Hi, Alexander!  Recently you wrote in a message to Roy Witt:  
    
  ak>  [...] IMHO, English Grammar is very clear on this  
  ak>  account.  It says that past events must be described  
  ak>  with the Past Tense.  Find me the opposite statement.  
    
    
          I found a lot of good stuff when I googled "English grammar  
  historical  
  present tense".  IMHO half the battle is knowing the technical terms....  :-  
  ))  
    
    
    
  ak>  So, the 100% correct version will be:  
  ak>  A father of a big family came home tired as a dog.  
                                           |dog-tired  
    
  ak>  His children surrounded him  
    
  ak>  and nosily  
            |I think you mean "noisily"  ;-)  
    
  ak>  demanded him to play with them.  
        |demanded (that) he play with them.  
    
  ak>  At last the man gave up: "Oh, well, let's play Red  
  ak>  Square and Mausoleum.  
  ak>  I'll be Lenin, and you, the guard of honour."  
    
  ak>  The first variant can be seen as an informal variant.  
    
    
          It's often, but not always, used informally... [see above].  If I  
  were  
  to comment on the original example I'd be inclined to use the same tense, e.  
  g.  
  "As I understand your story the father wants a bit of peace & quiet.  The  
  kids  
  are full of beans, so he proposes a game which allows him to catch forty  
  winks  
  while they work off their excess energy.  Lenin may no longer be revered as  
  he  
  once was... but I think most parents will get the drift either way."  
    
          I would also use the historical present tense if I were writing a  
  book  
  review:  "When Aunt Polly asks Tom to whitewash the fence, Tom gets other  
  kids  
  to do the job by making it seem like fun."  In both stories the alleged  
  events  
  occurred some time ago.  As you say, however, the insight is timeless....  
  :-)  
    
    
    
    
  --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+  
   * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)