Answer:
Authorial reticence allows the narrator to exaggerate
Explanation:
Authorial reticence can be defined as a term with lack of clear conclusion, description, opinions etc. about an event. More so, It allows the narrator to exaggerate and hence escape the judgement. Many readers abhor authorial reticence due to absence of clear judgement. Their authors are permitted to include fantasies and magics which will make readers concluding things based on their own perspectives. Furthermore, It leaves readers in the state of uncertainty and no clear conclusion is reached.
It is during the falling action
Answer:
“Fate is like a strange, unpopular restaurant filled with odd little waiters who bring you things you never asked for and don’t always like.” - Lemony Snicket. In the novella “The Pearl” by John Steinbeck, there are several examples of fate throughout the story. Most of the time the main character, Kino does not ask for them and in this story, fate takes many bad turns throughout the book, resulting in tragic events.
Fate is responsible because the good and bad of pearls. When Coyotito got stung by the scorpion, Kino and Juana were forced to bring him to the doctor to prevent him from dying. Kino had no money to pay the doctor, so he attempted to pay him in the only thing he had. Flat, gray, ugly pearls. “Crease by crease he unfolded it, until at last there came to view eight small misshapen seed pearls, as ugly and gray as little ulcers, flattened and almost valueless” (Steinbeck, 11).
It was by fate when Kino could not pay the doctor the great pearl he found shortly after. At that time, Kino only had the worthless pearls. Of course it was after the doctor denied them and after Coyotito healed when they found the pearl of the world. It was clearly fate. He could have of looked somewhere else and the whole story would have of been different. However, he searched in the exact area where the
:) i really hope i helped!
Explanation:
