criticism gone awry

Tanaqui tweaver at
Tue Aug 24 21:32:42 EDT 1999


[_Fire and Hemlock_]
+ re-reading the ending before writing my reply, I came across the one line
+ I've never understood at all, at all.  It's on the last page (I'll put in
+ the sentence before, in case people don't have the book handy).  "She
+ thought of all the things Tom might have said - which Seb would have said -
+ just now to change her mind.  It was the things not said that showed they
+ might have a great deal in common."   I just don't get that.  I know Polly
+ said that she and Tom had nothing in common, but I'd figured that was just
+ to "lose" in the contest, to save Tom, and not something she really meant,
+ any more than she meant the other things she said then.  If it's Seb and
+ Tom, I see what they have in common, but here she's contrasting them.

I think that she is realising that Seb would have tried to persuade her with
a big stream of logic, designed to convince rather than to argue. Or more
railroad than persuade, really.

The fact that Tom shuts up, so like Polly's withdrawal when she thinks she's
merely embarassing him, shows that they are both reserved and imaginative
people who won't try to nail down each other (maybe Seb had a point in 
labelling Polly as The Girlfriend when she didn't contest it, but it's still
horrid exploitation) in roles. Tom hasn't tried to own her - he's been 
painfully fair about his exploitation of her. 

To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at

More information about the Dwj mailing list