I was
actually pretty clueless before the surprise ending was revealed byin her short story,
"." I wondered about the imaginary Charles and why he had never been seen by anyone
but Laurie. After a rereading, the clues given by the author become more obvious. Laurie's
increasingly bad behavior at home should have been one clue of the bad habits he was picking up
in kindergarten. The fact that Laurie seems to enjoy telling of Charles' exploits is another
clue. Laurie's laughing "insanely" should certainly be yet another clue that the young
boy was in need of some counseling, and that Laurie may actually be suffering from a
split-personality disorder. Since the story was told from the viewpoint of the mother, who still
saw Laurie as her innocent, little boy, it is no wonder that the ending was so surprising to
most readers.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
At what point in the Shirley Jackson short story "Charles" did you figure out the ending? What led you to this conclusion at this point?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
How is Joe McCarthy related to the play The Crucible?
When we read its important to know about Senator Joseph McCarthy. Even though he is not a character in the play, his role in histor...
-
"Festival" addresses the age-old difficulty of generational gaps, in the setting of a traditional Chinese-style New Y...
-
Sipho Sepamla is a South African poet born in 1932. He wrote during Apartheid and had some of his work banned by the Apartheid regi...
-
An is an expression that has a meaning which cannot be derived from the combined meaning of its words. To put it somewhat different...
No comments:
Post a Comment