While reading through Edward Gorey’s “Amphigorey”, I found that most of the stories were characterized by either gloomy subject matter or satirical commentary.\u00a0What\u00a0results from this, I think, is the communication of\u00a0frequently used\u00a0story lines and\u00a0narratives in a completely new form and sometimes, with a dissimilar ending. For example, the Bug Book tells a\u00a0story dominated\u00a0by social\u00a0stratification of groups with the exclusion of those who do not conform. But instead of ending the story with this morality or somehow allowing justice to be had for the ostracized\u00a0bug, the story ends with the it being killed by the others. Consequently,\u00a0they are able to continue acting the way they do at the expense of and with the exclusion of others. This is also displayed\u00a0in the alphabet section entitled, “The Gashlycrumb Tinies”\u00a0, which categorizes each letter by something somber in nature. One example is, “C is for Clara who wasted away”, another one being, “I is for Ida who drowned in a lake”. Gorey uses\u00a0format of a child’s learning tool – the alphabet, the very basis of our language – and characterizes it by\u00a0different forms of death. What are the implications of this choice? Is this simply a\u00a0stylistic choice, or is Gorey trying to communicate something specific to the reader?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
While reading through Edward Gorey’s “Amphigorey”, I found that most of the stories were characterized by either gloomy subject matter or satirical commentary.\u00a0What\u00a0results from this, I think, is the communication of\u00a0frequently used\u00a0story lines and\u00a0narratives in a completely new form and sometimes, with a dissimilar ending. For example, the Bug Book tells a\u00a0story dominated\u00a0by social\u00a0stratification of … <\/p>\n