There is a mistake in the story, I think?
Maybe I'm missing something, though, since no one else seems to have mentioned this in the thread (I may do a search to see if there is any commentary on this). Perhaps someone like Bev Vincent would like to offer an opinion, or Ms. Mod? I may very well be wrong and misunderstanding something, or am forgetting something in the narrative that reconciles what confuses me; after all, I believe this story was previously published, and any contradictions would have been caught by the time it was collected.
Still, I loved the story. At one point I thought this was how it was going to end (although the story would need to have been written slightly differently for this conclusion):
King presumably meant the lawyer's name was written in the sand, but on page 87, second paragraph (by that I mean second full paragraph on the page, I'm not considering the incomplete one at the top; is that the universal way of counting paragraphs on a page?), the Judge says that his lawyer, the one he is telling the tale to, can do the legal work for the Sarasota County Beach and Wildlife Preservation Society in regard to one of the requests in the Judge's will, the one pertaining to declaring the island with the dune forever wild (which I assume means it will then be protected and that people will be disallowed from stepping foot upon it?); he says he would like him to do it pro bono, but that it is his choice whether or not he will do it for free. How can he do that if he is dead? Presumably the man will die at any time before a month (I think it is) after his name is written in the sand, so yes, he still could have time to do it, but since the Judge wanted to get the will done quickly, and because of the way the ending was written, this would seem to contradict that paragraph.
Maybe I'm missing something, though, since no one else seems to have mentioned this in the thread (I may do a search to see if there is any commentary on this). Perhaps someone like Bev Vincent would like to offer an opinion, or Ms. Mod? I may very well be wrong and misunderstanding something, or am forgetting something in the narrative that reconciles what confuses me; after all, I believe this story was previously published, and any contradictions would have been caught by the time it was collected.
Still, I loved the story. At one point I thought this was how it was going to end (although the story would need to have been written slightly differently for this conclusion):
The word written in the dune would have been either Mankind, or Earth.
Another thing I thought is that it would have been fun if, somehow, the power of the dune was connected to the "Obits" story. Obviously both of those supernatural occurrences are different in nature -- one tells the future, one can make the future -- but it was something I nevertheless thought, as both of the stories' themes seemed to be similar. I should also say I don't necessarily want the two stories to be connected, as maybe it's best for both of these worlds to exist in their own respective collection of fictional letters.
Another thing I thought is that it would have been fun if, somehow, the power of the dune was connected to the "Obits" story. Obviously both of those supernatural occurrences are different in nature -- one tells the future, one can make the future -- but it was something I nevertheless thought, as both of the stories' themes seemed to be similar. I should also say I don't necessarily want the two stories to be connected, as maybe it's best for both of these worlds to exist in their own respective collection of fictional letters.
Last edited: