Page 2 of 2

Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 8:19 pm
by Liz
theresa wrote:
DeppInTheHeartOfTexas wrote:How can we be sure it wasn't Crawley's? :-?

I don't think we can be sure about anything in this book, DITHOT -- but I got the impression it couldn't be Crawley because on page 300, after Walter announced her pregnancy, Finch writes:

Beside me I heard Crawley muttering under his breath:
"Impossible. . .nothing short of a miracle. . ."


So I was thinking that for whatever reason, Crawley couldn't get her pregnant.


Good point, Theresa.

The name Chester was given as a cover for Walter. I think Mina chose the name Chester (as opposed to Walter) because she was covering for the fact that Chester was not Arthur's baby. I also think that what Mina was trying to tell Finch in her letter about the Emily Dickenson poem was that things were not as they would seem and that would mean--her child. The timing was right for Chester to be Finch’s child. So my vote goes to Finch.

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:17 am
by DeppInTheHeartOfTexas
theresa wrote:
DeppInTheHeartOfTexas wrote:How can we be sure it wasn't Crawley's? :-?

I don't think we can be sure about anything in this book, DITHOT -- but I got the impression it couldn't be Crawley because on page 300, after Walter announced her pregnancy, Finch writes:

Beside me I heard Crawley muttering under his breath:
"Impossible. . .nothing short of a miracle. . ."


So I was thinking that for whatever reason, Crawley couldn't get her pregnant.


Good catch, theresa. I wonder if Crawley thought that after Mina's "miscarriage" she couldn't get pregnant again, or perhaps he meant to cause that? :eyebrow:

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:58 am
by Betty Sue
At the end of the story I was sure we were supposed to assume it was Finch's. And again (just like when I read "Forget the Arrow---I have met the Archer!"), I was surprised to get chills on reading about the boy's "uncanny" resemblance. But I agree with the others who find it strange that Finch never exhibited any particular paternal interest. Maybe it would have shown up if there'd been one more paragraph... :writer:

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:27 am
by nebraska
I vote for the pigeon.......well, sort of :blush:

My immediate reaction was that Walter was the father.......or that perhaps the infant was Walter re-incarnated. I know, incest is icky stuff, but this is fiction and Walter was already dead so it isn't really incest. I just thought the baby resulted somehow from Walter's spirit. Maybe Walter gave his sister the one gift she truly wanted............I suppose he could have used Finch's body to do the work......

And no, I am not certain of my answer at all. But I had as strong a sense of Walter's hand in this birth as I did of anything else in the book.

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:38 am
by Betty Sue
Woooooo, Nebraska!!! :freaked: Interesting!!!

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:41 am
by Liz
OK, I have to admit the thought crossed my mind, too. But it was only a fleeting one. :-?

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:38 pm
by Larkwoodgirl
definitely Finch

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:00 pm
by SamIam
When I finished the book, I thought it was Finch too, but I don't know. Gangemi could be making us think it was when it could be another illusion. However, the timing is right so who knows?? I still say it was Finch.

SamIam

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:20 pm
by suec
nebraska, spooky! But I have just checked the description of Walter in his photograph:
"Something off to the right had caught the attention of those bedroom eyes, and though I knew this was only a staged pose in some portrait studio, I couldn't help reading into his look an eerie prescience, as if he had just caught sight of a stage door left open in the wings of this world."

There are some interesting echoes in Finch's dream:
Crawley was nowhere to be seen - my unconscious must have buried up to his neck in the sand somewhere offstage... Hearing his name, Chester turned to look at his mother over his small shoulder, and I glimpsed in that backward glance just how much the boy took after his father..."

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 3:56 pm
by Liz
suec wrote:nebraska, spooky! But I have just checked the description of Walter in his photograph:
"Something off to the right had caught the attention of those bedroom eyes, and though I knew this was only a staged pose in some portrait studio, I couldn't help reading into his look an eerie prescience, as if he had just caught sight of a stage door left open in the wings of this world."

There are some interesting echoes in Finch's dream:
Crawley was nowhere to be seen - my unconscious must have buried up to his neck in the sand somewhere offstage... Hearing his name, Chester turned to look at his mother over his small shoulder, and I glimpsed in that backward glance just how much the boy took after his father..."


And I just assumed that Finch was really referring himself. :eyebrow:

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 3:59 pm
by DeppInTheHeartOfTexas
I too am puzzled by Finch's seeming lack of parental emotion. I'll say this, Gangemi certainly has put up both sides (sometimes more than two) to each question we have raised. :eyebrow:

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:41 pm
by ThirdArm
I'm going for the simple and obvious: Finch.

Although I like Nebraska's theory. :-O

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:42 am
by dharma_bum
suec wrote:I suppose if he did identify the father as Stanlowe, then it might suggest that he is the accomplice.
I don't know who the father is. But just for the sake of argument, I vote for Pike. I daresay a case could be made: least likely candidate in some ways as he is so allied to Crawley - but he is always there in the background. He is even mentioned in Finch's dream, albeit "offstage" with Crawley.

Pike again! I must say he is a delightfully subversive choice. But the Freudian award has go to Stanlowe. After all, he becomes her "gardener."

Hate to say it... but the answer is probably the obvious. Finch.

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:58 am
by Gilbert's Girl
I think it could be Stanlowe but as has been suggested it could be Walter, but to think that you would have to aknowledge that he was real and somehow planted the seed within, but not physically if you get what I mean. this would then explain how he knew she was pregnant before anyone else.
But that just adds to the complete confusion and befuddling of the story that Gangemi has deliberately written.