A Brief Outline for Organising/Writing the PhD Thesis: Chapters I, II, & III

-->

The Research Question(s) are central and key to both the overall purpose and design of the Thesis. Each Chapter relates to them. The Intro sets up the problem(s) from which they arise and provides a map for the investigation. The Lit Review Chapter then investigates what is already known in relation to the research questions and convinces the reader that they are unanswered and need to be addressed. The Method Chapter establishes the researcher’s point-of-view within scholarship and methodology and then proceeds to consider various ways of answering the research questions within those parameters, finally arriving at the method chosen for the investigation and the reasons for it.

Chapter I: Introduction

A. Background (275 words[i]) (This is the section of the Introduction where first person can be used; perhaps how you became interested in the area of study, but not your life story [or employment history] here.)

B. Research Problem and Hypotheses (349 words) (This is crucial to establishing the whole raison d’etre of the study and the Thesis!) Make the reader/examiner as curious to find answers as you initially were!

C. Methodology (242 words) The plot of how you came to the method, rather than the method itself; that’s for later. Resist writing your full methodology here.

D. Justifications for the Research (177 words)

‘The research is also justified because its revelations and discovery add to and enrich …’

E. Outline of the Thesis (descriptions of the following, not details or argument) What the reader can expect.

1. Chapter Two: Review of the Literature (178 words)

2. Chapter Three: Method and Methodology (1184 words)

3. Chapter Four: Presentation of data (157 words)

4. Chapter Five: Analyses of data (167 words) (Four and Five are often combined)

5. Chapter Six: Conclusions and Implications (78 words)

F. Definitions (122 words)

G. Delimitations (234 words)

H. Conclusion

‘This introduction lays the foundations for the thesis.  It introduces the research problem, questions and hypotheses.  The research is justified, definitions are presented, the methodology is briefly described and justified, the thesis outlined and the limitations are given (c.f., Perry 1995).  On these foundations, the thesis can proceed with a detailed description of the research, beginning with a thorough exploratory examination of the literature on [the topic] in the following Chapter.’

Note: The Introduction is an overview, setting out the plan of action or map for the Thesis itself. It is not the place to go into detail about the how’s and why’s of either the questions, method(s) or findings, but rather, is descriptive of the processes that are to follow. This is not the place for argument or debate.

 

 

Chapter II: Literature Review

‘A literature review is a text written by someone to consider the critical points of current knowledge including substantive findings’. Theoretical and methodological considerations are left for the following Method Chapter.

A. Introduction               (about one page)  

B. Mapping the process           (about half page)

(How you went about searching the Literature, terms, databases, etc)

C. Unpacking [the topic] (20-25 pages)

1. The choice of terms in the literature (Further exploration and definitions of your terms from the literature)

2. The history of [your topic] research (linking your reviews of the parent and immediate disciplines/fields).

3.Unearthing specifics of your interest in the literature

4.Exploring major concepts of your research interest in the literature

D. Discussion         (eight pages)

Three main subjects or topic areas from the literature, delineated and synthesized (“the combination of ideas to form a theory or system”) to your research questions as valid and deserving investigation.

E. Conclusions         (a page)

“A new history of [your topic] has been constructed by journeying through the

literature, locating the peaks and valleys, the well-worn footpaths and the nooks and crannies of language in the previous research. Reconstructing the territory itself has set a new map for further exploration. …The question then remains … only by understanding … can we finally begin to understand this phenomenon we call …?” (Jones, 2001)

From Chad Perry:

“The second section aims to build a theoretical foundation upon which the research is based by reviewing the relevant literature to identify research issues which are worth researching because they are controversial and have not been answered by previous researchers. That is, the literature review is not an end in itself but is a means to the end of identifying the worthy research issues …”

III. Method & Methodology

       A. Introduction           (Two pages)

Having explored the literature on the topic and come to the conclusion that your questions remain unanswered, this Chapter  explores possible methods by which to answer them and arrive at a conclusion for the best way forward.

       B. Justification for the methodology   (One to two pages)

The following outlines that journey and its underpinnings.

Justification for the methodology in terms of the research problem and the literature review, for example, a qualitative methodology requires a research problem involving people’s constructions of meanings which have not previously been explored (Perry)

Ontology ... to do with our assumptions about how the world is made up and the nature of things

Epistemology ... to do with our beliefs about how one might discover knowledge about the world

Methodology ... to do with the tools and techniques of research

Guba and Lincoln (1994:108) categorize alternative inquiry paradigms according to their stance on the following three questions:

·       The ontological question
What is the form and nature of reality and, therefore, what is there that can be known about it?

·       The epistemological question
What is the nature of the relationship between the knower or would-be knower and what can be known?

·       The methodological question
How can the inquirer go about finding out whatever he or she believes can be known?

Your Methodology follows on from the Ontological and Epistemological positions you have taken.  There is no need to defend them from different ontological or epistemological standpoints. 

      C. Research procedures           (15 pages)

Because of the preceding exploration of the theoretical possibilities, a decision was made to use a … approach, building upon a … theoretical metacontext, and based within the general rubric of … .

This is your map or set of instructions for another researcher who wishes to follow your procedures.

      D. Ethical considerations         (One page)                     

      E. Conclusions         (One-two pages) 

From Perry:

§  Describes the major methodology used to collect the data which will be used to answer the (research questions).

§  Must be written so that another researcher can replicate the research.

§  Must show familiarity with controversies and positions taken by authorities.

§  Analogous to an accountant laying an ‘audit trail’

§  Awareness of how validity and reliability are viewed in qualitative research,

§  Advantages and disadvantages of other methods must be discussed

References

Jones, K. (2001) Narratives of Identity & the Informal Care Role (unpublished PhD Thesis). Available at: https://www.academia.edu/2570520/Narratives_of_Identity_and_the_Informal_Care_Role_unpubished_PhD_Thesis_

Perry, C. (1998) “A Structured Approach for Presenting Theses” Australian Marketing Journal, Vol. 6., 1, pp. 63-81. Available at: http://users.ugent.be/~dgosseli/Presentations/PhD-Thesis-Approach.pdf

---

[i] Abstracted from Narratives of Identity & the Informal Care Role. Numbers of words or numbers of pages refer to the actual thesis and are given as examples of the proportions and lengths of sub-sections.

The "Long Take" Shooting RUFUS STONE's Fire Scene

William Gaunt ("Rufus") left; Nicholas Thompson Technician, exiting quickly, right

I have been screening RUFUS STONE at various venues around the country recently. Typically, after the film, we hold a Q and A session with the audience.

Usually, there is a stunned silence following, sometimes applause. The silence is understandable. I believe that it takes a bit of time to take in the emotional journey that the film has produced and respond to it. Time to catch one's emotional breath, as it were.

I often simply ask for comments, questions or reactions to the film. Typically, the first questions are about the research, how it fit into the process of making the film, etc. At this point, some then begin to express how it made them feel and relate it to similar experiences that they have had or have heard of. Discussions then often turn to what might be done to minimise prejudice and open up hearts and minds in the wider community.

At about this point, questions begin to turn to making of the film itself, working with the director, Josh Appignanesi, and a professional crew and how that was accomplished. I love talking about this part of making the film, probably because it was the new part for me and, therefore, the most exciting personally.

I often use the example of shooting the fire scene that ends the film because it represents the magical mix of director, cinematographer, cast, crew and extras working simultaneously to pull off a very difficult shot. Anything can go wrong, from actors missing a cue, technical malfunctions, and, in this case, the fire starter coming into camera range inappropriately.

The "long take" or "oner" is an uninterrupted shot in a film which lasts much longer than the conventional editing pace. Long takes are often accomplished through the use of a dolly shot or Steadicam shot. Long takes of a sequence filmed in one shot without any editing are rare in films (cf. Wikipedia). Cary Fukunaga, director of True Detective, said "They're the most first-person experience you can get in a film."

I refer to the long take in RUFUS STONE when answering questions about making the film because it demonstrates in a few minutes my admiration (even astonishment) at how well the crew carried off each of their specific tasks. No one gets in the way of someone else's ability to carry out what is often a very technical and seemingly insignificant (to outsiders) function. When it is working, it is a well-oiled machine. Impressive!

The last day of the shoot was intense. We had filmed two other scenes in two different locations in rural South West England that day, including the very emotional final scene between Rufus and Flip. We then moved to the old, abandoned farmhouse site, for the final 'fire scene'. I often mention the 'fire starter', a professional technician (Nicholas Thompson) who is required for safety as well as skill to start the fire.  Nick enters the scene, starts the fire and exits without ever ending up in the frame. All of this time, the camera on a dolly track is moving towards the lighted fire itself.  When I observed this scene being shot, I said, "It's like a ballet. Wonderful!".

I also realised somewhat later that I was fascinated by fire as a child and, for a time, had a problem playing with matches. Perhaps I am intrigued with the fire starter for that reason: an adult occupation where you are allowed to 'play with matches'!

I embed the "Long Take" from RUFUS STONE below. If you keep an eye on the pile of wood and the right of the frame, you can catch the fire starter, Nicholas Thompson, entering at 0:25 and exiting the set-up at 0:46.

The "Long Take" for RUFUS STONE the movie from Kip Jones on Vimeo.

Trailer for RUFUS STONE

A ranking of the greatest, most celebrated long takes in cinema history. 
16 Incredible Long Takes

Watch the film here:  https://vimeo.com/109360805

Title tittle-tattle

“The writer is always tricking the reader into listening to the dream.” —Joan Didion

Dear Tweedledum and Tweedledee*, I see via Google citation alert that you mention two of my articles in your recent piece about titles. ... What was your title?

"Some papers have interesting and/or catchy titles, perhaps more so in the social sciences than in health journals. Sometimes these catchy titles are just too cryptic, for example from ‘On a train Morgantown: A film script’ 11 and from the same author ‘How Did I Get to Princess Margaret? (And How Did I Get Her to the World Wide Web?)’12 . For both papers one needs to read the paper to understand the title. So before suggesting a funny title, remember that articles with funny titles are less cited than more traditional ones as an analysis of papers published in psychology journals suggested".

I would suggest that both my mentioned titles are creative rather than simply cryptic. I am not sure that I would categorise the titles as 'funny' either. The point of a creative title is to attract an audience, in spite of your opinions. I explained my choice of the title for 'On a Train from Morgantown', actually, right in the article:

 "I had always had the film, "Caught on a Train" by Stephen Poliakoff, in mind when writing the original script and wanted to continue with a similar sort of visual evocation for the written form" (Jones, 2011).

"On a Train from Morgantown" was an invited article for a prestigious psychology journal special issue about Kenneth Gergen.  It has been widely read  (i.e., read more than the average three times with 50 views on just one repository). (The paper has been cited 31 times in the eight years since publication) The fact that it is a film script published in an academic psychology journal is a major breakthrough for dissemination of Performative Social Science. This innovation in communication of arts-based research was acknowledged in an article about its publication in Times Higher Education and on several blog sites. The title was never questioned by either the journal editor or the Times reporter.

I took umbrage at your use of the word "funny" (twice, in close proximity to one another) to describe my titles because 'The One about Princess Margaret" was, ironically, always meant to be humorous. The word "funny", however, can connote "odd" or "inappropriate" or "misplaced", something your article then goes on to try to substantiate. I wrote about the careful choice of the title in the first version of Princess Margaret, again, in the article:

"The title ("The One about Princess Margaret") itself is a play on the titles for “Friends” episodes (e.g., “The One Where Rachel Finds Out”) and humorous stories (“Have you heard the one about …?”). I wanted the production to be clearly placed within the genre of popular culture, but reinvent it for an academic setting" (Jones, 2006).

"Princess Margaret" is very much a body or portfolio of work supporting the original video production. These follow-up textural outputs produce a trail, trace or map of methodological underpinnings and production values for a Performative Social Science output via video. The title varies from publication to publication, journal articles to book chapters. "The One about Princess Margaret" was published originally as a journal article (21 citations so far), then invited as two separate book chapters, including the *offending* title,"How Did I Get to Princess Margaret? (And ow Did I Get Her to the World Wide Web?)". This means the title went past at least four editors and several reviewers, but you know better. The article describes the project background and includes the script for the original audio visual production. The video itself has been viewed about 500 times in four years on various sites and in classrooms worldwide, the whole point of writing the article and chapters in the first place.

The fact that both of these articles may be used more as inspiration for further development in arts-based research and not simply to spawn citations in subsequent journal articles is a point missed by a 'citation only' impact approach.  Both articles open up possibilities for alternative ways of expressing and disseminating research in any 'subject' area; impact beyond the page, in other words. The final impact is with the readers, audiences and communities to whom Performative Social Science efforts are directed. They make the final judgements.

Nonetheless, as I work to further disseminate my work through social media outlets, I am finding that even the "funny" titles are not always catchy enough and further work needs to be done to develop short descriptions or titles to attract a very fast-moving and attention-limited audience gaze, even amongst academics. Developing 'tag lines' (a device from film distribution) etc. for articles is a whole new approach with which I am currently experimenting. 'Intriguing' rather than 'cryptic' is certainly my watchword in these endeavours.

Perhaps if your article had explored these kinds of developments in publication and dissemination rather than desperately trying to find examples for your scorn,  it would have been more 'interesting'. As it stands, it is pretty basic textbook fodder. I mostly skimmed it because, on your advice, I knew what it said already by the title.

Cheers,
Kip

PS: "'The Bridges of Madison County'.  Huh? What's dat? Why would I want to read/see somethin' called that?"

PPS: Please feel free to send my reply along to the long list of 'authors' of your article.

*A response to a journal article by two of my colleagues at my university which cited two of my articles as  examples of bad journal article titles.
 
Resources:
 

Jones, K. (2011) “On a train from Morgantown: A filmscript”. Psychological Studies (Springer). DOI 10.1007/s12646-011-0123-9

 

Jones, K. (2012) “Short Film as Performative Social Science: The Story Behind "’Princess Margaret’". Ch. in Popularizing Research, P. Vannini, Ed. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Jones, K. (2009) “How Did I Get to Princess Margaret? (And How Did I Get Her to the World Wide Web?)” Ch. in M. Srinivasan & R. Mathur (Eds.), Ethnography and The Internet: An Exploration. Nagarjuna Hills, Punjagutta, India: ICFAI University Press.  

Jones, K. (2007) “The one about Princess Margaret” Forum: Qualitative Social Research Special Issue on Virtual Ethnography 8: 3 (Sept 2007).

.
How_did_I_get_to_Princess_Margaret_-FQS

 "The One About Princess Margaret"-Script-FQS

Jones, K. (2006) "The one about Princess Margaret" (Video) 

 

ARTS in RESEARCH (AiR) Collaborative forms at Bournemouth University

Bournemouth University has a growing community of Arts in Research (AiR) academics and post-grad students.  This effort grows out of the experience of the School of Health and Social Care’s ReThink process and previous work at HSC in using tools from the Arts in carrying out research, disseminating findings and sharing them with students, colleagues and communities beyond the University. The AiR team would like to join up with researchers in any School with an interest or even curiosity in how they might infuse their interest in the arts within more routine research and/or presentation practices.

The interest in Arts-based Research is international and growing. Areas such as video, film, photography, dance, drama, poetry, radio production, creative writing—even clowning—are becoming more mainstream.  Conferences, for example, no longer routinely consist of hour-after-hour packed with 20-minute PowerPoint presentations. Young students balk at PPT and expect more creativity from lecturers in their learning experiences. Reaching wider audiences (including ‘service-users’ and the public) is now routinely demanded by funding bodies. Tools from the Arts can greatly enhance all of these efforts.

Using Arts-based approaches in research requires thinking about Method from novel viewpoints. Involving research participants in producing outputs frequently enlivens projects, for one example. Finding the right arts-based method for the research questions or findings is key to their use. Finding the right collaborator for your project can be central to its success.

AiR researchers began meeting in January (watch for future announcement by email, Facebook and Twitter).  There is already interest in developing a series of workshops with working artists as facilitators.  No need to feel that great personal skill is required, just enthusiasm! We hope to open the collaboration up to others outside of BU through future events and workshops.

“Selfies” by some of the AiRHeads collaborating on ARTS in Research (click on photo to enlarge)

 Pictured (top to bottom, left to right): Anne Quinney, (HSC); Sue Thomas (Visiting Scholar); Kip Jones (HSC & Media School); Michele Board (HSC & BUDI); Bronwen Thomas (Media School); Wendy Cutts (HSC); Wendy Couchmann (Southbank U); Michelle Cannon (Media School); Jen Leamon (HSC); Carolyn Ellis-Hill & “Dylan” (HSC); Louise Oliver (HSC); Lee-Ann Fenge (HSC); Karen Cooper (HSC); Trevor Hearing (Media School); Julian McDougall [with Billy Bragg] (Media School); Rebecca Edwards (BU R&KE).

Bournemouth University's Centre for Qualitative Research Refreshes Website

The Centre for Qualitative Research (CQR), a long-standing resource for research practice and postgraduate learning at BU, has recently undergone a ‘refit’ of its web pages.  Content from the old site has been moved over to the new platform for Bournemouth University groups and centres. The new format now makes it possible to link with work taking place in other Schools and research sites. In addition, Impact, Public Engagement and Postgraduate Research links feature on every page.

 

UPDATE! CQR has received approval to continue as a Research Centre within Bournemouth University.  Kip Jones will act as Centre Director, with Caroline Ellis-Hill acting as Deputy Director. The Centre will be part of the new Department of Health Sciences & Public Health in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences. Members are welcome from across departments and faculties at BU.

 

CQR is held in high esteem globally for its innovative work and commitment to qualitative research. The refreshed web pages provide an international ‘shop window’ for CQR, School of Health & Social Care and BU more generally in regards to cutting-edge qualitative work. CQR has always engaged across Schools at BU and welcomes new opportunities for collaborate efforts.

The new CQR pages include information, resources and links organised around the following areas of research:

• Humanising Health and Social Care
• Novel and Innovative Research Methodologies
• Performative Social Science

In addition, areas such as Biographic Narrative Interpretive Research, Cut-up Technique and Appreciative Inquiry are covered. A new page outlining the ‘Gay and Pleasant Land? Project and Rufus Stone’ has been added. The recently organised, cross-Schools ARTS in RESEARCH (AiR) collaboration is also featured.

The new web pages include new information and resources, links to further information and even videos for viewing pleasure! Last but not least, a photo has been added as a ‘Featured Image’ highlighting the essence of each page.

Have a look around this interesting site!

The Look of Love

Lifelong friends

One last reunion
Shady Slim and Jimmy James.

They call you “Doctor Doctor”
Never knowing
It saved you from burning.

(Playing Doctors and Nurses:
“Feeling bad” and “Make it better”
That’s all it ever took).

[Felini sets the scene in black and white.]

Spiny ridge with sea both sides.
Down to the dunes and crashing water.
(The storm is always approaching).

Niche in the sand carved by wind.
Just enough space to shelter three.
Parasoled extras paraded by.

Alone at first
As you prefer it. Always
Waiting to be found.

Man with ugly donkey
That nuzzles you.
You retreat into the recess.

Jimmy shows you shiny 8 X 10s.
Shady Slim’s band
Posed on weathered wood.

Nothing special
Except the layout
Which is Malevichian.

Then Shady Slim’s
Typed out lyrics with
Corrections penned in Peacock:
     “He likes
     The look of love
     Like you”.

They like the look of love like you.

Research as Fiction: “The Return of Rufus Stone” by Kip Jones*

A four-year research project at Bournemouth University, “Gay and Pleasant Land?—a study about positioning, ageing and gay life in rural South West England and Wales”, took place as part of the Research Councils UK-funded New Dynamics of Ageing Programme on ageing in 21st Century Britain. The key output of this effort was the short professionally made, award-winning film RUFUS STONE¹. I acted as Project Lead and Author and Executive Producer for the film. The research project’s methods included narrated biography, visual ethnography, auto-ethnography, focus group work and theatrical improvisation of interview data.

 

In the process of refining the treatment for the film, the Director (Josh Appignanesi) and I faced several obstacles revolving around plot. If the premise was that Rufus would return to his boyhood village after 50 years in exile, there needed to be a reason for that journey backed up by research to support it. Subsequently, I returned to the interview data for more detail (‘evidence’) to support the reasons (‘theory’) for the return of Rufus Stone. I further explored and elaborated both Rufus’ story as a lad and his decision-making as an adult, always constructing these ‘facts’ from stories which were told to us whilst carrying out the research.

 

Both the film and this short story are fiction, or what I prefer to call ‘fictive reality’. Fictive reality is conceived as the ability to engage in imaginative and creative invention while remaining true to the remembered realities as told through the narrations of others. Several, in fact, may recount a similar incident. When these reports are combined into one person’s story or a “composite” character, a “fiction” is born (Jones, 2013).

 

By returning to this material to write “The Return of Rufus Stone”, I am creating a ‘prequel’ to the film RUFUS STONE. It is a reworking and refinement of those early writings. By becoming a short story, it fine-tunes the detail by focusing on the reasons for Rufus’ return as literature. Rufus Stone’s reappearance in his boyhood village after 50 years of exile sets up the possibilities for the characters to remember, reassess and even potentially change. This short story explains how that journey became possible.

Read the story here

 

 * This story was first published on 22 Dec 2013 on the SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION website, Mark Carrigan, ed. 

 

 Watch the film here:  https://vimeo.com/109360805

 

A September Song

 Someone had ghoulishly named the canal ‘Styx’ some time ago now and it had stuck. The bridges were so low that you were finding it difficult to navigate the canal in the small craft. The boat was too high to get under the overpasses. You hadn’t thought of these details or really planned very much for the journey. Getting together again after so many years was its purpose.

At each bridge you emptied the boat, carried it up the embankment across the road and back down the other side to the canal. Fitzcarraldo.

Fred came from America for the celebration. Forty years after your relationship had ended, he still held a deep affection for you. You had loved each of them in a particular way and time. Each represented an episode in your love life, as it is called.

Instead, the day became about the bridges and all the hard work to navigate them. The whole event turned into that. You won’t bore us with the rest.

≈

She was shortish, with the curliest natural blonde hair. Her round face and complexion reminded you of an apple. She rushed towards you after the lecture, a white piece of A-4 flapping in her hand.

“That last clip was about you, wasn’t it?” she asked.

 “More or less, yes”.

“It’s in the lyrics; I could hear it” she added.

“Actually, more the visuals. What’s that piece of paper?” you hastened to ask, always preferring to divert attention away from yourself.

“Oh, just some sketches. Ideas really”.

“Let me see… are you left-handed? You draw a lot like I do”.

“I know. I’ve seen your drawings. Most people haven’t. They don’t understand how your work now follows on naturally from that time in your career”.

“You’re right about that. Too little time to explain. Better to get on with the work at hand than …”

PULL OUT FADE TO BLACK

≈

Craig was so wrong for you. The wrong age, the wrong time in life, the wrong place. And yet it was beginning to work. He had asked you to move in with him, which was very sweet and kind of foolish. It never would have worked.

The meeting was in a medieval hall, usually reserved for important political and social functions. The old oak panelling and fixtures had a particular smell that most ordinary folks would only recall from churches in their childhoods.

The tables and high-backed chairs were set out in a rectangle in the centre of the room; the meeting was about to begin. This was a British gathering of (mostly) men who thought they had their ‘fingers on the pulse of contemporary male culture’. Such hubris.

You were there. Craig, being in his twenties and from a poor background, was invited to represent ‘youth culture’. Your colleague, Margaret, the only female participant, sat dead centre on one of the long sides of the rectangle.

The truth is that the British only implement change, which they frequently find distasteful, in small increments. A bit like their taking their good old time in getting the fuck out of India. It’s just the way they are. How this particular group ever thought they could recognize cultural change was beyond your comprehension. Nonetheless, the Brits love to bang on about things instead of participating in them.

After a round of introductions (listing credentials like so many cock measurements), a second go-round was conducted—what the Brits like to call a warm-up exercise. Each member in turn was to name a men’s cologne recently introduced to the marketplace.

Craig’s longish hair, cord jacket and screen-printed denim shirt stood out from the rest, of course. They had been expecting Craig to be a ‘hoody’ so were a bit disappointed. When his turn came, he mentioned the little-known maker, Parfumerie Generale from Paris, and it’s new scent, ‘Monsieur’.

Just as he finished, Margaret fainted. Perhaps it was all the talk about colognes or just the over-powering scent of testosterone in the room. Craig rushed to her side, as the others remained immobile and dumb-founded. Craig helped her to her feet and out of the hall. You followed close behind.

“I’m okay now, really. Thanks ever so much, Craig”.

“No problem! Do you want to go to the ladies’ and splash some cold water on your face?”

“Good idea, Craig. See you back in the hall”.

Craig then asked you to join him for a fag in the fresh air. As the pair walked towards the exit, Craig said, “Y’know, I’ve invited Margaret to join us for our party on the canal in September but she says she can’t make it”.

“I don’t think she really approves of our relationship, Craig”.

“No! I’m sure she’s not like that. Why do you think that?”

“Because of our age difference”.

Now outside, the temperature was rising and the air balmy. Craig removed his jacket and rolled up his sleeves. He jumped from the hall’s steep climb of steps on to the pavement and began dancing and punching the air, imitating Rocky or Muhammad Ali.

“We’re the best! We’re the greatest!” he shouted, continuing to dance in the street.

Your love for him and attraction to his youth, enthusiasm and energy were immense at that moment.

Joining you on the steps and lighting his cigarette from yours, he said, “There’s plenty of time. She’ll change her mind by September”.

Neither of you knew, of course, that by September you would be dead.

FADE TO BLACK

≈