For Wednesday: King, Carrie, pp. 175-277 (end of Part Two)



Group “B” should answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Part Two offers extensive transcripts from The White Commission Report, which interviews several eyewitnesses on the stand. How does the lawyer questioning these witnesses try to lead and guide their testimony? What seems to be their agenda? How might this tie into our earlier discussions of “forgetting”?

Q2: In Norma Watson’s recollection (from the so-called book, We Survived the Black Prom), she writes, “I knew right away, even before it hit them, that it was blood. Stella Horan thought it was paint, but I had a premonition, like like the time my brother got hit by a hay truck” (198). Why is it significant that many people in the book claim to have premonitions of certain events, and most claim to know what Carrie was thinking and feeling? What ‘taboo’ might this hint at, which the scientists and lawyers who investigate are keen not to follow up on?

Q3: How do people describe the crowd’s reaction to Carrie’s bloodbath? Why was the laughing “raw and hysterical and awful” (199)? What else do eyewitnesses describe or remember about the minutes immediately after her final humiliation? Is this the expected conclusion of a ritual, or a ritual gone wrong?

Q4: As the book goes on, King writes with more parenthesis and disjointed narration, particularly when Sue finds Carrie dying. What is he trying to make his readers ‘see’ with these passages? Why does he often abandon traditional grammar and capitalization when writing this way?

Comments