Thursday, April 15, 2010


I was interested in the idea of not giving animals names, as is suggested in the short story, "Strays." It was an intriguing thought because animals do not use language and rely on basic senses to communicate, so they have no use for a name. Although dogs and cats seem to understand when they have been given a name, so maybe if they could speak they would develop a language.
The author does a good job of suggesting a story without telling any specific events. It's not really a series of events, but rather a vague place in time. The last two paragraphs are my favorite.

"There would be saucers everywhere, some stained with milk, others brimming with dirty rainwater. She belived in the curative powers of rain.

" 'I never give any of them names. We don't know an animal's name. A name's what we use instead of smelling.' "

Dybek has the ability to give a vivid description of characters and places in very few words.


  1. That is the best part about short stories, when you are able to make it a longer story through your thoughts and ideas on what was written. If is fun when they give you something short and you can elaborate and run with it.

  2. I really like how you described how the girl does not give pets names because she looks at it from the point of view of the pets themselves. That is really what I was trying to say in my post but I couldn't think of the words.

  3. I really like your ideas on the no-name animals. I guess I never really thought of it either.