Karen’s answer to “I wish we had learned what happened to Erik? That was the central mystery to the story. And was Dap…” > Likes and Comments

58 likes · 
Comments Showing 1-14 of 14 (14 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Sarah (new)

Sarah Got it! But is it ever explained why Daphne didn’t tell the police?


message 2: by Karen (new)

Karen No, it's never explained. But she was probably afraid of getting into trouble. Remember, at the time she was a teenage runaway. Or maybe she was the one operating the boom on the boat and thought she would be held responsible for Eric's death.


message 3: by Sarah (new)

Sarah Good thoughts. I wish the author had made this more clear.


message 4: by Cindy (new)

Cindy Lane Then what is the significance of the cut anchor ? If it was an accident , why is the anchor rope cut clean?


message 5: by Sarah (new)

Sarah Hmmmm…. Frustrating to have such an unclear ending.


message 6: by Karen (new)

Karen You're right; the author doesn't explain the significance of the the cut anchor. All I know is that Tova's brother, Lars, taught Erik how to cut an anchor rope clean, so I assume he cut it himself. Maybe the anchor became stuck in some rocks and he was forced to cut it loose in order to get them back to shore? Maybe the author is planning a sequel where she will hopefully wrap up all of these mysteries.


message 7: by Liza (new)

Liza (view spoiler)


message 8: by Karen (new)

Karen Hmm. When you look at it that way (that the author's vagueness about what really happened to Erik is a reflection of the fact that Tova herself will never know for sure what happened), then you're right -- the author doesn't need to spell out every little detail for us. Makes sense, in a way!


message 9: by Beth (new)

Beth Kiernan I also thought daphne didn’t report the accident because she was scared she’d be blamed, or simply overwhelmed by the unexpected death of her boyfriend. My guess then is she became an addict as a means to cope with this terrible tragedy, and at one point considered suicide too, which is when Avery intervened.


message 10: by Claudette (new)

Claudette What about the cut anchor rope??


message 11: by Karen (new)

Karen Tova’s brother, Lars, taught Erik how to cut an anchor rope clean, so we’re left to assume that Erik himself is the one who cut the anchor. Although why he did it isn’t explained.


message 12: by Sarah (new)

Sarah Agree. A point of confusion.


message 13: by Liddy (new)

Liddy My read was that the woman Avery was talking about was not Daphne. I’m not even sure the timing would make sense given that we know Avery is only a few years older than Cameron. I thought that the author was trying to get us to see how rigid Tova could be and that her husband and son may have felt they had to find ways around her. The author writes that Will snuck out for lunches and “stole” pens and that Erik hid the broken dala horse and a snack cake he felt he had to secret away. I wondered whether Erik felt that getting a girl pregnant, let alone dating a girl, would have been too much for him to stay “good” in Tova’s eyes. Tova felt there was a “right” way to do things, from trash bags to where t-shirts and cleaning supplies could be stored, and she had a hard time living and finding room for others outside of that. Tova means good in Hebrew and to stay good in Tova’s eyes, you had to follow her rules. I think for Erik he was horrified that he would have fallen so far outside of Tova’s version of good that he took his own life. As the book progresses, we see Tova (and Cameron, grow and develop and move beyond where they have been stuck since Erik’s death for Tova, and Daphne’s abandonment for Cameron. The author even shows us how Tova’s thinking on her friend’s daughter getting pregnant at 18 shifted over time but this was not something Erik was able to experience. He just knew the mom who would have been angry with him for making a mistake and breaking the dala horse.


message 14: by Potter (new)

Potter Earle Karen, you're probably right. But, this narrative was so underdone that it's hard to tell. Van Pelt messed this one up, unless Erik is alive and will be introduced in a sequel. There's no reason to be that mysterious about a character's fate in a book that's largely aiming to satisfy the reader.


back to top