Narrative vs Exposition


Exposition and narration are two of the four most common rhetorical modes, or modes of discourse. The other two are argumentation and description. Besides organizing the different kinds of writing according to convention and purpose, these categories can also be found within a story. A story, also known as a narrative, is an account of events that includes characterization, setting and plot. Within a story, exposition is what creates rising action while narration guides the telling of the story.


The purpose of exposition, also known as expository writing, is to explain and inform the reader about a particular topic. Expository writing presents a particular idea with all the relevant evidence. Within a story, exposition is the beginning of the narrative arc. It is something that creates the story’s rising action which then reaches the climax and continues through into the resolution. The story’s exposition phase shows the reader all the information needed in order to fully understand later parts of the story.

Elements of Exposition

The exposition phase of a story consists of three main elements: characters, setting and mood. The characters face the primary conflict in the story. The setting of the story is the story’s time and place; time can refer to a particular date or time period and the place can refer to a specific location, such as a house, city or forest, or it can refer to a more general backdrop, such as a social environment. The setting situates the story in a particular milieu, grounding the story’s characters and the conflict to a particular world. The mood of the story refers to its atmosphere, and it is established using particular language. For example, a Gothic story may use figurative and descriptive language to describe an old abandoned mansion in order to create the mood of mystery.


The purpose of narration, also known as narrative writing, is to tell a story. All stories have a narrator and the story’s narrator puts different elements of a story into a particular order in order to achieve a particular kind of effect. Narration may tell the story chronologically in order to show the natural unfolding of the story or nonchronologically in order to grab the reader’s attention in the beginning.

Narrative Points of View

There are many types of narration, because there are many different ways that a story can be told. A major element in the type of narration is the narrative point of view; there are also many different points of view but, in general, these points of view can be grouped into three categories. The story’s narration may be first-person, third-person or second-person. A first-person narrator describes his thoughts and feelings and tells the story using “I.” The third-person narrator creates greater distance between himself and the characters by using the pronouns “she” or “he.” Some stories use second-person narration, but it is much less common. A second-person narrator addresses the reader directly, using the pronoun “you.”




i dream of words spoken into infinite space glittering on with heavy beauty and shadow and no shame.

im all alone it is not your fault it is mine and iam so lost sometimes, im needy, i want to reach on rings of the saturn and imagine to have sex there.

to fail to love is not to exist at all – mark von doren

he gave you all the air in his lungs and you lost it kissing someone else.

how many scars did we justify because we loved the person holding the knife.

you stabbed me a thousand times and acted like you were the one bleeding

loving you was like navigating a dense fog, i convinced myself i knew the shapes of our landscape but when the sun broke through the mist i realized i had been filling in blanks to comfort myself.

she got oceans tucked away in her hair poems swim under her skin.

even when this world is a forgotten whisper of dust between the stars, i will love you

love yourself dont set yourself on fire to keep others warm

the power in every relationship lies in the hands of the who cares kess, but the power is not happiness.

im falling for you way too fast adn way too hard, but that is not the scary part. the scary part is not knowing if you will be tehre to catch me when i hit the bottom.

i fed her with my mind instead of my body

i still remember you as a little girl who overwaters plants because she doest know hen to stop giving.

maybe i did not lose you, maybe you were not really there. maybe what we were was simply an illusion condused as love, but im not person in a half.

he loves her chaotic beauty, gives her wings, keeps her safe, one day she will fly into his arms, blindfold. leap of faith.

it is sad really, we fabricated the idea that souls are real just to convince ourselves we are not empty.

message appears : you are not an experienced enough driend to unlock this response yet, try again after reaching friendship level 10.

“i” doest become “We” it still become “you” and “me”.

i wish, i could swim thorugh conversatuons with others as easiily as i swim through my own thoughts.

my mind is in water, either spinning in a gyre. drowning by sinking to the bottom. or floating along the river.

in the depths of hell, do not demons love one another?

inject the memes into your bloodstream

keramahan berarti kesiadaan untuk membuka diri, rumah atau negara bagi orang lain “unconditional hospitality that is openness to whomever to any newcomer”.

the more i think deeper, somehow i become ithy about something that i understand, make me over  thinkin and think over, these uncomforable feelings make me grind harder about life itself.

have you ever meet person who at first glance you are not attracted to, but then you talk and with every word smile laugh they become more beautiful until there was a moment you did not think they were.

but pleasure is bried in the world my sweet – jekyll

society should destigmatize incorrect grammar, obviously some grammar is important but as long as you are easily understandable, it should not be made fun of.

how can i say : i love you, if i know the word love either as a verb or a nound would be destroyed in front of you.

hey if you need someone to talk to, i will listen to you untill you forget why you were sad and being here, i will drop my phone number in your chat if only you asked for it.

he thought of her as a giant, but she thought of him no more than a tiny ant

i would like to talk to someone who probably want to talk about how we felt, what it meant to us, we can talk about facts and feelings, we jsut not stay on surface of our conversation.

if you were quicksand i dont mind if you sucked me in, lost till the bottom of rabbit;s hole. i dont mind if we were lost together. me and you vs lonliness.

my heart is an abondened planet (eric greinke, 1994)

when you learn how to die, you learn how to live (friday with morrie p.104)

dont wanna invanding my solitude with your useless messages.

will you drowning yourself in a sweet illusion?

love could be labled “posion” and i swear we would drink it anyways.

do you ever have a sense that you fear for who truly you are?

speaks into poems, like if we were poets having conversation who would tend to write down about life? so anyone?

crying is a way that your heart has had enough but is still fighting for someone who wont return.

what is a real lonliness for you?

you dont need other people to drive away your lonliness you just needed to find a way to talk to it.

do you comfortable to sit along with your own thoughts, i wanna know what you think of, will you tell me, what is it?

percakapan-percakapan yang terisolasi.

hey, i think i lost another one, thought that maybe i was done, but darling i will be here, you will find me writing love letters to no one.

my ex she gave me something that world cant never take it back from me, a thought. now your words just like waves on the shore, swashing back and forth, on and on.

are you days get numbered? cause i think my days get numbered too

i dont care, i already all alone.

i will tell you something about me, i never chase a girl, cause i got asthmatic.

is there anyone here who has a feeling of certain death? absolute certain death?

she will put up guard and assume everyman can trap her anytime until proven otherwise.

i will crucify myself to let you know and show that you are not alone on this miserable world.

sex is the consolation you have, when you cant have love.

do i look like need smart or intellectual person to accompany me, i dont need them i would like to have someone who understand what is like to be cripple one, but we can laugh it sometimes.

she wanted to be fully isolated from the toxicity in humanity lost in isolation which felt like loneliness stuck in the depths of her mind.

silence is not empty it is full of answers.

we were never meant to be in love, we were only ever meant to learn love from one another.

tapi apakah cinta itu ada? benarkah ia menjadi hal yang membuat hidup bermakna? atau cinta itu palsu? karena ia sekedar libido dan hasrat semata?

how can i feel so fuckin lonely with your hands on my chest and also yours on mine, you whisper what do you want to do next? our generation is taking love out of sex, so the question is left ‘if you love me, let me know’.

i fall in love with an idea when two broken people fall in love each other.

love is what makes sex more than mastrubation, if there is no love even if you are really with a partner, you mastrubate with a partner, you became a tissue to wipe the dick.

at least i have loved someone more than i love my ownself and i knew how does it feels like.

how about while you lying on the bed and wanting someone to explore, to talk about your night time thoughts or everything that bothered you or trying to relax your mind, can we?



Waiting for Godot is one of the most famous plays of the 20th Century.

In it, two characters named Vladimir and Estragon pass the time on a country road as they wait for a man named Godot to arrive.

The play is famously weird and mysterious and open-ended – prompting the question – What is this story about? The play massively interests me as an actor, because it’s brilliant and really, really fun to perform, but it also interests me as a man with a background in philosophy, because it is part of the Theatre of the Absurd.

Absurdism is a philosophical movement that wound up influencing a lot of 20th Century art, through a rather interesting story: Samuel Beckett was an Irishman who moved to Paris in 1928 and sank into this cultural milieu that was going on.

At the time it was very fashionable for ‘philosopher’ and ‘creative artist’ to be fused in one person: philosophers wrote literature and writers wrote philosophy. And then, something very bad happened. Something called WWII.

France is invaded by the Nazis. And so ‘philosopher,’ ‘creative artist,’ and ‘resistance fighter’ become fused into single persons, as both Samuel Beckett and Albert Camus join the underground resistance. And this is the context in which Camus writes his most famous work – ‘The Myth of Sisyphus’ – in 1942.

The book asks ‘How Should We Confront the Absurd?’ The Absurd, with a Capital A, is a technical term in Camus’ writing: it refers to the contradiction between humanity’s desire to find meaning in the Universe and the Universe itself, which is completely meaningless. And once you realise that life is pointless but you are compelled to find a point to it anyway, Camus says there are seven possible responses. anyway.

  1. Number one, you could kill yourself.
  2. Number two, you could try to ignore it by filling your life with pleasure of food, drink, and uh, company.
  3. Number three, you could just deny it: for insatnce you could be religious and say that no, there is meaning in life because the meaning comes from God. Or you could be an existentialist, and say that maybe you don’t go in for organised religion so much but in some sense you create your own meaning in life. Camus saw both of those as forms of denial, he says you’re still not really looking life in the face because ultimately the universe is meaningless. Which is why he didn’t like to be called an existentialist, although his work does have some themes in common with that.
  4. The fourth way of confronting the Absurd is to become an actor, and try to live lives that pretend to have meaning within the context of stories.
  5. Fifth is to become another kind of rtist, like a painter, somebody who creates works of art that have meanings as a substitute for living a life with one.
  6. And the sixth is to become a political person, like a conqueror. Somebody for whom power and government and the right way to use those things, fills up their time and gives them meaning. All of these methods Camus considers and ultimately rejects.
  7. But the seventh and final method of confronting the Absurd, the one that he actually recommends, is acceptance.

Accepting that life is pointless but that you are compelled to find a point to it anyway. But this acceptance isn’t a kind of sad, passive, depressing acceptance: Camus thought it was an act of resistance against the Universe itself. You look life square in the face; you don’t deny it, you don’t distract yourself and you don’t give in, and you live life anyway in full knowledge of its pointlessness.

In Greek mythology, Sisyphus was doomed to roll a boulder up a mountain every day and then watch it roll back down again every night. Forever.

And Camus says that’s the only way Sisyphus can really be happy is he accepts the pointlessness of that task. And he decides to own it and go down the mountain every night smiling.

You can see how living in Nazi-occupied France informed a lot of these ideas: this feeling of fighting what looked like an unwinnable battle against uncaring forces indulging in pointless inhuman destruction, was a feeling Camus was very familiar with day to day. The final line of the book is “One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

And then we come to 1953, and the premiere performance of Waiting for Godot. À l’époque, c’était en Français: ‘En attendant Godot’; The English translation came two years later. In it, Vladimir and Estragon are engaged in what seems to be a neverending, pointless, and often repetetive task – waiting for Godot.

Waiting for Godot is the whole reason they are there and yet he never turns up. So their situation is rather like someone else’s we’ve just met! The play is about what people do when confronted with the Absurd: with the compulsion to find meaning where no meaning exists.

And throughout the play, the characters try every method of confronting the Absurd that Camus suggests. They talk about killing themselves, but they don’t. They talk about attempting some sexual pleasure, or becoming more physically comfortable with food or with their shoes.

Vladimir considers some religious ideas at various points but it doesn’t seem to satisfy him. All of the characters are of course, metatextually, played by actors, and so they are examining that way of confronting it too.

Vladimir tries singing at one point, and various popular interpretations of the characters present the two as being rather like a music hall double act generally. One of the other characters, Pozzo, who has a slave called Lucky.

Having that power over him seems to give his life a lot of meaning, or at least structure, but by Act II it doesn’t seem to have made him better off. By the end of the play, Didi and Gogo seem doomed to wait for Godot forever.

They don’t seem to be able to accept that, if he exists at all, he’s not coming. Interestingly, there is one character in the play who I think maybe does accept the Absurd.

They are charged with carrying a heavy burden, but when offered comfort and distraction willingly go back to that burden and pick it up again. It’s Lucky – the so-called slave. I think – at this particular stage of my artistic career and I reserve the right to change my mind later – but I think you could read Lucky as Camus’ model of the Absurdist Hero. Somebody who knows that their life is a pointless, horrible chore but who gets on with it anyway.

And when Lucky finally speaks to Vladimir, Estragon, and Pozzo, they, and the audience, are incapable of understanding a word he’s saying. You see what I mean? ‘Waiting for Godot’ is just the staged version of ‘The Myth of Sisyphus.’ It’s a work of philosophy in dramatic form. Of course if you’re an actor, none of this tells you how you should play the roles.

There’s a big difference between delivering a lecture on symbolism in Beckett and actually getting up and making somebody feel something, but if you’re going to see ‘Waiting for Godot’ as an audience member, which you should, then I hope that this helps you understand it a little better.

A Succulent Life


you you we wake up look out the window get watered look out the window some more that’s the routine

they say the world revolves around it’s the only thing anyone seems to have on their mind

how much water they have

when they’ll be watered again and how much water they’ll receive

I don’t really care about water

I wonder what it would be to feel the uneven skin of a tree

what it would be to see its leaves flutter and dance on the tips of its fingered branches moved by a wind whispering on nature’s behalf

they say I’m foolish for wanting something so unrealistic wanting more for myself maybe they’re just trying to protect me from failure

the same failure that may have burned them in their past

but if you never get burned

if you never feel the lick of the plane how can you say that you’ve lived they say that following your dreams is scary

I believe that not following them is scarier

I’m scared of the reality in which I never swing on the swing go up and down on the seesaw or go down the slide

I’m scared of that reality more than I am of the one in which I’m bleeding covered in worms are engulfed in flames

and if I ever break my paws or end up alone somewhere along the way

I know that will all have been worth it in the end

because the day you stop believing the day you stop wanting will be the day in which the greatest crime of all will have been committed the crime of not having lived at all

funny isn’t it how the world works

how people work here

today here iam, i’ll be tomorrow you.



I feel like not enough people know the difference between a monologue and a soliloquy. A monologue is when no one else is listening. A soliloquy is when people are listening. Speaches are soliloquys. Not monologues.

Not to stir a hornet’s nest, but monologues and soliloquies are essentially the same thing. monologue, n. : 1. a long speech by one actor in a play or movie, or as part of a theatrical or broadcast program. synonyms: soliloquy, speech, address, lecture, sermon, homily; formal oration “he quickly launches into another manic monologue” 2. a long and typically tedious speech by one person during a conversation. “Fred carried on with his monologue as if I hadn’t spoken”

soliloquy, n. : 1. an act of speaking one’s thoughts aloud when by oneself or regardless of any hearers, especially by a character in a play. synonyms: monologue, speech, address, lecture, oration, sermon, homily, aside “Viola ends the scene with a soliloquy” 2. a part of a play involving a soliloquy. From what I can surmise from the above definitions, monologues are more of speeches, whereas soliloquies are your “inner monologue”, or just your thoughts being vocalized. They’re both ultimately monologues, however.

Actually, I think you have it backwards. Soliloquies are speeches the character makes to him/herself or to the audience. Monologues are speeches the characters make to each other, to a courtroom, etc. So these are all monologues, not soliloquys.