Originally Posted by Richard G
Paul takes on the task of being a neighbor to Mr. Chester,
- Is that in the same way that MC took on the 'task' of saving his best friend's daughter?
- But why does he? What is his motivation?
"Resolving to be a better neighbor"
"Paul casually mentioned that he would be happy to help out"
It's all 'what' but not 'why'.
I had wanted to present Paul as an affable man who takes on Mr. Chester as a “project.” Having lost his own father at a young age, he may understandably seek friendship with and approval of an older man. He also wants to be a good neighbor. But Mr. Chester rebuffs his overtures at first, withholding his name, not going to the barbecue, and failing to invite him in after Paul helps him with the firewood because he knows who Paul is and does not want to reveal his secret. Nevertheless, Paul persists.
Paul knows that Mr. Chester saved his sister’s life, but at the price of abandoning Paul
- there's no real mention of a relationship between the two. MC was the father's best friend (we're told) but simply calling someone 'Uncle Joe' doesn't make for a deep relationship. And being 'like one of the family' mean that much when you look at Paul's indifference to his sister's illness.
and possibly hastening John Mortenson’s death.
- How? Whatever JM did he did as an adult, and, presumably, was motivated by saving his daughter. One might have thought the joy of that outweighed the sadness of what he lost. But apparently not.
When he learns Mr. Chester’s identity, fairly or unfairly, Paul holds him at least partly responsible for his father’s decline and death. He is not indifferent, but rather, he has mixed feelings. He feels indebted to Mr. Chester but on another level he resents his participation in the embezzlement. We probably all feel that Paul’s father had to save his daughter at any cost, but the theft of hundreds of thousands of dollars could have resulted in a long jail term and disgrace. Paul’s father was unable to handle his guilt or fear of discovery. We don’t know if he committed suicide, but more importantly for the story, Paul seems to think he did and that Mr. Chester contributed to it.
The story is meant to show that even when we perform the kindest acts with the most altruistic of motives, we can also cause harm by entangling our lives with others’.
- IF MC did any harm, which I don't see (and nor does Paul) he did it by 'disentangling'.
Paul begins the story wanting to entangle his life with Mr. Chester’s. At the end, he sees that such entanglement is risky and can cause unwanted consequences.
It is possible that by returning to Mr. Chester’s life and forcing him to consider the effects of his actions,
- What effects? The girl was saved. He knew he was sacrificing the friendship (though that seems vastly overblown. All JM had to do was wait a couple of years, quit his job, move the family to where MC is and start over. Killing himself, having just saved his child, simply doesn't ring true. And what kind of 'hiding' is it when all you do is drop the first syllable of your name? The greatest risk he faced was being blackballed from the industry, hardly the end of the world - especially when compared with the possible loss of his child.)
You have given me the idea that my theme about neighbors and entanglement would be much clearer if Amy had died in spite of the expensive and heroic medical intervention. That would, perhaps, give Paul’s father a much more plausible reason to slip into a possibly suicidal depression, but would also give Paul a much clearer motivation for his resentment of Mr. Chester’s well-intended, altruistic, but criminal and meddling “entanglement” with his family.
Paul caused stress that precipitated Mr. Chester’s sudden decline.
- what stress?
I wanted the reader to appreciate the messiness of involvement in the lives of other people and our inability to know with certainty what the effects of our most well-meant involvement might be.
But your central character doesn't really care.
"nor did Paul feel inclined to assign him any blame."
"neither did Paul feel any gratitude for Mr. Chester’s sacrifice in saving his sister."
If he is indifferent why shouldn't I be the same? And who thinks that they know, with certainty, what will happen?
This is also solved by having Amy die.
"He would never tell Amy, his mother, or even Susan about what Mr. Chester had done."
If he'd not done anything blameworthy how is it a secret to be kept? And why deny Amy a chance to meet/say thank you to someone who had saved her life?
Also solved by Amy’s death.
|