The sequence of events (plot) might be similar if the story was told from the dual perspectives of Georg and Ulrich. However, if Saki had chosen this kind of narration, he might have used flashbacks to give more backstory about the feud. For instance, the story begins with both men stalking each other in the woods. Perhaps the story could then shift to Ulrich's thoughts as he searches for his enemy. In narration, he goes back in time (in his mind) and revisits when and how their feud began. The narration might then shift to Georg who has a similar flashback. Saki might then bring the story back to the present. If this continued to be a dual (or "dueling") narration, the story would have an interesting "back and forth" effect. If the story is written from the perspective of both men, each man would use "I." For example:
By law, these are my lands. It is irrelevant that the hunting is so poor. I will chase him off again. Will I ever have to resort to violence? If he shows aggression, so will I.
The law is unjust. Why should one man own so much land? It is greed, pure and simple. I hesitate but long for a confrontation. If he shows any aggression, I will act and claim self-defense. I see him amidst the trees.
This shows the two men narrating (first Ulrich and then Georg). This style might be useful in humanizing the two men. If Georg and Ulrich show, at least in their own thoughts, their own doubts and frustrations about the ongoing feud, it might make them more sympathetic. Any time you get into the mind of character, there is the possibility of uncovering something more human. Then again, if Saki stuck to the structure of his story, he would not reveal any humility or generosity in either perspective until the men are forced to consider friendship.
No comments:
Post a Comment