War Paper

Another Possible Approach -- Author's Perspective

If the earlier approach doesn't work for you, you might want to consider an approach that asks that you consider the author's perspective (or voice). In this approach, you ask yourself what you think the poet, or director, or author is attempting to do in his/her work of literature. In essence, you're considering the author's intent.

So, what do you think Rupert Brooke is attempting in his poem "The Soldier"?

What do you think Leon Rosenberg wants his readers to "get" from his war poetry?

Do you think John Hersey has an "agenda" in his non-fiction work, Hiroshima? While he uses a somewhat objective, reportage style, one could still argue that he has a perspective on war (even a "bias).

What about Peter Weir, the film director? Based on your viewing of Gallipoli, what view do you think this director wants to "transmit" to his viewing audience?

Finally, there's Mr. Dalton Trumbo, the author that so infuriated some Americans during the 1940s by his novel that he was eventually "blacklisted" during the McCarthy era and was unable to officially work in Hollywood for the latter part of his career. It's obvious Trumbo has a perspective on war. He makes it pretty clear--not only in the novel, but also in his introduction that was written when the novel was republished during the height of the Vietnam War.

So, you could move from one work to another and consider each author's perspective/viewpoing/bias/agenda/attitude/intent.

Finally, you could have a conclusion that attempts to "sort out" these differing viewpoints.

If this approach works for you, give it a try.

posted by Brady Kelso @ 11:04 AM