Concluding the reading of Unbroken and reflecting upon the writing style it made a shift from a profile style to writing about place as Louis had traveled to throughout the war. The book began with a strong start as it started out with a backstory of Louis before the war and uses interview to build characters and events. From the beginning Louis' character had developed and it was clear to see that he had a strong future ahead for survival.
When the book made the shift to talking about places, it seemed that's when the facts became a prominent aspect of the reading. At this point the story had lost the personal element and I often found myself questioning the truth of events like when Louis had to dodge bombers and fight off the Sharks at the same time. It is a possibility that both of these events had occurred simultaneously but to come out from both of them unharmed seemed a bit much. With Louis as the only survivor, questioning the truth of the events is easy to do. How do we know truth from exaggeration? I feel that the background of being an Olympian helped to find the truth in these events. The average person made not be able to overcome those events and maybe that is the reasoning for Louis being the only one to survive.
At the end of the book I was able to connected back to Loius as a character when the author included photos of Louis. Being able to see Louis in life in the photos made a connection of empathy for what he had overcome in the war and make it to the point of survival.
The book is going to be a movie so I would be interested to see how the movie tells the story and what is omitted and included to tell the story in film version. While the book seemed to hit upon details that seemed like facts and could have been omitted I feel that the book would have lost a quality of they had been left out.
No comments:
Post a Comment