Skip to main content

As Winnie tries to fall asleep, she can't decide whether or not to believe the Tucks' story. Would you have believed it? Why or why not?

This is ultimately a matter of personal opinion, but I will reflect on the text and provide you with my thoughts on the matter.


After Winnie meets Jesse in the woods outside Treegap and watches him drinking from the spring, she is kidnapped by Mae Tuck and the boys and brought back to the Tucks' house. Mae tells Winnie the story of how the Tucks discovered the spring and the consequences they faced after drinking from it. Although they initially didn't notice anything funny about the water (aside from its odd taste), they realized something was terribly wrong after Jesse fell out of a tree, landed on his head, and didn't have the slightest injury. Over and over again the Tucks received what should have been fatal injuries, but were left unscathed. After their appearances remain the same for year after year, they finally come to understand that the water they had consumed at the spring had left them immortal.


When Winnie hears this story, she thinks it is ridiculous, and had I been in Winnie's position, I would have been inclined to agree with her! As a young girl who has seen very little of the world outside of Treegap, this claim would seem impossible. I would likely have thought that the Tucks were crazy and were trying to keep me calm so that I did not run off in the middle of the night after having been kidnapped. This story seems like the type of preposterous lie that a sociopath would perpetuate in order to develop the trust of his or her victim. That being said, I may also have been so curious about the story that I would have stuck around to see if any of it was true... which is exactly what Winnie does! 

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