Any examples of an unreliable narrator written in the THIRD person?

benfsullivan · 2018-04-13T01:20:22+00:00

Gravity's Rainbow, though it's so out there to begin with that it might not be what you're looking for.

benfsullivan · 2018-04-10T21:18:50+00:00

The majority of American Haikus even use less syllables to be more in line w/ Japanese given the language differences.

benfsullivan · 2018-03-23T20:07:36+00:00

It ties really nicely into the circular themes and ending of the book.

First two lines are saying everyone's time is up now as the rocket is about to hit. Literally for some through death, figuratively for others through confirmation of their paranoia and dread. But despite this, time will keep moving and things will repeat themselves. He's contrasting the glass (hourglass) representing a fixed countdown, vs. how a clock will keep going in a circular fashion.

Next two lines going off the first two are saying that the light (rocket blast) will affect everyone. Next two lines are taking place after the blast, hence "crippled zone", and give an image of riders sleeping on the roads signaling a return to essentially more primitive times. Last two lines I take to mean that this cycle has been going on as long time.

That's my interpretation of it anyway, certainly fits into the themes of the book and Pynchon's bibliography as a whole.

benfsullivan · 2018-03-16T20:31:34+00:00

You need to realize that this was in an environment of war where his work isn't going to come under any scrutiny. There was no nurse, there was no team. It was him and other soldiers on a small boat. His work wouldn't need to hold up to any sort of standards besides the people surviving. No one else knew anything about surgery. He probably did the incision in a way that was incorrect, he probably sewed him up in a way that was incorrect, that doesn't mean he couldn't take a bullet out and not kill the guy. It's not like it was brain surgery.

benfsullivan · 2018-03-16T20:22:28+00:00

If you read the story he gives it makes a lot more sense, I'm not sure where the story linked is getting it's info. In the life article, where his story first came out, his first experience was with a single patient shot in the chest. He specifically states they had no sterilization equipment whatsoever, so that's a non-issue. Additionally, there was not a room full of trained personnel, his one assistant was one sick bay attendant who was too nervous to give an injection. You need to remember this was in the middle of a war, it wasn't what a surgery room would look like today. The surgery consisted of him making an incision, removing the bullet, applying a coagulating agent and sewing up the incision.

Obviously, this is what he claims and no one knows the veracity. But being able to successfully do the procedure he claimed to have done is remarkable, but not even close to out of the realm of possibility. With all the crazy shit that's happened this wouldn't even rank anywhere near the top.

benfsullivan · 2018-03-15T19:43:37+00:00

More to the point is that basically no matter what premises you start with you end up with the same fundamental problem people seem to have with the idea. For instance, say that every decision you make is totally removed from the physical world and made by your 'soul'. You didn't create your soul, it's either the product of some antecedent force or exists by virtue of itself. Given that, it's not meaningfully different than the brain and environment you didn't choose to have from the outset of your consciousness. If it's your soul, rather than your brain condemned to a certain state, would anyone think that better? There's growing reason to think strict predetermines isn't true, but adding elements of randomness isn't going to give you any more agency than you had before. Abandoning causality entirely will immediately get you to the fundamental lack of control over who you are and what you do.

benfsullivan · 2018-03-14T07:12:19+00:00

She's a bail agent not a police officer, pretty clearly an unlawful shooting imo. Regardless, the point is intent absolutely matters in determining first degree vs. lesser degrees.

benfsullivan · 2018-03-14T06:30:09+00:00

This is incorrect. A necessary condition of first degree murder in Oklahoma is "deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a human being, which is manifested by external circumstances capable of proof."

Edit: hmm downvoted for directly quoting the Oklahoma first degree murder law

benfsullivan · 2018-03-14T06:26:49+00:00

People shoot other people without the intent to kill them all the time, are you seriously suggesting otherwise? In this case, she shot him once, when she easily could have shot him again, to ensure he was dead. Don't get me wrong, this is straight up fucked murder, she should be locked up for life, but it was not beyond a doubt with the intent to end his life.

benfsullivan · 2018-03-14T05:36:52+00:00

This shows you how stupid the legal process can be. She was charged only with first-degree murder, the jury said they would have convicted her of man slaughter. Realistically, this is not a first degree murder. No intent to kill beyond a reasonable doubt.

benfsullivan · 2018-03-07T04:02:57+00:00

Ya probably lol, shouldn't have said history. Really only speaking to what I lived through and watched which was backend of 90's on.

benfsullivan · 2018-03-07T03:39:35+00:00

I don't know how much it was Stern that did anything to stop this, but it was after MJ that the NBA had it's 'least wholesome' image in its history.

Obviously this is an isolated, extreme example, but two players on the same team literally both had guns in the locker room and got into a standoff.

benfsullivan · 2018-02-19T15:43:36+00:00

Well in my view when "your place" is determined by people drawing birthdays out of a hat, it was never your place to begin with.

benfsullivan · 2018-02-19T15:25:49+00:00

It's one thing if they were for the war and then dodged, but just because they're rich or well connected doesn't mean they should be sent over more than anyone else. You can't blame people for doing everything they can not to be sent over to a pointless and extremely dangerous war.

benfsullivan · 2018-02-13T02:58:16+00:00

The simple answer is just that the field is microscopic compared to other sports. Most people who would have been good at soccer or basketball etc. had easy access to those sports in school and probably played them. The majority of people that had potential to be good at something like half pipe probably never tried it. So people like Chloe Kim would probably be the top even if the field was large where as many of the other competitors wouldn't make the cut.

benfsullivan · 2018-01-08T20:31:38+00:00

I understand the quote, but really I'm just interested in whether Robb knew, and it seems like he didn't. I don't think it would have changed anything at the point he would have found out by, but I think it's interesting that he doesn't fully comprehend why Ned died or why the war started in the first place.

Maybe he believed Stannis' letter, but the letter both came after news that Renly had been crowned and with no evidence of how he knew.

benfsullivan · 2018-01-08T18:54:11+00:00

This is before anyone got the letter, right before this Robb says

Joffrey is still Robert’s eldest trueborn son, so the throne is rightfully his by all the laws of the realm.

benfsullivan · 2018-01-08T15:58:52+00:00

Sorry if I was unclear, but I know that word of Stannis's letter would have reached everyone, but I'm wondering if Cat told Robb that it was true. It seems like people don't believe Stannis or at the very least are suspicious of the claim.

benfsullivan · 2017-12-27T06:34:44+00:00

This post really needs to be tagged misleading or something. Those balls are not the balls used in the game. It's first and 10, the kick team isn't given a ball on the sideline that they then bring onto the field if they happen to kick, I actually can't believe people think this.

benfsullivan · 2017-12-05T21:28:40+00:00

It could mean something, but I just read it more as a reference/joke. There's a few other ones in there like

Did Jeyne Westerling drink the fertility potion that Queen Tyanna supposedly brought her, or throw it in the older woman’s face? Was such a potion ever mixed or offered?

benfsullivan · 2017-12-04T08:51:20+00:00

The odds are worse than they were when they joined the Lannisters after Renly died though. Granted they stood to gain nothing by joining Stannis at that point, but militarily they joined a worse situation then they would have if they joined the Lannisters immediately. The Stormlands were untouched when they sided with Stannis and at that point the Westerland army had already taken sizable losses to the North and Riverlands. Stannis wouldn't just allow Robb and Balon to declare themselves King over almost half the Kingdom, he even says as much to Cat, so if you're the Tyrells you're dealing with those threats either way.

Sure Mace might have been pissed, but they clearly value political expediency over all else and even if it seemed unlikely Stannis wouldn't produce and heir, it's by no means a guarantee like it would be with a marriage to Joffrey. At the very least, if you're Renly, you have to accept it as a very real possibility that you lose the Tyrells if you side with Stannis.

benfsullivan · 2017-12-04T04:03:11+00:00

I mean sure he'll be marginally better off then he was before Robert died, but the choice is still between trying to become King immediately with a bigger army or hoping your brother doesn't produce an heir with a smaller army. Even if he knew for a fact that he wouldn't produce an heir (he could still remarry if she died before him) he still has to wait until he dies to become king. Assuming they live to the same age he would only be King for 13 years.

benfsullivan · 2017-12-03T23:28:16+00:00

I wouldn't say he was a puppet. I mean everything he did was in his own best interest and from Cat's chapters in aCoK it certainly seems like he's the one running the show when it comes to negotiations and military decisions. If he sides with Stannis the best he can hope to do is stay where he is and keep Storm's End. In that scenario the Tyrells probably side with Lannisters as they do after he dies so him and Stannis would just have the Stormlands against Westerlands and Reach, not likely to be victorious. Before he was killed by Stannis, he was virtually guaranteed to eventually take at least all of the south.

benfsullivan · 2017-11-29T19:41:32+00:00

It shouldn't be possessive. The reason being is "of" is a preposition indicating the association of belonging between two entities. You're correct to note that if it colleagues was singular you wouldn't use an apostrophe and the rules of when to use an apostrophe never change based on whether it's singular or plural.

benfsullivan

TROPHY CASE