In Children of the Sea if Kirk! Krak! readers are exposed to two people attempting to maintain a connection with one another. They are attempting to do this by writing in what seems to be a journal for each other. Each of the narrators says multiple times that they hope that the other one still is writing, that way when they are reunited, it is as if they were never really separated. The connection these two seem to have with each other is extremely intense. The male narrator can be quoted as saying that he would still love the female narrator if his heart were to be ripped from his chest.
The type of language each of the narrators use is extremely different. Readers know that the narrators are about the same age, because the male narrator compares their age to the age of the pregnant women on the boat with him. Even though they may be the same age, it is extremely clear that they each have a very different educational level. Readers know that education is extremely important to both of them, because it is repeatedly discussed. The language and grammar make it clear of the drastic difference in education however. The male narrator is better, or more highly, educated than the female narrator. The male narrator uses proper grammar and a larger vocabulary in his writing. The female narrator has very simple, but intense language with no concern for grammar.
Even though there is apparent difference in language, grammar, and educational level, the messages and imagery are extremely intense in both of the narrators story telling, and very much to the point. They have a similar style where they seem to both get to the point rather quickly, with emotion coming secondary to their writing. They both get to the point. I think that this is because they have both been through so much in their short time on this Earth. They have both had to endure more than one person should ever have to, and even though they may not realize it at the moment; it is making them both stronger in the end. I admire both of them for being able to talk this freely, because this is not something that I can do. Not nearly to the extent these two have, but I have had my share of rough times. I wish I could talk as freely about them as these two, but I cannot. I feel as if I should just deal with it internally. In a sense, I guess they are, because the other is not reading the journal entries yet. I also find this very appealing. I like that they get to the point, because I think that the imagery becomes more intense. Danticat is not trying to distract the reader with fancy words to display the intensity and seriousness of what these two are attempting to discuss with each other. She is blunt and to the point. She tells you what she wants you to imagine as you reader what she has written.
I feel that because the reader never learns either of the narrators’ names, it makes them easier to relate to. Danticat does not really describe the physical characteristics of either of the narrators. This combined with them not being given a name in the writing makes it so the readers can in vision who ever s/he wants. This makes the characters more flexible and relatable, and I think this was her tactic when she decided to do this. When authors give you names and descriptions of the characters, they want the reader to see whom them see. This freedom allows the reader to picture whom ever, someone they never met or someone that may be in their lives. Although some would say this is a bit of a bold move for a writer, I cannot imagine reading any other way. I think it would change how I perceived the story and made it less personable for the reader.
No comments:
Post a Comment