The problem I always find with
dialogue is how it often breaks the flow. In the process of writing, the
punctuating and he intros to speakers constantly breaks my thought process and
direction of the story. What Richard Bausch did very well was create a story
compiled completely of dialogue without any break in flow. Bausch created
tension and complications and kept me interested and informed of the characters
without any narration or any mentioned knowledge of their personalities or
problems.
The change at the end is
surprising, when Sharon cannot complete the service because John actually
accomplished what seemed impossible at the beginning. The change surprised even
me, because I felt like Sharon was still capable until the moment that Sharon
didn’t feel capable anymore, at which point I also felt very uncomfortable
about it.
The story was very poetic and
complex and left me wondering if people can really write like that on purpose
or if those kind of stories are rare and surprise even the writer.
The story seems to have made you think--not only about the lives of the characters, but also about the creation of fiction. In response to the end, I think it's the process of constant writing and multiple revisions that get a story to where this one was. I doubt this kind of complexity would emerge -- surprise! -- in a very early draft. Did you see Bausch's advice to writers, linked on the class blog?
ReplyDelete