares my interpretations to some alternative proposals about similar textual phenomena.