What perspective is the author telling the story from?

The book I was reading when I chose this question is The Amulet of Samarkand and it is written by the author Jonathan Stroud. In this book Mr. Stroud changes between 2 different perspectives constantly. The first of the 2 perspectives is the young magician's apprentice, Nathaniel Underwood's perspective, and the second is the djiin, Bartimeus of Uruk's perspective. Bartimeus is Nathaniel's personal demon slave, so from his perspective, magicians are evil and malicious, since they are always imprisoning djinn and forcing them to do things. But from Nathaniel's point of view, the magicians are constantly protecting everyone from the evil djinn. So the two are always trying to prove that their side is right. So you can't really say that he is telling it from one perspective, and that makes all the difference of a good story, and a not-so-good one.

What would happen if you changed one of the major elements of this story?

Once again I am reading a fantasy-fiction book to answer these questions. This time, the book is called Dragons of Autumn Twilight, a book by two, (in my opinion), very good writers, Margaret Weis, and Tracy Hickman. This is the first of many books in the Dragonlance Chronicles, which is a series totally based on in a world of magic, and wonder. In this particular volume, Tanis, the half-elven ranger is on a quest to find out the origin of a strange staff for which armies are fighting to control, with Flint the dwarf fighter, Sturm the human knight, Caramon the human berserk, his twin brother, Raistlin the human magician, Tasselhoff the adventurous kender rogue, and two barbarians, (called Plains People). But if you took out the adventurous kender rogue, then the whole story would have gone a different way. Because Tasselhoff was the one who convinced everyone to go on the quest in the first place. Without him, there is no story at all. but you cannot take out anyone else either because they all play a vital role in keeping the story flowing.

How does this event/problem in the story affect us today?

For this question, I read the book called Empire. It is a book written by Orson Scott Card, a formidable Sci-Fi writer who wrote a famous novel called Ender's Game, and the many sequels that followed. The reason this book affects us even now, is because the author wrote about the possibility of another civil war. Except this one would be fought on the basis of the red-states not following the Constitution and the blue-states taking their revenge by murdering the President. I think that this war might still be a problem because there are still people that don't like the way current politics are going and would be willing to assassinate the President to change things. And that is why I believe that this book affects us right now. Because this is an actual possibility for the future of our country

How do you know the author is presenting factual information?

The book I am in the middle of right now is a non-fiction book about a confidential computer break-in that happened some years ago. Clifford Stoll is the author of this book is one of the actual characters of this book so he narrates it himself. And to answer the question, I know that this story is true because of 2 very obvious(to me) reasons.

1.The book is labeled NON-FICTION.
2.There is an old article about the actual break-in in the back of the book.