“What Wasn’t Said” tells the story of two friends
that have a falling out and never reconcile. The story is puzzling, for sure. I
really don’t understand what the narrator felt was so horrible that it couldn’t
be reconciled even after Peers’ many attempts to move past the issue. The
narrator develops a weird detachment from Peers that it seems Peers cannot
accept. The language throughout the piece is clear and effective, with a good
mix of dialogue, action and exposition. I enjoyed the dissolution of the
relationship as described in verbal exchanges. The story is very clear as far
as what happens, I think this is one of its strongest points, but it is not as
clear on why things happened the way they did, which I suppose can also be a
strong point depending on perspective.
I guess I’m just having a real tough time with the
ending. The voice within the story is so detached—it carries no nostalgia or
love for Peers or working on the boats or anything mentioned. There is also a
strong sense of suppressed emotions—the narrator would rather not think about
things than think about them—but without the involuntary confusion and
frustration that often (in my opinion) accompanies suppression and repression. Why
focus on the neighbor in the final paragraph? Why leave the reader with that
image rather than Peers? For the record, I like the questions asked; I like how
the narrator internalizes a situation he has nothing to do with. I can identify
with that. But I have a tough time grasping just why I’m left with the thought
of the neighbor.
No comments:
Post a Comment