Sharon
I agree, Jade. I just didn't find the case particularly interesting, and I didn't feel a connection to the victim. You 'd think I would empathize, given that he was blind, and a man who wrote letters for all these other people but who never found the courage to say what he himself was feeling about his writing partner. I just felt that information maybe came a little too late in the game; I felt more in five minutes for the guy on the train who talked with Sweets than I did for the victim whose case was discussed throughout the entire hour. *shrugs*jade.stormcloud wrote:On the down side, I thought the case, & especially the vic, seemed to take a backseat to the main characters. When they showed the scene where Sweets revealed the vic's secret love, I found that I just didn't care.
That's fascinating, Steph! Well said.ThyneAlone wrote:The idea of communicating feelings at a distance, through someone else, was a strong theme with some depth. Brennan's realisation that Angela had humanised her books, as she has also helped humanise her character, and her typical desire to make things right, were quite moving. But in the same way, Angela's contribution to the books turns out to be partly - at least here - a way of working through her feelings for Hodgins. And the victim was blind. Maybe we are all a bit deliberately blind about the effect we have on others and the emotions they arouse in us.
Sinkwriter72 wrote: I don't have a ton of thoughts on this one, just a few things.
Well, I gave you a 'few things' to comment upon, if you want to get back on topic, sister! Heeheheee.skftex wrote:Maybe I should get back on topic though? LOL
Sinkwriter72 wrote:...You were too busy thinking about TJ and Page 187.![]()
![]()