end of conversation scene

They say that policemen and fire fighters have a sixth sense. I’ve heard them talk of it myself. They are chasing a fugitive or in a burning house and something – a chill up the back, an unexplained pressure – tells them not to take the next step. They find out later that the bad guy was hiding on the other side of the door with a scythe or length of pipe in hand or that the rafters in the next room collapsed only seconds after they backed away. They claim that the feeling came out of nowhere, that it was God speaking to them, protecting them from catastrophe.
The psychologists disagree. They acknowledge that this happens, but they believe that the decision was based not on immediate divine intervention, but on a thousand little clues that the men have been trained to pick up have subconsciously registered and at the tipping point some part of their consciousness, something beyond their articulation, sends a firm but wordless warning.
As I walked away from that window, having heard that candid analysis of my own actions, I felt that same sensation; it was like I was frozen for a moment. I don’t know whether it was from God or a message from my subconscious.  I would not let myself think about what it meant. But now I know. The message was that I was worshiping the wrong god; that I needed to turn around. Whatever it was had figured out and tried to confront me with the fact that I had chosen to play my own game, by my own rules and, even at that, I was losing.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to end of conversation scene

  1. I like this Blink exposition. Again, good stuff for the reader to think about.

    You say Coach walked away from the window having heard a “candid analysis of my own actions.” As a reader, I didn’t see the conversation that way. Maybe Coach did, but as a reader, I’m wondering how he jumped to that conclusion. Maybe a little transitional inner thought that shows how Coach got there?

    • labeak52 says:

      Well, it was candid in the sense that the speakers did not know he was listening. I thought it was pretty fair, too. Why do you think candid is the wrong way to describe it?

      • No objection to candid, but on the surface , the conversation was not about Campbell. It seemed to be about Kelso. It’s his interpretation that the conversation was about “his own actions” that for me could use a transition. Such as, “I knew what this was really all about. It could see it wasn’t just about Kelso. It was about my own failures.”

  2. labeak52 says:

    I guess my response is that the conversation he overheard contains a candid assessment of Coach because the conversation isn’t about him.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s