H2 Literature, CK Unseen

Mr. CK's Unseen. The Finkler Question.
1. What is Free Indirect Discourse (OITPN)? In defining FID, you may wish to illustrate the difference amongst Direct Speech, Indirect Speech and Free Indirect Discourse. It will be best if you can even look up the possible linguistic features of Free Indirect Discourse.
Direct speech: the reporting of speech by repeating the actual words of a speaker, for example ‘I'm going,’ she said.
Indirect Speech: a speaker's words reported in subordinate clauses governed by a reporting verb, with the required changes of person and tense (e.g. he said that he would go, based on I will go ).
Free Indirect Speech: according to wikipedia, Free indirect speech is a style of third-person narration which uses some of the characteristics of third-person along with the essence of first-person direct speech. Randall Stevenson suggests, however, that the term free indirect discourse "is perhaps best reserved for instances where words have actually been spoken aloud" and that cases "where a character's voice is probably the silent inward one of thought" should be described as free indirect style
Linguistic features: What distinguishes free indirect speech from normal indirect speech is the lack of an introductory expression such as "He said" or "he thought". It is as if the subordinate clause carrying the content of the indirect speech is taken out of the main clause which contains it, becoming the main clause itself. Using free indirect speech may convey the character's words more directly than in normal indirect, as devices such as interjections and psycho-ostensive expressions like curses and swearwords can be used that cannot be normally used within a subordinate clause.
Free indirect discourse can also be described, as a "technique of presenting a character's voice partly mediated by the voice of the author", or, in the words of the French narrative theorist Gerard Genette, "the narrator takes on the speech of the character, or, if one prefers, the character speaks through the voice of the narrator, and the two instances then are merged."
Example:

Direct Speech

He laid down his bundle and thought of his misfortune. "And just what pleasure have I found, since I came into this world?" he asked.  

Indirect speech

He laid down his bundle and thought of his misfortune. He asked himself what pleasure he had found since he came into the world.

Free indirect speech:

He laid down his bundle and thought of his misfortune. And just what pleasure had he found, since he came into this world?

2. What is Omniscient Intrusive Third Person Narrator (OITPN)? How is this type of narrator different from other third person narrators?
Nathan Bransford
Third person limited : the perspective is exclusively grounded to one character, unless you cheat a little. This means that you have all of the constraints of first person (all the reader sees is what the protagonist sees), but with just a tad more freedom. The reader will wonder a bit more precisely what that character is thinking and there's a bit more of an objective sensibility.

Third person omniscient is, ostensibly, a bit more freeing, because you aren't limited to a single character's perspective. However, it's also very difficult because for a reader it's very disorienting to head-jump. If you're inside one character's head and then jump to the next character's head and then another, it's very difficult for the reader to place themselves in a scene. They just have whiplash.

The first approach is to have the narrator be a fully developed character or character-esque presence of their own narrating the action. And while the narrative may show a bit of what the characters are feeling, the narrative never truly jumps to far insider character's heads to show precisely what they're feeling.

The other third person omniscient approach is a limited head jump.Whatever perspective you choose, it has to be grounded. The reader has to know where they are in relation to the action so they can get their bearings and lose themselves in the story.
3. From Line 7 to Line 23 in the excerpt, how is OITPN used to present the protagonist? Please explain the effects and significance of OITPN in this paragraph?
How is OITPN used to present the protagonist Libor?
" Everything he remembered… kind" explores the initial feelings of "melancholy" he felt after Malkie's death. Highlights the sadness in Libor which reinforces the first paragraph which details his grappling with the loss of Malkie
"So many bad things…" prepares the guilt he experiences. Repetition of "them" highlights his identification that the choices he and Malkie made directly led to consequences, rather than destiny.
"He had.. musical career" Past perfect tense reflects his guilt towards Malkie.
"They had..because it didn't" Past perfect tense here in relation to "they" instead of "he" suggests that in his opinion the blame was not to be held totally by himself, and Malkie was not merely a victim of his choices.
"She had… new aquaintances" Past perfect tense and its changing forms up until this point reflect the shift in Libor's mentality pertaining to who was responsible for his pain.
"The only company she wanted..Only he interested her" This is a shift from Libor's perspective to what he imagines as Malkie's perspective. The reimagining allows him to recognise Malkie's role in letting them not live "in paradise together at all, but…. more like hell". He rejects a large proportion of the blame he previously felt. He asserts a narrative to Malkie based on what he saw of her rather than her actual thoughts, resulting in a change in his personal perspective of her as a victim of his decisions.
"But now he came…intolerable burden on him?" Rhetorical question here reinforces the uncertainty with which Libor considers Malkie's motivations for her actions. Allows him to doubt himself and in the process, shift the blame between himself and Malkie before realising that it was neither of their faults.
"He had been lonely..been with him" Back to his personal thoughts on their life as a couple. Libor allows himself to be seen as a victim now as well, rather than someone to blame.
"And he never dared… confidence in him" this reflects both their thoughts as a collective form of consciousness rather than previously as his individual character speculations. Repetition of the form in both sentences balances out the amount of thought each contributes to the sentence as well as signifies the equal amount of responsibility between Libor and Malkie rather than it just being one of them catalysing the painful events/ "the black years".

4. From Line 25 to Line 29, is there FID? Please explain your answer with relations to the definition from Question 1.
None of these thoughts…her.  - (I'm not sure to be honest. )
But they changed…darkened. - FID
This might…he thought. - Indirect Speech
Nature's way… through. - FID
But what …helped through? - FID
Who was… to decide! - FID
5. Contrast the use of OITPN with FID in these two paragraphs. What are the effects and significance in using such narrative techniques?
FID- stream of consciousness, raw emotion. More telling of what Libor feels in that particular instance.
OITPN- a reflection of past events allows Libor's memory of the events to be distorted. His memory also only stems from him, so any other suspicions he may have had about Malkie's motivations are purely speculation on his part.
6. Develop one body paragraph with the ideas that you have generated from Question 1 - 5. You may want to include other literary devices in the body paragraph.

Paragraph 2 reflects the hypothetical ideals that Libor contemplates as he tries to reason out his feelings of melancholy and pain. In the idealised version of his thoughts, the memories are skewed and even his view of the events which led up to Malkie's death were malleable. The atmosphere constantly shifts from Libor's blaming himself initially, to a shared blame, to making Malkie take most of the blame and his final realisation that neither of them were responsible for their fate. This shift in Libor's assignment of responsibility can be seen from the use of past perfect tense with "he", "they" and "she". The change in his memory of Malkie is calculated and gradual, which contrasts the way "the atmosphere around the memory of her, as thought a golden halo had-no, not slipped but darkened" in paragraph 3. Libor's contemplations also seem to be of greater depth in paragraph 2 than his rash outbursts which are highlighted by the use of exclamation directly following a rhetorical question. The simile of the golden halo alludes to his previous opinion that his memory is "painful by virtue of its sweetness. But now the pain was of another kind." It links the memory to something which has been idealised and is hence impossible, the golden halo. In its darkening rather than disappearance, it reflects that Libor's memories of Malkie have not disappeared or completely changed but, rather have been skewed.