disastrophe

blonde woman in the scc wearing a pink abercrombie sweatshirt, talking on a cell phone loudly, openly

ahem:
so yr just gonna wander around bryan by yrself?
thats stupid jeremy
huh?
thats not what this is about. fine come thur. nite(x4) and stay until sunday, and we'll stay in and fite
yr not being cooperative. u say yr coming but yr not organized, u dont have a schedule. at 10am u thought i had a test today- ok im just saying u need to be realiztic
ok this isnt worth fiting about, come thursday
ILL BE IN A TEST
ok, ill see u tomorrow, I have to study
tests at 630
so whatre u gonna do tomorrow? How do u know? Couse i dont even know if...
no...im just trying to figure this out, cuz i dont want this to go on like last time..
im not pissed off b/c yr coming, yr just not using discretion (x2)
nono i told u, thats not my fault
yr not gonna bore me jeremy, if we're in my apt for 3 days we'll just fight, like last time.
go out later.
what?
WHAT?
[loong pause...I should be writing an english paper]
[sullen] talk to you tomorrow
thats fine, yr callin the shots for yrself.
[hangs up]
APPARENTLY, he's coming to check out blinn, but they only do tours on friday, so he's going to come tomorrow (THRUSDAY.)

What got me interested in this onesided dialogue was they were vehemently arguing abt a picture on facebook, that USED TO be her profile picture, but no longer is. she kept saying, check the date, i took it down a long time ago, check the date, check the date, &c.

THIS IS TRUE LOVE


=======================================
=&&&&&&&&& Idea Break &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& =
=======================================

here's the first exploratory draft of that paper i was tellin you about:

Fact vs. fiction in creative non-f:
What is the ultimate goal of writing a piece of cn-f? to me: to share universal insight gleaned from (a) particular experience(s)
Hampl: to find self and the world, make connection with an old self
Gerard: primarily, to be true, but also, to tell a dual story: app. subj/deeper subj., and show the author’s reflection. EMPHASIS ON THE TRUTH BIT.

Creative non-fiction reflects broad strokes of inductive reasoning. It takes an experience from the author’s past and, here’s the creative part, generalizes to a more universal theme or concept. By contemplating the story’s meaning during the process of writing, the author forms a clear idea of what the implications of the story are, both for themselves and more generally for an audience that most likely doesn’t share that experience. If small facts get in the way of this, or if the point can be made more clearly by changing certain details, does this detract from the overall message the author means to get across?

Gerard disagrees. He thinks the primary focus of cnf is to tell a TRUE STORY. TO THE LETTER. The truly creative aspect, then, manifests in the logic in its arrangement and the critical thinking required to see its deeper appeal to a broad audience. One of the purposes is to reflect on both the actual research to get the facts on the page AND the “‘research’ of a lifetime.” But isn’t the research of a lifetime of experiences extremely subjective? The reflection is still valid, in his opinion. So then if details in the story didn’t happen in exactly the same way as real life, this should be still valid?

Hampl says that ABSOLUTE TRUTH is not necessarily the primary goal of creative n-f. She says that more importantly, in the process of writing we discover symbols, which, though maybe not 100% accurate, are the only way to generalize our past and interface with vastly different people about common subjs eg lifedeathlovelossdespair. I think this means that “TRUE EVENTS” in a piece of cnf can be “more or less TRUE EVENTs,” so long as they reflect the truth the way the author experienced it.

What is the purpose of cnf: from my readings of memoirs and the selected passages we read, it is to tell a MOSTLY true story, and to share universal insight gleaned from (a) particular experience(s).