Sunday, March 22, 2009

Question

Why do you think Brooks chose to tell the history of the haggadah is reverse chronological order instead of starting when the book was made.

6 comments:

  1. To me telling the story in reverse order makes more sense. I think Brooks wanted to tell what went in to the making and the history of the haggadah. Also, I feel like Brooks wanted to add up the parts of the book instead of breaking it down bit by bit.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is a little weird that it was in reverse chronological order. But i do agree that it makes more sense that way. I think that that reversing the stories added more suspense to each story. I also found it interesting how before each story we heard from Hanna, just because it lead into the introduction of a new character.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it would have made for sence to go in chronological order. That way each story would have built on the last. But it also makes sense reversly too. Each new story is one layer deeper into details Hanna is discovering. We only know as much as Hanna knows.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I like what Nathalie said about how it is interesting that he hear from Hanna before each story. I also like how each story is based on a wine stain or butterfly wing or something similar to that that Hanna finds in the Haggadah.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I like what Aimee said about how we only know what Hanna knows and that she keeps discovering things deeper in the past.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think the reverse order is logical, because Hanna gets the latest information first, once she has had enough information then she can find out the events that happened before. Like how historians first find a person's tomb, then they discover the person's story.

    ReplyDelete