Skip to main content

In Hatchet, what did Brian mean when he realized his mind and body had made a connection?

Brian means that his mind and body are working in perfect unison.  There is no longer a disconnect between thoughts and actions.  His mind registers a stimulus of some kind, and his body instantly responds without being told to do so by his conscious mind.  


The full quote is as follows:



None of that used to be in Brian and now it was a part of him, a changed part of him, a grown part of him, and the two things, his mind and his body, had come together as well, had made a connection with each other that he didn't quite understand. When his ears heard a sound or his eyes saw a sight his mind took control of his body. Without his thinking, he moved to face the sound or sight, moved to make ready for it, to deal with it.



The quote appears in chapter 11 of Gary Paulsen's Hatchet.  The chapter mainly focuses on how Brian's mind and body are changing.  Physically, he is becoming much more lean and tan.  That makes sense.  He's surviving outside with a minimal calorie intake.  The changes in his mind are more important though.  Not only is Brian's environment changing his body, but it is also changing his mind.  He sees nature differently.  He has started to see the meaning in certain natural events.  For example, the chapter goes on to explain that Brian could see ripples in the water, and he knew what kind of wind was needed to make that particular ripple.  Because his mind is more in tune with his environment, his body is also better prepared to respond to that environment. 

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