Skip to main content

In "Charles," why did Laurie’s parents take so long to find out the truth about Charles?

There are several textual clues that can be used to support inferences as to why it took so long for Laurie's parents to discover the truth, but there is no direct statement made in the story that explains it.


The opening paragraph describes Laurie as a sweet-voiced nursery school tot who has turned into a swaggering, belt wearing boy who forgets to say goodbye to his mother. One could infer that one of the reasons the parents are slow to figure out the truth is because they are having difficulty letting go of the image of their sweet young son. They close their eyes to the changes going on in Laurie that go beyond his physical appearance.


The author gives several clues throughout the story that show that Laurie's behavior is similar to Charles's. He shouts raucously on two occasions: once on his first day home from kindergarten, and once the first day Charles has to stay after school. He speaks insolently to his father, saying "Hi pop, ya old dust mop" and telling a joke "Look up, look down, look at my thumb, gee you're dumb." He also spills his baby sister's milk. 


But because of the invention of Charles, the parents don't suspect Laurie, they simply think that Charles has been a bad influence on their son. 


It is interesting that there is no communication between adults in this situation until the PTA meeting at the conclusion of the story. The teacher doesn't call Laurie's parents to tell of his unruly behavior in school. Laurie's parents don't talk to the teacher or other school personnel about their concerns about Charles. Laurie's mother is desperate to meet Charles's mother at the PTA meeting, but she doesn't make any efforts to try to get in touch with her prior to that meeting. 


The invention of Charles appears to be the perfect ruse for Laurie to deflect the truth and consequences for his bad behavior.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more