How does Jhumpa Lahiri use the minor action and subtle details to express the unmet needs of the characters?

Jhumpa Lahiri does a fantastic job of putting in minor details like the exchange of gum, the details about the use of the camera, the use of the type of clothes that each character is wearing. All these minor details tell a lot about the characters. Usually these minor things are described in a way which makes you feel that the details are being thrown at you but in this short story Lahiri does not do that. For example, Mr. Das is glued to his camera all the time. He never leaves it and seems to care more about the pictures than the holiday itself. It probably shows his need to showcase the happy moments of his life, his need to save those happy moments for later. The gum is an example to conversation. Gum is offered to Mr. Kapasi when Mrs. Das starts taking interest in his story. Gum is also offered to Bobby after he is attacked by the monkeys. These examples show that gum is a minor but significant detail.
In one part of the story Mr. Kapasi is thankful that he was wearing his grey suit and not the other one. This is a minor detail but it shows the growing affection that Mr. Kapasi has for Mrs. Das. Even a detail as small as the color of the suit is shown significant by the author.
Another minor but significant detail is the doll. The author describes the doll as a gorl who's hair has been cut and who is naked. The little girl slams the doll again and again due to frustration. It shows that she is angry at her mother and therefore is taking out her anger on the doll. Lahiri does a very brilliant job of showing the little girl's emotions through her actions towards the doll. She is probably thinking about doing what she did to the doll to her mother. Again Lahiri does a brilliant job of making minor details significant.

Why are writers driven to write, according to Tobias Wolff? Also, what does Wolff say should be our motivation in reading short stories?

"The social act of a solitary act"(Pg.11, 19) is how Jack Yeats described writing. This line implies a lot of things about the life of a writer. Why is it the act of a solitary man? Does this mean that a writer is someone who is alone and cannot express their views and feelings? On thinking more clearly I found that this line made much sense. It said that it was a social act, which probably pointed to influencing other people's lives, of a solitary man in my opinion meant any person who cannot or has difficulty in expressing their views and opinions, someone who has no one to share his/her experiences and imaginations with. So in short a writer is driven to write because he/she is influencing other people's lives with their experiences and because it gives them a way of telling the world about their ideas. Also he says that "romance" is what keeps them going. "Making life where there was none"(Pg.16 29) is what Wolff describes as the writers's ambition. I think this is one of the only reason why a writer is interested in writing. To create something out of nothing, which is impossible scientifically, is the goal and passion of a writer.
As Wolff says there are a lot of things that motivate us to read. The most common of which would be the hunger for knowledge. Usually people are interested in knowing how everything around them works, what is beyond their eyesight, etcetera. This huger for knowledge makes people learn more and more and people basically end up learning about their surroundings for the first 20 to 30 years. But that is not what Wolff says should be our motivation in reading. According to him our motivation to read should be to look for that life where there really was none. To recognize the imagination or the experiences of the author. That is what I think Wolff says should be our motivation for reading.

No News From Aushwitz: What is the implication of giving a newspaper article the title 'No News...'? Also, in what section does Rosenthal's piece belongs in the NYT and why?

I think "No news from Aushwitz" implies that there is nothing worth reporting, not that it is a boring place which will not interest anyone but because it did not have any recent activity and therefore there is nothing new to report. The author probably wants to say that everything is the same and that it was nothing noteworthy. The title "No news from Aushwitz" was probably chosen because it makes the reader think why there is no news. It makes the reader think that Aushwitz is a deserted and dangerous place which is why no news is available.
I don't think this article can be turned into a newspaper article. It has too many thoughts from the author's point of view and not as many facts. If it were a newspaper article then it would go in the travel section of the NYT. Probably because it describes a now tourist spot to show the past inhumanities done by mankind upon their own kind. The article clearly shows that it was meant for a travel section as there are tourists and giudes in the article itself. Also it is noteworthy that the article gives some imformation like "12000 inhabitants", "....miles from the main town", and such. This kind of articles which have information are usually found on the front page like ".... number of people died in a plane crash", "number of votes a party has after an election", etcetra, which shows that this article could be on the front page with all the statistics as well.
It would also be suitable for the side sections of any page because this article is very interesting and therefore will fit into any page's side sections. The article has information as well as an emotional effect to it and therefore I think that it would be best fit on the 1st page near the ending.