Creative Nonfiction

Analysis
(Shafaq-us-Sahar
Associate Professor of English
Government Graduate College for Women
Dubai Mahal Road
Bahawalpur)

Table of Contents

▪️ Creative Nonfiction: An Overview

Letters
▪️On Noise, by Seneca.

Consolation
▪️Consolation to His Wife, by Plutarch.

Book Review
▪️Of Books, by Michel de Montaigne.

Memoirs
▪️An Hour or Two Sacred to Sorrow, by Richard Steele

Meditation
▪️The Solitude of the Country, by Samuel Johnson

Analytic Meditation
▪️On the Pleasure of Hating, by William Hazlitt

Prose poem or Reverie

▪️Dream Children: A Reverie, by Charles Lamb.

Humour
▪️On Running After One's Hat, by G. K. Chesterton

Travelogue
▪️Street Walking by Virginia Woolf.

Creative Nonfiction: An Overview

The Creative Nonfiction (CNF) genre can be rather elusive. It is focused on story, meaning it has a
narrative plot with an inciting moment, rising action, climax and denoument, just like fiction. However,
nonfiction only works if the story is based in truth, an accurate retelling of the author’s life
experiences. The pieces can vary greatly in length, just as fiction can; anything from a book-length
autobiography to a 500-word food blog post can fall within the genre.
Additionally, the genre borrows some aspects, in terms of voice, from poetry; poets generally look for
truth and write about the realities they see. While there are many exceptions to this, such as the
persona poem, the nonfiction genre depends on the writer’s ability to render their voice in a realistic
fashion, just as poetry so often does. Writer Richard Terrill, in comparing the two forms, writes that the
voice in creative nonfiction aims “to engage the empathy” of the reader; that, much like a poet, the
writer uses “personal candor” to draw the reader in.

Creative Nonfiction encompasses many different forms of prose. As an emerging form, CNF is closely
entwined with fiction. Many fiction writers make the cross-over to nonfiction occasionally, if only to
write essays on the craft of fiction. This can be done fairly easily, since the ability to write good
prose—beautiful description, realistic characters, musical sentences—is required in both genres.

The first key element of nonfiction—perhaps the most crucial thing— is that the genre relies on the
author’s ability to retell events that actually happened. The talented CNF writer will certainly use
imagination and craft to relay what has happened and tell a story, but the story must be true. You may
have heard the idiom that “truth is stranger than fiction;” this is an essential part of the genre.
Events—coincidences, love stories, stories of loss—that may be expected or feel clichéd in fiction can
be respected when they occur in real life.

A writer of Creative Nonfiction is always on the lookout for material that can yield an essay; the world
at-large is their subject matter. Additionally, because Creative Nonfiction is focused on reality, it relies
on research to render events as accurately as possible. While it’s certainly true that fiction writers also
research their subjects (especially in the case of historical fiction), CNF writers must be scrupulous in
their attention to detail. Their work is somewhat akin to that of a journalist, and in fact, some
journalism can fall under the umbrella of CNF as well. Writer Christopher Cokinos claims, “done
correctly, lived well, delivered elegantly, such research uncovers not only facts of the world, but
reveals and shapes the world of the writer” (93). In addition to traditional research methods, such as
interviewing subjects or conducting database searches, he relays Kate Bernheimer’s claim that “A
lifetime of reading is research:” any lived experience, even one that is read, can become material for
the writer.

The other key element, the thing present in all successful nonfiction, is reflection. A person could have
lived the most interesting life and had experiences completely unique to them, but without
context—without reflection on how this life of experiences affected the writer—the reader is left with
the feeling that the writer hasn’t learned anything, that the writer hasn’t grown. We need to see how the
writer has grown because a large part of nonfiction’s appeal is the lessons it offers us, the models for
ways of living: that the writer can survive a difficult or strange experience and learn from it.
Seneca
On Noise

The interesting and contradicting personal essay, " On Noise", written by Seneca the Younger, presents a
different way to look at noise as a distraction. It is a personal essay about the search for peace of mind in any
environment. Seneca reveals that noise is not a disturbance of one's mind, but rather something to fill the air and
that there will always be the noise within.
Seneca begins the essay by describing the sounds that come from the public bathhouse below his lodgings and
how they can potentially be distracting and cause him to lose focus. Seneca swears that these noises have, for
him, become nothing more than the "sound of waves or falling water". He then goes on to say that there is no
such thing as "peaceful stillness" and that only peace within can one " freely develop a sound mind". His
conclusion is that noises and voices are ceaseless even if we block out sound because there will always be noise
within us.
Seneca uses various examples to prove his point. He starts off by giving specific sounds that he can hear from
the public bathhouse. He uses this to show that he has already become immune to the noise and that he is only
disturbed by voices. Seneca also tells the story of a man who tries to sleep in a quiet surrounding, but still tosses
and turns in his sleep. Seneca states that even though there is no external noise, the man still has noise that
lives within him. He also uses quotes from ancient Greek stories and characters to help prove his ideas. Seneca
shows from his own experiences that even with the distracting noises that he can hear from his own room, he
has still managed to deal with all the noise.
Seneca uses logos to prove his point. He provides multiple examples that readers can understand logically even
without Seneca's help of explaining them. He says that, "The fact that the body is lying down is no reason for
supposing that the mind is at peace. Rest is sometimes far from restful". This use of logos causes readers to
think about how there are times where they themselves can't sleep even though it is quiet. Seneca says that to
have peace at mind, one must put aside their ambitions and anxieties. The lessa fear for his possessions, the
less anxiety he will experience in life. To prove this, Seneca uses the Greek fighter Aeneas as an example.
Aeneas had to escape out of Troy carrying his father. He was scared of everything, even the breeze, because he
didn't want to lose his family. Once one is not afraid to lose anything, then all noise and voices will never “shake
one out of oneself".
Seneca writes this essay in a form that is different from other essays. He gives his readers his own evidence that
he has mastered how to cancel out noise and not be distracted. If one tries to copy him, it could possibly lead to
falling for temptation. At the end of the essay, Seneca does say that he will move to a different house so he will
no longer need to listen to the constant noise. He then compares himself to the Greek hero Ulysses. He docs not
need to stay and try to resist temptation when there is an obvious solution. Just like how Ulysses plugged his
cars to resist the Sirens, Seneca can just move away from the noise. He says that he stayed next to the public
bathhouse just to " test himself and some practice".
Seneca writes "On Noise" with strong descriptive imagery. This essay proved a way that was very contradicting
to previous thought. People used to think that in order to find peace, one must move to a quiet location. Seneca
states that this does not merely solve the problem since people still have turmoil within their own minds. They
must free themselves of the confusion in order to find peace of mind. " On Noise" addresses the mysteries of
noise and distraction to help people figure out what should really be done to find "peaceful stillness."

Plutarch
Consolation To His Wife
From an intimate and moving letter to his grieving wife on the death of their daughter, to elegant writings on
morality, happiness and the avoidance of anger, Plutarch’s powerful words of consolation and inspiration still
offer timeless wisdom and guidance today.
Throughout history, some books have changed the world. They have transformed the way we see ourselves –
and each other. They have inspired debate, dissent, war and revolution. They have enlightened, outraged,
provoked and comforted. They have enriched lives – and destroyed them.
In his Consolation to His Wife, Plutarch writes a moralistic consolation to his wife following the death of his
daughter in order to demonstrate that mothers who have lost their children should remain composed while
mourning.
Plutarch begins by establishing his wife as a model for others by describing the “excess and superstition”
usually associated with mourning as “faults to which you are not at all prone”. Plutarch regards his wife as a
moral person and admonishes socially acceptable mourning practices using “superstition”, “excess” and
“faults”, words that all have a negative connotation. Plutarch then plays to the expectation that women are meant
to act as a support to their husbands: “In your emotion keep me as well as yourself within bounds”. Wives who
do not maintain their composure have failed their husbands.
Plutarch is a loving, caring, and compassionate human being even though it may not seem obvious after one first
reads his Consolation to His Wife, which talks about the death of his daughter Timoxena. He is a philosopher and
as such is preaching his beliefs in this letter, however not to his wife even though it was supposedly written for
her. He states many times throughout the letter (obviously not in the same way) that he does not have to "worry"
about his wife having "...incontinence in her soul," which further proves the point that the letter was in fact
intended for another audience besides his wife. Why? Because time and time again he says things about the
nature of grief and sickness of the heart and tells the reader, ostensibly his wife, how it is not good to grieve. Yet
Plutarch also points out that his wife needs no reminder or help in knowing how to deal with such events. Why
then write a letter to his wife explaining how she should act at a time like this if it is in fact unnecessary? so as to
inform those who do not already know.
For example Plutarch is talking about how "silly women" come over to the house of the grief stricken for
whatever the reason may be, and "fan and whet the grief" of the person "and prevent it from abating." He then
wrote to his wife, "I know the good fight you lately fought when you supported Theon's sister and resisted
women who were charging in with wails and shrieks, simply to pile fire upon fire." He further analyzes this
situation and gives other analogies; the main one being that by showing the person who is grieving for their loss
an outsider's pity and sorrow for that same person will only worsen that person's their pain, e.g. "When people
see a friend's house aflame they extinguish it with all possible speed and strength, but when souls are ablaze
they only add to the kindling." By implying this he means for the reader to do the opposite.
Plutarch’s consolation letter to his wife is not merely an act of public posturing, but a moving personal
document, a public statement on correct grieving, and a demonstration of the syncretistic trend in philosophy in
early Imperial times. The letter can be connected to a tradition of ancient consolatory activities which established
an ancient form of psychotherapy.

Of Books
Montaigne

Montaign began to write down striking sentences from the works of classical, mostly Latin authors and to make
them the starting point for his own reflections. He saw these reflections as attempts to get to the bottom of the
nature of the human being and the problems of existence, especially death. He himself had to develop the
appropriate form of representation for these “attempts” (French essais) in a tentative way, because only later,
after him and thanks to him, the term essay became the name of a new literary genre. While writing, Montaigne
describes his thoughts as if the page before him were his counterpart – just as he would tell his lost friend la
Boétie. Changing himself over time, he also encounters the text in a new way when he reads it again. He then
corrects, completes and rejects it from the new perspective. His thought process leads him to change himself in
turn. “For him, the whole of humanity consists of nothing but moments governed by his own laws, and he
reproduces his empathy with his own past.”
For Michel de Montaigne, sensual perception was a highly unreliable act, because people can suffer from false
perceptions, illusions, hallucinations; one could not even be sure that one was not dreaming. The person who
perceives the world with his senses hopes to gain knowledge from it. But he is subject to the danger of illusion,
and the human senses are not sufficient to grasp the true essence of things. He considers it impossible to
separate the appearance from the actual being, for this requires a criterion as an unmistakable sign of
correctness. Montaigne uses the term apparence (appearance) to create a way out. Although man cannot
recognize the essence of things, he is able to perceive them in their constantly changing appearances.
In the wonderful biography How to Live: A Life of Montaigne, by Sarah Bakewell, we learn a bit about the books
that influenced Montaigne himself. As would have been the case for most of his contemporaries, his primary
influences were classics from Greece and Rome. He started with the 16th century’s version of the Grimm
Brothers: Ovid’s Metamorphoses, and then moved on to Virgil’s Aeneid and some modern comedic plays. In
other words, Montaigne started out with works of fiction:
One unsuitable text which Montaigne discovered for himself at the age of seven or eight was Ovid’s
Metamorphoses. This tumbling cornucopia of stories about miraculous transformations among ancient gods and
mortals was the closest thing the Renaissance had to a compendium of fairy tales…In Ovid, people change. They
turn into trees, animals, stars, bodies of water, or disembodied voices. They alter sex; they become werewolves.
A woman called Scylla enters a poisonous pool and sees each of her limbs turn into a dog-like monster from
which she cannot pull away because the monsters are also her….Once a taste of this sort of thing had started
him off, Montaigne galloped through other books similarly full of good stories: Virgil’s Aeneid, then Terence,
Plautus, and various modern Italian comedies. He learned, in defiance of school policy, to associate reading with
excitement.
From Fiction to Non-Fiction
As he got older, though, Montaigne turned more and more to non-fiction, to works of real life. In his words,
reading non-fiction taught you about the ‘diversity and truth of man,’ as well as ‘the variety of ways he is put
together, and the accidents that threaten him.’
The best material he had available to him were from the classical stylings of writers like Tacitus, historian of the
Roman periods in the early years after Christ; Plutarch, the biographer of the eminent Greeks and Romans; and
Lucretius, the Roman philosophical poet. In Bakewell’s biography, we learn what it was he loved about these
authors:
He loved how Tacitus treated public events from the point of view of ‘private behavior and inclinations’ and was
struck by the historian’s fortune in living through a ‘strange and extreme’ period, just as Montaigne himself did.
Indeed, he wrote of Tacitus ‘you would often say that it is us he is describing.’
Turning to biographers, Montaigne liked those who went beyond the external events of a life and tried to
reconstruct a person’s inner world from the evidence. No one excelled in this more than his favorite writer of all
— the Greek biographer Plutarch, who lived from around AD 46 to around 120 and whose vast Lives presented
narratives of notable Greeks and Romans in themed pairs.

An Hour or Two Sacred to Sorrow

Richard Steele
“An Hour or Two Sacred to Sorrow” In the essay, “An Hour or Two Sacred to Sorrow,” the writer, Richard Steele,
explains to the reader that many unexpected and unfortunate events may occur in our lifetime; however, those
occurrences should be looked back upon rather than forgotten. He writes from his own experiences of loss, but
continues to include the fact that it is acceptable even satisfying to remember such events. The writer begins by
reliving the day his father died. At a mere age of five he remembers knowing something was wrong because no
one would play with him, but no recollection as to what was truly amiss in the situation. When he says, "I...fell
a-beating at the coffin and calling Papa..." that statement along with, "... I know not how. I had some slight idea
that he was locked up in there," explains further that he knew something was unsound about the situation just
not exactly what it was. He then talks about how his mother smothers him out of her own grief, which struck his
instinct of sorrow for his mother. He then moves on to express the fact that when we're older we obtain memory
better than at a younger age; in addition, he explains that different memories cause different reactions in a
person. For instance, when a person passes away all you find yourself remembering is their death not the
cheerful memories they left with you. He then elaborates this point by saying, "... gallant men.. cut off by the
sword move rather our veneration than our pity..." Saying this he points out that when a man from the military
dies we are more respectful than sorry or upset by the incident. Many people would prefer not to remember the
mournful events of their lives, but rather the joyful experiences. In continuation he says that the first beauty he
ever beheld was in a virgin. He describes her as ignorantly charming and carelessly excelling, which leads him to
understand why death should have a right to her, but it still baffles him why death also seems drawn to the
humble and meek. He watches death become an object of little value when he states, "... death becomes the
pretty trifler." He describes the virgins sudden death and the anguish he felt after hearing this news. He then
invites friends who had known her, and they begin drinking two bottles of wine apiece; however, he finds that no
matter how much he drinks it can not erase what had happened the night before. Which gave them all the more
reason to recollect the impact she had left on their lives. In conclusion the writer relives past dismal experiences
that stood out in his memory. In many ways life can be full of sorrow, but we must learn how to move on from
these events in our lives. on to better times. He explains that many unexpected and unfortunate events may
occur in our lifetime; however, those occurrences should be looked back upon rather than forgotten.

The Solitude of the Country

Dr. Samuel Johnson

In "The Solitude of the Country", Samuel Johnson considers the romantic notion of going into the country, and
"getting away from it all." However, he states he rejects this notion because it treats society as something to "get
away" from.

"I know not whether those who thus ambitiously repeat the praises of solitude, have always considered how
much they depreciate mankind by declaring, that whatever is excellent or desirable is to be obtained by departing
from them…"

He makes a number of criticisms against the "solitude of the country." Most people dream of going away, but
never get around to it. On the other hand some people are just selfish, and run away from society to a place
where they are out of reach, so that they no longer have any responsibilities to society. While some other people
have minds that are "more delicate and tender," who flee because they are weak.
Some people simply go because there have been other famous people who have also gone. However, Johnson
says this is a bad idea, because those famous people have lived accomplished, fulfilling lives, and have lots to
think about. An ordinary person, however, would have nothing to do in solitude.
Some people go to learn and pursue scientific life. Johnson says that although solitude can help with studying,
there will be no point to it, if, in such isolation, you cannot teach what you have learned. Johnson continues, that
being in the middle of society is actually better if you want to learn, because then, you can share ideas with other
people, who can evaluate your work.
Another "set of reclusive" goes away for religious purposes. Johnson reuses his previous argument, saying that
it does not help for those people to pursue religion in solitude if they cannot preach, or have other people
practice piety (like a "flower that blooms in the desert").
Johnson concludes by saying that those who rush to solitude are weak or fearful. They "desert the station which
Providence assigned them." However, those who stay in public life confront their challenges. "They are placed in
an evil world, to exhibit public examples of good life." They are "so fortified with resolution, that the world passes
before them without influence or regard."
Johnson is of the opinion that,” Study requires solitude, and solitude is a state dangerous to those who are too
much accustomed to sink into themselves.”

William Hazlitt
On the Pleasure of Hating
Among the many pleasures of Hazlitt’s piece is the permission he grants us to lay claim to our baser, not our
better, natures. And to befriend them thereby. It’s hard not to be charmed by brave admission of base instinct, as
when Gore Vidal confessed to a reporter that “Whenever a friend succeeds, a little something in me dies.” It’s not
simply the marvelous frisson of truth that delights, but that such truth is tonic—liberating us from shame about
our own too-human natures. “Nothing that is human is foreign to me,” wrote Terence, the second-century Roman
playwright, and we’re still quoting him today, because it’s true.
Hate, Hazlitt makes clear, outlives our best intentions to weed it from our natures, and so begins his artful
dissection of sentiment, society, and self.
His piece from there can be read as a sort of sentimental striptease, peeling back the layers of his subject to
reveal the mysteries of malevolence: first he considers hate in abstract terms (as when he writes that “Nature
seems [the more we look into it] made up of antipathies: . . . Life would turn to a stagnant pool, were it not ruffled
by the jarring interests”); then he considers hate as it manifests in society, where he critiques hate’s place in
religion, politics, and pop culture; finally he scrutinizes private life, where he dissects the pleasure of hating his
friends, admits to hating books, and finally tells us that he hates himself. And it is here that Hazlitt demonstrates
the essayist’s greatest strength: unrelenting self-examination—the courage to lay oneself bare.

It is somewhat telling of William Hazlitt (1778-1830) that he had the audacity and courage to write and publish an
essay called ‘The Pleasure of Hating’—often described as a ‘classic of spleen’.Hazlitt is an arch-romantic in both
inspiration and execution. His ideas, for example, inspired Keats and his notion of ‘negative sensibility’. He is
revolutionary in approach and often presents himself as a critic of the monarchy and a social reformer. Unlike
Wordsworth, for example, who began as a revolutionary but whose outlook became more conservative with old
age, Hazlitt remained unrepentant in his antagonism towards power and his writing about social justice.

Hazlitt was also a fine literary critic and theater reviewer, especially interested in Shakespeare. His Characters of
Shakespeare’s Plays remains a well-known text in theater reviewing, particularly in the way Hazlitt helped
reinforce the character focused and literary approach to Shakespeare’s drama that would be dominant for a good
150 years after his death.

In ‘The Pleasure of Hating’, Hazlitt is not writing about Shakespeare, but as he often does, he scatters numerous
allusions (sometimes overtly and sometimes less so) to Shakespeare’s plays. In Shakespeare, Hazlitt finds a
voice that he often integrates with his own as he explores topics of universal significance that go beyond cultural
and historical specificity.

Thus, for example, Hazlitt writes about the instinctive, visceral hate that arises every so often, not only in real life
but also in our religious and political ideas:

Hazlitt thinks of the human instinct to hunt each other through Shakespeare’s King Lear (the idea is captured
brilliantly by Akira Kurosawa’s adaptation of the play in the 1985 film, Ran, especially in the opening sequence).

He studies the effects of raw feeling on human behavior. It’s as if he’s speaking to us, today in 2017, when he
links religion and patriotism to the poisonous effects of hate:
The pleasure of hating, like a poisonous mineral, eats into the heart of religion, and turns it to rankling spleen
and bigotry; it makes patriotism an excuse for carrying fire, pestilence, and famine into other lands: it leaves to
virtue nothing but the spirit of censoriousness, and a narrow, jealous, inquisitorial watchfulness over the actions
and motives of others. What have the different sects, creeds, doctrines in religion been but so many pretexts set
up for men to wrangle, to quarrel, to tear one another in pieces about, like a target as a mark to shoot at?
But as elsewhere in Hazlitt, I’m particularly intrigued by those passages in which Hazlitt turns to his personal life.
And here, his particular bent of character, his moodiness and his intellectual honesty that is not compromised
even if his words will make enemies of his acquaintances comes to the surface. Follow him here as he talks
about some of his old ‘friends’:

Dream Children
Charles Lamb

Dream Children" is a formally unique essay, channeling the logic and flow of a dream in a series of long
sentences of strung together phrases and no paragraph breaks to be found. Lamb deftly uses these stylistic
conceits to pull the reader into a reverie, creating a sense of tumbling through this dream world with its series of
dovetailing tangents. In fact, the essay could prove confusing and hard to navigate until the reader gets to the
end when, with a savvy twist, Lamb explains the formal oddness of the yarn he has been spinning all along.
We're ripped out of this odd dream state into the most familiar state Lamb can be found in—sitting next to his
sister.
To some extent, this piece blurs genre lines between essay and fiction. Commonly, we understand essays to be
works of non-fiction, but in this one Lamb uses his typical interior-facing autobiographical approach to make
room for a fictional narrative inside of a dream. The fact that his children exist is a fiction, as is the idea that he
married Alice, as may be the existence and deaths of Field and John L. We know that the real life Charles had a
brother John Lamb, but in choosing the rare occasion to write of his real life brother inside of this vivid dream,
Lamb seems to be choosing to write about a fantasized version of his real life.
Children love to listen to stories of their elders as children, the essay begins, because they get to imagine those
elders that they themselves cannot meet. Elia's children gather around him to hear stories about their
great-grandmother Field, who lived in a mansion that she cared for on behalf of a rich family who lived in a
different mansion. Young Alice scoffs at Elia's recollection of that rich person removing a detailed wood carving
depicting the story of the Children in the Wood to put up an ugly marble thing instead.

At Field's funeral, Elia recounts, everyone praised her goodness and religious faith: she could recite Psalms and
some of the New Testament from memory. She was a great dancer until she was stricken by cancer, but even in
the grip of that disease, she didn't lose any of her good spirits. She was convinced that two ghosts of infants
lived in her house, but she didn't consider them harmful, so it didn't bother her much. But the young Elia was
terrified of them, and always needed help getting to sleep, even though he never saw them.

The young Elia used to wander the grounds of that mansion admiring all of the marble busts and wondering
when he may himself turn into one. He spent his days picking the various fruit from around the grounds of the
estate. Elia breaks from his recollection to notice his children John and Alice splitting a plate of grapes.
Elia continues that Field loved all of her grandchildren, but especially Elia's elder brother John L., a handsome
and great-spirited young man who rode horses from a young age. John used to carry Elia around on his back
when the younger brother became lame-footed. When John fell ill, Elia felt he wasn't able to care for his brother
as well as when John had cared for him, and when John died, Elia was reserved in emotion but consumed by a
great sorrow. At this point in the telling, Elia's children start to cry, asking not to hear about their uncle, but to
hear about their dead mother instead.
In his book Metaphors of Self: The Meaning of Autobiography, the literary theorist James Olney says that the
most fruitful approach a writer can take in an autobiography is not to follow a formal or historical one but to, "see
it in relation to the vital impulse to order that has always caused man to create and that, in the end, determines
both the nature and the form of what he creates." This explanation of autobiography rings true generally of
Charles Lamb's work, but doubly so with "Dream Children." Here, Lamb models his essay on a dream, bringing
the fantasy that fuels his creative energies to the fore, blurring the lines between that fantasy of his past life and
that life to which he dedicates his writing practice.

On Running After One's Hat

G.K. Chesterton

In 'On Running After One's Hat' by G.K. Chesterton we have the topic of escape, humiliation and
acknowledgement. Taken from his 'On Running After One's Hat and Other Whimsies' collection, after reading the
essay, the reader understands that Chesterton might be investigating the topic of escape.

For Chesterton, it is simpler to envision himself, what he acting as a kid would do with regards to the issue of
burden. He accepts that an individual will be more joyful on the off chance that they change their viewpoint or
view his/her life through the perspective of a kid when experiencing an inconvenience. Then, at that point, not
exclusively will an individual resist the urge to panic yet they will regard each inconvenience as an experience,
similarly as a youngster may.
Chesterton is using the little boy at the train station for instance. The kid doesn't disapprove of the way that train
is late. Maybe he considers everything to be the station as being superbly energizing. In spite of the fact that
Chesterton may have a point, it very well may be critical to recall that numerous individuals will experience
trouble taking a gander at life through the perspective of a youngster. Humiliation will surpass them and they will
feel separated from the world, as numerous individuals who have pursued their caps may feel. It is this
humiliation that an individual feels which will stop an individual pursuing their cap as they realize that those
spectators who notice what's going on are giggling at the individual as opposed to with them, something that
Chesterton doesn't specify in the essay.

For Chesterton, life is essentially better when society brings down its defences and takes into account the
person to act naturally without being obviously condemned by society. Society likes to snicker at the incidents
that happen in a person's life. It assists society with diverting away from its own issues or stresses. It is simpler
to giggle at someone else than to ponder one's own setbacks. Something that won't change paying little heed to
Chesterton's statement that it is great to snicker at a man pursuing a hat. One point in which Chesterton may be
correct is on the issue of men pursuing ladies. However, this demonstration might be considered by certain
individuals as silly. It is regardless of society. So as such, it doesn't justify a similar consideration for other
people. Individuals will see a man pursuing his hat faster than they will see a man pursuing a lady down the road.

Chesterton may likewise be recommending that society should take a close look at itself and realign itself with
his line of reasoning, which would be a romantic view on life that isn't really useful. Take the flooding in London
for instance. For Chesterton, there is a level of fervour. Anyway, for the individuals who live in London, the
flooding of their homes might be something that could be considered negative and expensive.

It is additionally intriguing that Chesterton can part himself into two separate camps - the viewpoint of a
youngster and the standpoint of a grown-up. Despite the fact that the reader is left pondering with regards to
what may trigger Chesterton to see life through the eyes of a grown-up.

Chesterton works on circumstances to keep a heartfelt view of life. It is something that may leave a few readers
to propose that Chesterton is basically off-base on his standpoint. Life itself is certifiably not a basic matter and
is in fact complicated by the man himself. Then again Chesterton's viewpoint has some legitimacy and might be
helpful for individuals.

Life can be a lot easier and less irritating should an individual be positive in their viewpoint paying little heed to
the accidents they may bring about. A positive psyche will redress a negative circumstance faster than a
negative brain will. In reality, an individual with a positive brain is hard to overcome. Despite the fact that looking
after inspiration, while confronting antagonism can be troublesome. Something that Chesterton doesn't concede
to nor does he consider it to be being significant.

For Chesterton, inspiration is something that an individual can promptly turn on. The instance of Chesterton's
companion and the cabinet is such a model. Chesterton essentially isn't being down to earth however his
heartfelt view on life is excellent. He, at the end of the day, has not referenced whether he battles with regards to
confessing to pursuing his cap. Chesterton has decided to look outside instead of inside. Something that society
itself does.

Street Haunting
Virginia Woolf
In Virginia Woolf’s “Street Haunting”, the reader follows Woolf through a winter’s walk through London under the
false pretense to buy a new pencil. During her journey through the streets of London, she is made aware of a
number of strangers. The nature of her walk is altered by these strangers she encounters. Street Haunting comes
to profound conclusions about the fluidity of individuality when interacting with other people. Woolf is enabled
by the presence of others to subvert her individuality. Instead of reflecting directly onto herself, she uses the
people she interacts with as a proxy for her own feelings and opinions. In doing so, Woolf empathizes with the
people while engaging in a cold deconstruction of her surroundings, making the reader see everything.
Woolf makes a point to disengage with her environment. She mandates that she not allow herself to become too
absorbed with any one person or their story. Instead she ought to treat each moment as if it were fleeting, saying
“Let us dally a little longer, be content still with surfaces only” This instruction is literal, Woolf believes that
engaging with her setting will remove the joy from vapid displays of beauty. She even compares such an
experience to a sugary diet, lacking in nutrition but desirable nevertheless . Consequently, what she makes from
the “fluff” of her walk will be a reflection of herself. Like any creative medium, work produced from raw materials
can be more telling of it’s creator than the subject itself. Choosing to interact with things at face value speaks
volumes about Woolf as an essayist.
Woolf uses omnipotent language when sharing the anecdote about the dwarf such as “She was thinking” and
“she said to herself” as if to imply that she knows the mind of this supposed stranger. Simply by observing the
dwarf, Woolf is made aware of the dwarf’s afflictions. For a brief moment, a new parallel between the two women.
After completing her purchase, the dwarf’s “the ecstasy faded, knowledge returned, the old peevishness, the old
apology came back, and by the time she had reached the street again she had become a dwarf only” Both Woolf
and the dwarf are indulging in escapism during their separate journeys. The dwarf goes shopping to forget her
disability, to feel desirable, and Woolf goes walking to escape her solitude.
Street Haunting” is about the joy of walking through the city streets of London. The essay follows her taking a
walk to buy a pencil in the streets of London. The errand is an excuse for her to traverse the streets of London to
escape the domesticity of her home.
Woolf extensively uses stream of consciousness in the essay. Reality and fantasy are not distinctly demarcated.
Woolf describes in detail the appearances of others while launching into fantasies of their imagined lives.

Street Haunting”: Themes

There are three themes in “Street Haunting.”

1: People Watching
The most obvious recurring theme throughout “Street Haunting” is observing others. Woolf delights in watching
denizens go about their business. She describes in detail the people she passes. She often imagines their life
and how their environment changes them. The dwarf is apologetic and small on public streets. Yet once inside
the shoe shop, she is confident and proud, showing off her perfect feet and relishing the attention of others.

2: Escapism
Woolf delights in the fantasy of imagining her life as other people. She dives so deeply into the imagined minds
of others that it’s not clear to the reader which is fiction and which is reality. When she steps inside the shop for a
pencil, she notes that the atmosphere of the room feels like the “distilled” essence of the people who own it. She
believes that the two owners have been arguing, but it is at once resolved as she buys a pencil. The story ends
and begins with the pencil, with a brief mention in the middle. However, the pencil serves as an excuse for Woolf
to escape the confines of her domestic life and go on an adventure in the city streets.

3: Individuality and Urban Anonymity

Cities, with their seemingly endless amounts of inhabitants, provide an opportunity for one to be an individual,
yet lost within a crowd. Woolf describes the flow of pedestrians as something larger than life that cannot be
defied. Observations of others are fleeting as the flow forces Woolf to continue onward. For a moment, people
have distinct identities. In the theater district, she sees performers, yet once they fold into the crowd, they lose
that identity and become indistinguishable from the rest. The dwarf goes from quiet to confident in the shoe
shop, but back to quiet once she returns to the streets. For Woolf, she can assimilate any identity she chooses as
she imagines the life of others, remaining aloof as she flows along the streets with the rest.