For this post I wanted to look more closely at the characters
presented in the stories, specifically those of the Florist Friars story. I
noticed that each story had more than one character and had to introduce these
characters quickly within the brief passage. I thought that the Florist Friar
story was particularly successful at developing its characters succinctly,
especially given the fact that there is no dialogue. The question I looked into
was ‘Who are some of the characters are in the story and how are they
introduced and developed?’
The friars themselves are the first characters introduced in
the story. Although they have no lines, the audience is able to imagine a
sufficient picture of them as the archetypal friar or monk. The reader or
listener likely fills in details like the shaved heads and brown robes, as I
did. We get this picture, not through direct description, but from other
phrases in the passage which develops the Discourse associated with friar-type
characters.
For
example, the phrases describing their flower selling business are “small
florist shop” and “their little business”. Words like “small” and “little” do
more than describe the physical size of the store, they also reflect the level
of ambition in the friars. We get the feeling that the friars, as well as the
store, are somehow cute. In addition to cute, we also picture the friars as
approachable due to the references to their “flock” and that “everyone liked to
buy flowers from the men of God”. The “surrounding countryside” mentioned adds
definition to their character as likeable countryfollk. These concepts are not
necessarily language that goes with Friars, but some other “stuff” involved in the
Discourse of this archetype, such as their pleasant approachable nature and
lack of ruthless ambition.
The next
character of the story, the Florist, is developed in the second paragraph. The
audience’s focus is so turned to him, in fact, that it seems like he is now the
main character. His picture as a disgruntled store owner is pretty explicit
from the action of the story. To look more closely at his character, though, I
looked for what kinds of social languages were used. One thing I noted was the
difference in how the Florist is portrayed depending on the social language at
work. At first it says he, “asked the good fathers to close their little shop”.
This phrase, spoken in the way the Florist likely thought of the encounter,
presents him as polite and respectful. The next sentence shows him going back
repeatedly and “finally begging”. This line helps us sense his desperation, but
moves us to a more ambiguous point of view. The next sentence, however, shows
the action very differently. “By this time, they (the Friars) had tired of the
florist’s constant whining and they ignored him.” Here is the same action, the
Florist asking the Friars to close their business. However, the feel of it is
different coming from the Friars’ perspective. The question now feels like
nagging; it’s referred to as “constant whining”. The use of another social
language to state the same action helps to give us another perspective on the
Florist’s character.
The
only “pattern” I could point out is the tendency to use implied imagery to help
develop the characters of the story, and the lack of stated dialogue. The
associations of a particular Discourse help to fill in the details of the Friar
characters, while Social Languages help to show a contrast in the understanding
of the Florist character. The Florist pictures himself in one way, while the
Friars see him another. These characters
are introduced and developed through particular verbs and adjectives which help
the reader to pick up on associations to archetypal characteristics.
No comments:
Post a Comment