Now, we’ve got a serial killer’s case in the background and a story full of curiously unreal elements which may be explained with a dozen of theories (the story could be completely symbolic, Arnold could be an alien, etc.), but the simplest background would be that the whole setting is a nightmare induced by the murders and driven by the desires and fears of an adolescent girl. If that’s the case, the short story doesn’t indicate a shift between reality and dream – just like we don’t realize such a shift as we fall asleep and begin dreaming. Basically everything becomes improbable about Arnold upon is arrival to the house: he has an impossible name, a curious car with his name on it and ornamented with several other lines, and an appearance like that of imperfectly pictured characters in a vague dream. His friend in the car – being more or less out of Connie’s attention – is seen almost merely as an animated doll. The above are completed with something perfectly improbable: Arnold is as omniscient as far as the story goes.
Not only real and symbolic/dreamt elements are mixed up in the story, but there’s also no hint whether distinguishing the two is important or not – the story focuses on Connies’ experience about her desires (those she regards completely mature), her fright upon getting close to their fulfillment, and her decision (or involuntary drifting) to actually fulfill them.
Nincsenek megjegyzések:
Megjegyzés küldése