Hi all,
I've just finished re-reading Reprisal, and started The Dark at the End, heading towards Nightworld. I'm both excited, and dreading the end of the story. It's all been such a great ride! ;-)

But one recent thing puzzles me: at the end of Reprisal, when Bill is heading south to save Lisl from Rafe, why does Mr Veilleur choose to go with him? At Lisl's, he gets out of the car and enters the house where the confrontation is taking place, even though he knows that Rafe is Rasalom (yes, he doesn't know for sure that Rafe is in there, but it's a fair bet), and he simply walks into the room and allows Rasalom to see him ... and then curses himself for a fool that he's allowed Rasalom to know he no longer has an Ally-aligned adversary to confront him.

I gather it's necessary for the story, but within the story's own logic it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense for him to do that, since he's voiced so many times how disastrous it would be for Rasalom to know Glaeken has grown old. So ... why does he do it? I can only see a plot-based reason, that doesn't seem to make sense on a character level. Have I missed something?

Glaeken and Jack have both made some "tactical" mistakes. It is easilly explainable because they are both human, and don't always make perfect decisions, or use flawless logic.

My biggest problem is just the failure to act, at times. Many times Jack will see something is awry, but just shrug it off and forget about it. Still, don't we all do things like that in reality?

If I'm not mistaken, Glaeken/Mr. Veilleur is still under the assumption that Jack is the heir. As the heir, Jack would be the one to take on the fight now.

That doesn't give him a reason to go, though — especially since he knows Jack won't take over the role until he himself is dead, and he's still saying that it's important Rasalom doesn't find out he currently has no potent opposition.

There are certain things that happen in the stories to which we are privy as readers that may not be seen by the characters. We knew Rafe is Rasalom and that he was at the house, because we were told by the author. That doesn't mean the characters know.

Same thing with Jack not realizing Sara Lom was an acronym for Rasalom. We know it because we could see it in print. Jack never saw the name in print, he just heard someone say the name so it never occurred to him.

Other instances of Jack not reacting really stem from the fact that we as the reader know something is up, but for someone just witnessing it without insider knowledge, it might not seem as odd or out of place.

Someone defined a thriller as a story in which the reader knows more than the characters and a mystery as when the reader is finding things out along with the characters. I see the RJ series as thrillers for this very reason. Not every decision Jack or the supporting characters make will seem logical to us, because we know things they don't.

Hi Tony,
Yes, I do realise that. I don't know, is there a reason you thought I didn't understand how stories work? Even if that were so, it doesn't give an answer to the problem I'm raising.

In the world of the novel, both Jack and Glaeken *do* know that Rafe is Rasalom at this point in the story, and are going to rescue Lisl from him. Glaeken has already indicated both that there's nothing he personally can do against Rasalom anymore, and that it's important Rasalom *not* find out he's now enfeebled. So why does he choose to go? My question is: is there a character-based reason for it?

Unfortunately, it does come across as a bit of plot manouvering by the auther that makes no sense in the domain of the story — i.e., there isn't a reason for the characters to do it, other than it's necessary for a plot setup. FPW wanted Rasalom to find out about Glaeken so he could unleash Jack, so he engineered an encounter, but it doesn't ring true for me. I'm trying to find out if anyone else has seen something I didn't (always possible). It *may* be that Glaeken engineers it to accelerate the sift of being The Heir to Jack, but I'm just supposing; it doesn't seem to be clear in the story. And the fact that no-one's jumped in to put that up as a reason suggests it may not be clear to others, either.

I'm not bagging the story, and I'm having to over-explain, which makes me sound dogmatic. I guess I'll assume it's a bit of a plotting flaw, and move on. :-)

Same thing with Jack not realizing Sara Lom was an acronym for Rasalom. We know it because we could see it in print. Jack never saw the name in print, he just heard someone say the name so it never occurred to him.

I made sure never to put "Sara" and "Lom" side by side. You met Herbert Lom and then you met his wife, Sara.

Other instances of Jack not reacting really stem from the fact that we as the reader know something is up, but for someone just witnessing it without insider knowledge, it might not seem as odd or out of place.

It allows me to play on reader expectations. In Crisscross, Jamie Grant is taken prisoner and trussed up in the mold for the pillar. I have Jack on the way to the same place, but he has no idea Jamie is there. The reader expects this to be one of those author-manipulated coincidences where Jack will arrive in the nick of time to save her. But Jack watches unknowingly as she drowns in the mold; from his perspective, they're simply pouring concrete.

Someone defined a thriller as a story in which the reader knows more than the characters and a mystery as when the reader is finding things out along with the characters.

That was yours truly.

That was yours truly.

Oh! LOL...no wonder it seemed to fit so appropriately.

Hi Tony,
Yes, I do realise that. I don't know, is there a reason you thought I didn't understand how stories work? Even if that were so, it doesn't give an answer to the problem I'm raising.

It seems you thought my response questioned your intelligence. I did not intend for it to come across that way. My answer addressed Tim's frustration as to why Jack sometimes doesn't act on certain things and instead stands by and lets them happen. I didn't really answer your question. Perhaps if I had quoted who I was addressing the confusion would have been avoided. It has been 22 years since I read Reprisal, Now I will simply offer an explanation as to why Glaeken would allow Rasalom to see him after Glaeken was so adamant that Rasalom couldn't know he was old and feeble. Maybe he thought Rasalom wouldn't recognize him, as he had aged so much. Rasalom was, after all, expecting a young Glaeken.

I'm not bagging the story, and I'm having to over-explain, which makes me sound dogmatic. I guess I'll assume it's a bit of a plotting flaw, and move on. :-)

I don't think you were bagging the story, and I assume no one else did either. We aren't the hyper-sensitive type here. It seemed like you had a legit question. No one may have a solid answer for you. By lack of a solid response, you can safely assume it is plot maneuvering, as cheap as it seems, or it was just an "oops". Or, perhaps, it was simply them having to save Lisl no matter the cost.