posted
*spoiler* do not read further if you've not read Speaker for the Dead...
I'm re-reading from the beginning entirely in preparation for SotG. I'm in SftD and I happened to notice this - am I reading this wrong?
p. 235 first paragraph: " ...The Speaker, however, followed lines of thought that were completely alien to Miro. Even though he wore a human shape, it made Miro wonder if Ender was really a framling - he could be as baffling as the piggies."
This made it sound as though Miro was thinking - "can Ender be a framling?" even though Miro does not know Ender as Ender; rather, he knows him as the Speaker.
It isn't until p. 239 when Human states that the Speaker has "killed all the hive queen's sisters" that the thought of the possibility is even forced upon Miro:
"Miro was stunned. It was one thing for the piggies to decide that this was the Speaker who wrote the book. But how could they reach the unbelievable conclusion that he was somehow guilty of the Xenocide? Who did they think he was, the monster Ender? And yet there sat the Speaker for the Dead, tears running down his cheeks, his eyes closed, as if Human's accusation had the force of truth."
Am I mis-reading the point of view? It just made me pause when I read it...
Posts: 142 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never noticed that before. I see what you mean, but you have to remember that it's not Miro, or even his thoughts which refer to him as Ender, it's the 3rd person omniscient narrator (if that's the proper literary term. I don't remember anymore). Still, it might have been better to call him "Andrew" or "the Speaker" that time.
posted
Thanks for the reply, neo-dragon. The third-person narrator does explain the inconsistency, but I do agree, though, that it may have been more clear with another reference. I had never noticed this in any previous reading, either. (Clarity of thought this time? Nah, not possible...)
Posts: 142 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
