Observe that Andy’s last act might have been that of a deluded brain, and that Stiles’s vision of the Lucky Star might have been one of hallucination. The more imaginative reader will regard the ghost-ship as objective, and will “believe” in the delayed union of Hope and Andrew.
Read Richard Middleton’s “The Ghost Ship,” for a frankly humorous treatment of theme. What other stories in Mr. O’Brien’s collections have an element of the supernatural?
Try presenting this story in pure English, from the author’s point of view. Use the objective method, abstaining from entrance into the mind of any character. Take up the narrative at the point of Andrew’s arrival at Stiles’s, and let his “queerness” emerge through his acts and speeches.
How much creative work must you accomplish to make a consistent character of Stiles? (Here, Stiles, the narrator, must be studied through the story he presents. In the dramatic presentation of the story, he will become more objective.)
THE WATER-HOLE
General Method. The immediate story of the water-hole is unfolded by the “rehearsed” method. What gain results from telling in a city restaurant an experience of the wilderness? Study the easy and natural way in which Hardy’s story is brought forward. “You’ve got a concrete instance back of that” (page 18) signifies that the narrator will cite a case to prove his point. Recall other stories told for similar purposes; e.g., O. Henry’s “The Theory and the Hound.”
Study the value of the two “I” narrators in the same story, with respect to increasing verisimilitude and making the reader “believe.” Kipling’s “The Courting of Dinah Shadd,” for example, uses the same tactics.
Try re-telling the story by the dramatic method. Omit the enveloping city setting; transfer Hardy from the first to the third person, and keep the “spotlight” on him. Begin with the arrival of Hardy at the home of the Whitneys, and follow the course of events to their dénouement. What do you lose in richness and effectiveness? Do you gain anything in vividness or directness?
Plot. Having studied preceding plot analyses, the student will find small difficulty in settling upon the main struggle in the action, the complicating line of interest, and the climactic incident. The surprise ending, however, calls for comment, in that to achieve it the author used a natural and yet somewhat novel device. Hardy has been speaking of himself, of course, in the first person. When, therefore, he refers to the love that “one of the young engineers” had for Mrs. Whitney we do not suppose that he and the engineer were identical. Hence, we receive the shock in the final paragraph: “On the brown flesh of his forearm, I saw a queer, ragged white cross—the scar a snake bite leaves when it is cicatrized.” On reflection, one recognizes that Whitney’s slight deception arose from motives of delicacy, and is more than justifiable—it pleases, in that it refines Hardy’s character. Deception as a means, in general, to create surprise is common (See “The Mastery of Surprise,” Bookman, October, 1917); but it is given here a particularly excellent turn.
Observe, also, that the plot presents a variation of the familiar “triangle.” The love story, however, is buried beneath the greater theme; and therefore, although it terminates in a lack of so-called poetic justice, yet its combination with the main line of interest gives utmost satisfaction.