Response to Fiction

Upon first reading these two stories, I found some similarity and quite a bit of differences between them. There were excellent uses of descriptors which allowed the reader to create some sort of mental picture. In my opinion, this is the most important aspect of fiction style writing. It is pivotal for the author to describe a setting or situation to a certain point in order for the reader to form his or her individual image of what is taking place. Description past that point forces the author's ideas on the reader, thus clouding the reader with confusion.

In the story by Evenson, there is evidence of a clear plot and the story flows this plot in a clear and chronological order. That is up until the conclusion of Part I and the transition into Part II. The character of the intern is well developed and the reader can follow the character through a series of well described events. This is an excellent example of the appropriate amount f descriptions in relation to the plot.

However, in the second story by Field there is a confusing plot. The narrator speaks in first person and describes what he or she sees and his or her thoughts and said subject. This is complimented by the suberd despriptions of the setting and of events taking place. The issue, as I see it, is the transition between events. There is a introduction that is found in shorter paragraphs between each longer paragraph and its job seems to be to set up the next event. The switching from event to event or subject to subject in such an abrupt way causes the reader a bit of confusion. Confusion that subsequently blocks the reader from developing any individual connection with the story by way of mental imaging, like a road block for the imagination.