Close Reading #3 Monster
“When Miss O’Brien looked at me after we had won the case, what did she see that caused her to turn away? What did she see?” P.281
This is from Steve’s journal reflection 5 months after the trial ended. He was found not guilty and when Steve spread his arms to hug O’Brien, she stiffened and turned away from him to pick up her papers. I think this is of primary importance when it comes to understanding O’Brien. Throughout the novel, we do not really understand how O’Brien feels about Steve. It can be argued that the most we know is that she is the lawyer who represents Steve. Their relationship is shallow. Sometimes in meeting between her and Steve, Steve will ask her a personal question. Aside from that, we don’t really understand how O’Brien feels about the case or her opinion of Steve. All throughout the trial, O’Brien has never hinted that she thought Steve was guilty and she always did her best to try and get justice for Steve. But this exposes her feelings about Steve that she wasn’t able to express before. This indicates that she definitely felt that Steve was at least partially responsible for the murder of Mr. Nesbitt. When looking back at the text, we now understand O’Brien more. This explains her distance from Steve throughout the trial. Throughout the trial she was always cordial, she always gave Steve the best advice possible and she always supported him, but she was always distant. When Steve asked what she was gonna do one weekend, she gave him a funny look. Steve said himself “I know she thinks I am guilty. I can feel it when we sit together on the bench they have assigned for us.” And Steve’s thoughts on her opinion of her were proven correct when O’Brien refused to hug him once he received his not guilty verdict and the trial was over. This last piece of text confirms how O’Brien viewed Steve throughout the entire trial. She viewed him as a monster the entire time.
So I think you have indeed identified a crucial moment in the text, and I appreciate the work you do to illustrate O’Brien’s distance and calculated remove prior to this moment. I am not sure though that what you are offering here is a close reading of how this passage or some aspect of the text works to communicate X and/or Y. I think you are kind of tracing a detailed line of the plot. One thing to ask yourself is “Would anybody really be able to provide a viable argument (alternative interpretation) to what you’re outlining here?) Particularly as you move from the history paper to the literary (Monster) paper, you need to make sure you’re working to interpret the effect of specific literary choices in the narrative rather than relaying the plot. You’re building a case for how you think the narrative is asking to be interpreted about some particular point.