Argument: While flashbacks are helpful, often times incorporating important background information in present time storyline plays off better and keeps the reader engaged. Claim: There is no such thing as too much back story but only with certain ways of revealing the information. Flashbacks tend to slow down the story and drag out. "Less is more," find ways to cut down words to paragraphs instead of pages when explaining. Evidence: "keep background information on a need-to-know basis. Figure out what readers really, truly need to know to understand a character and her motivations--and let the rest stay underwater."

Argument: Flashbacks, if utilized efficiently, can be a revealing part of a story. Claim: Flashbacks have to have a proper transition in and out of the story. They connect with the story and give more exposure however cannot deter from the main story itself so much that events are overshadowed. Make sure flashbacks are motivated Evidence: "By all means use flashbacks, but for good reason: not because you want to use them, but because your story demands them. Ask: Does the flashback deepen our understanding of a character or a relationship? Does it provide needed background? In the end, it comes down to what a story needs."

Argument: Death is defined not only by what is causing it but how the individual handles the strides of it. Claim: The disease pales in comparison to how the person chooses to live their life. If a person is encouraged and allowed to act negatively, they will be so. Finding the passion in something to throw oneself in is more valuable then giving up or submitting. Evidence: "The real question, though, is whether any lasting strength can be gained from an account like this one--strength that derives from knowing ourselves (as Morrie and Mitch do not) to be the legatees of inviolable traditions, cultural and professional alike, as well as members of a vast and enduring human community that stretches back into history and forward into the experience of those yet to come."