Working Together

When writers write their stories they usually narrate through a character. Using this method to tell a story is interesting because you not only know what is going on in the story but you know what is going on within the narrator. However as one reads it must be kept in mind that the narrator is providing only one view of the story. All the other characters within the piece have their own story to tell from a different perspective. Although the view point of stories is sometimes different, all the different versions can work together to give the reader a better understanding of the entire story. Different versions allow the reader to better understand different characters. Oats’ Where are You Going? Where have You Been? is one version of a story that was told from a different perspective by many other people as well.

The first story read in class was Where are You Going? Where have You been? by Oats. She wrote the story from the view point of a girl named Connie. Connie saw Arnold Friend as any other girl did; he was appealing with his muscles, clothes, and his voice. However this version of the story also allows the reader to develop their own opinion from the way his character is portrayed. The movie Smooth Talk also tells the piece from Connie’s perspective, however the viewer has the chance to see the character of Arnold Friend and make another opinion from his actions toward Connie as one watches.

Murder in the Desert was written from the perspective of Schmid’s, aka Arnold Friend, lawyer. According to this lawyer, Schmid was different from other kids; however, the words he uses to describe him make the reader think of him as better than others such as: good looking, high school gymnastics champion, polite, and mannered. When reading this article one may assume that because this is Schmid’s lawyer it is his job to make him look good. This piece of literature like the others so far still serves a purpose even if it is biased. It shows another view of Schmid from someone else’s eye. One finds out about Schmid’s murder conviction with the help of his two friends. Lastly, in this version another view is pointed out. At the end of the story, Schmid wants to take back his plea of guilty because he claims he did not murder this girl. He takes drastic measures like uncovering the body to prove that there was no fracture in the skull; however once the body was uncovered there was a fracture. Schmid honestly believed there was no evidence that he killed her. This detail may lead people to think he had a mental illness but it is just another piece of the puzzle.

Two reporters told their stories about Schmid in two different lights. In Crime Secrets in the Sand “Arnold Friend” is portrayed much the same way as his lawyer said. He was well muscled, a gymnast, had cars, money, and girls. He was made out to be the most popular, the best. The reporter of Arizona: Growing up in Tucson describes Schmid as “sick”, blabbermouth, a dropout. In this report Schmid is made to look like the worst of the worst. He was the bad man who killed people’s daughters.

These stories and few others change the way Schmid, aka Arnold Friend, is viewed. All these stories are also important because they are from different perspectives. After reading all the information one is able to formulate an opinion about this boy. This is how all different iterations can work together.

WORD COUNT: 602