Skip to main content

What might the man's warning to Eckels foreshadow?

Eckels is warned several times during this story.  I'm not 100% sure which warning the question is referring too.  It doesn't really matter though.  Each warning to Eckels foreshadows the same thing.  They foreshadow that Eckels is going to get scared and ruin the present/future.  The first warning to Eckels is that the trip is dangerous.  It's so dangerous, he might not come back alive. 



"Does this safari guarantee I come back alive?"


"We guarantee nothing," said the official, "except the dinosaurs."



The second warning to Eckels is more official.  The warning this time is a signed release document.  The document is meant to force customers into making sure that they are fully committed to the dinosaur hunt.  People who are not mentally ready tend to panic.  



"Sign this release. Anything happens to you, we're not responsible. Those dinosaurs are hungry."


Eckels flushed angrily. "Trying to scare me!"


"Frankly, yes. We don't want anyone going who'll panic at the first shot."



The warning foreshadows exactly what happens to Eckels.  He panics so badly that he can't control where he is walking.  


The third warning deals with where Eckels is going to end up walking.  The safari customers are specifically told about staying on the path.  It is strongly emphasized to not leave the path.  Leaving the path might lead to irrevocable changes in the timeline.  



"Its purpose is to keep you from touching this world of the past in any way. Stay on the Path. Don't go off it. I repeat. Don't go off. For any reason!"



Those three warnings all foreshadow Eckels's disastrous encounter with the dinosaur.  Eckels realizes that the dinosaur is the most dangerous animal that he has ever faced.  Next, he panics.  His panic then leads him to step off of the path and kill a butterfly, which causes an entire societal and governmental change in the present.  

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

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more