Complete 10 page APA formatted essay: Subjective truth and subjective history in literature.Download file to see previous pages... This distortion might be a function of this, as a child has a differe

Complete 10 page APA formatted essay: Subjective truth and subjective history in literature.

This distortion might be a function of this, as a child has a different perspective, and might be more dispassionate telling the story because he or she is unaware of the contexts of the events. The distortion might be because the story is being told many years after the fact, therefore the memories are hazy, and perhaps the memories never were true in the first place. Or the distortion might be because the protagonist feels so bad about himself that he ascribes sinister motives to others that are not true at all, but are a reflection of how he feels about himself. Whatever the cause of the distortion, the perspective of the child or the young adult makes the truth and history subjective, and this is what is at the core of these three stories. Discussion The first story where this is true, where the child's perspective helped illuminate the differences in culture, history and truth, in that the child has a truthful perspective in which there is not an adult's obscuring of the truth is the story The Cure. Like the other stories that are described in this essay, in this story, the protagonist is a child, and he tells the story very matter-of-factly. If an adult were telling the story, the adult might shade the truth, or might have greater explanations for what was happening. In this story, however, this shading and explaining does not exist. The child simply tells it like it is, so to speak, so this is a way to reinterpret history and truth. In a historical analysis, there would be some kind of explanation for the action in this story. There might even be a kind of pseudo-excusing what was happening. The truth of what was happening, which would be the why of the story, is also missing. The audience does not know why. At any rate, the horror of this story, if told in the eyes of an adult, would be brought to bear with some kind of context. However, through the eyes of the child, there is no context. There is no explanation. There are no excuses. There is simply brutality, laid bare, and this is part of what gives the story its power. In this story, the child explains that there are public executions by the armed work detachment. There is never an explanation for this group – what they are, what they stand for, why they round up innocent civilians for execution. Nor is there an explanation for why attending these executions is mandatory for the citizens. The child does not know why it is that the four people have been condemned to die. The father doesn't seem to know, either. However, the child does not pass judgment on the actions at hand. He is mystified, but he does not seem scared, he does not seem angry, he does not rail against the injustice of it all. He simply watches the action without personal comment. What is interesting about this particular child is that he or she seems to have a kind of numbness inside for what is going on. The narrative implies that the child may not be telling the story so objectively just because he is a child, but because he is hardened by what was happening around him. This is because the child tells the story in coarse terms - he refers to somebody “pissing over the bridge,” and talks about “dog turds.” When the people are shot, he states that “things were simplified considerably.” There is detachment, but there is also a kind of crude way of thinking in this child.