Only Constraints

1) The first constraint I noticed – and while I haven’t completely confirmed due to sanity, I’m almost sure about it  – is that the words on the inside of the covers (arranged in circles and such) are not used in the book. These groups of words represent synonyms and related ideas, which is interesting, given that…

2) Both stories are basically from one source text, with words (or short groupings thereof) either a) changed if bold, b) switched if referring to one of the characters (e.g., I -> he), or c) exchanged for some synonymous word or short grouping of words.

3) Finally, rhyme and slant rhyme is used frequently.

-Dave Turka

Advertisements

~ by kartud on February 20, 2011.

2 Responses to “Only Constraints”

  1. The first constraint is clearly explained and, if true, a very deliberate choice on the part of the author. As such I believe this qualifies for the assignment. The description is sparse, but I’ll get to that later. The fact that these words are synonyms is interesting, but why does it matter beyond the point you make in the next listing.

    As for the next listing, I’m not really sure what you mean. Are you saying that an overall text was written and then portions of it were split between each narrators section, or are you saying that each narrators section mirrors the others at that point of their corresponding story? To what degree are you saying these things interrelate? Since I’m not sure what you mean by this, I can’t really decide if it counts as a constraint.


    While examples would be helpful to illustrate the point, the deliberate use of rhyme within the prose sounds like a constraint. However an argument as to why it is a constraint would be helpful to further your point.


    Overall I feel that this suffers mostly from a problem of needless brevity, but had some interesting ideas. Also this post completely avoids duplicating any other students work as of the time of writing.

  2. Rory did an excellent job on his critique. His response to Dave’s post was thorough, offering suggestions where needed, and was critical of the points made. Perhaps my only suggestion would be to elaborate on why it’s “interesting” if only because that word usually leads to “how so?” Overall, it’s hard to critique a well-written critique. My suggestions for further responses would be to keep the organization and response structure used here, as it is clear and effective.

Comments are closed.

 
%d bloggers like this: