Annie Dillard and _Teaching a Stone to Talk_

I must admit that Teaching a Stone to Talk wasn't one of my favorite nonfiction texts we have read so far this semester. I think that the book tended to drag on and I don't think that Dillard's view of nature and God succeeded in capturing my interest or attention. I would have preferred to read Pilgrim at Tinker Creek instead even though it is longer than Teaching a Stone to Talk; since Pilgrim at Tinker Creek won the Pulitzer Prize I think that book must have been better.

However, when Professor Urrea read the section from Tinker Creek, I'm sorry to say that I didn't find it very compelling or interesting either. I sort of liked the part when Dillard described the bloody paw prints on her chest and described them as looking like roses, but I think the main reason I liked this part was because Professor Urrea has been talking about it for weeks. I really tried to give Annie Dillard a chance, but for some reason I just don't like her writing style or the topics she writes about. I have never been very interested in nature, so maybe that has something to do with it.

The story that captured my interest the most was "On a Hill Far Away." The way that she represented the boy in that story both irritated and interested me. Her condescending behavior toward the boy was rude and cold and I actually made me disklike her a little bit. The boy was clearly lonely and looking for someone to talk to, but Dillard was trying to find excuses to leave. I have the impression that she knew that the boy was looking for companionship, but she didn't have the patience or the time to talk to him.