many writers would do to lengthen or puff up their stories.
             Making the stories short was good enough, but why do they defy time? While most autobiographers fear losing themselves in the organization of their past and thus fail to end their stories at an appropriate length (LongRobert), Thurber sticks to short accounts of his adventures to excuse both himself and his audience from unnecessarily long texts. He pushes his readers to feel the same momentary inertia with which he writes his stories, explaining unchronological organization; he wrote them as they hit is mind, meaning that the episodes don't necessarily follow time, but in accordance to how memorable and impactful they were to him as a child. How Thurber introduces every one of his family members and their complication relationships, followed by descriptions of their distinct traits and personalities all in the first chapter, confirms this.
             Another factor a senseless critic could hammer on is Thurber's exaggerated details of already-unbelievable events. In fact, it'd unsurprising if a person evaluated this autobiography as a fantasy novel, because at a surface, the stories seem extremely untruthful and unlikely to happen. While it would be most conscience to alleviate this suspicion with simpler words, Thurber does the total opposite; Even though he omits much of his personal thoughts and emotional standings, he explains all scenes in the book literally with superfluous amounts of details, especially exaggerating the conflicts. But they are not hyperboles, since Thurber intends no satirical purposes, and would be dumb if he wanted to scar his own reliability as the narrator. Of course, his intention is not to confuse the audience to an unbearable extent to make them believe that his stories are real, no. Providing mass amounts of details of his surrounding in little pieces rather than focusing on his introspective mind- in which case all scenes would&apos...