In a message dated 05/20/2004 4:00:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, calianng_graves at yahoo.com writes: Okay, I know this sounds odd of me.... But why are we arguing of the *possible* lies, ficticious accounts or outright perjury of the testimony of either characters....or narrators...OF A NOVEL OF FICTION? Okay, okay, I know we all wax passionate...and Steve is VERY good at making us think. Can we think about the issues that he writes that MAKE us wax passionate, because of our own beliefs, rather than arguing over whether Paarfi, Paresh, Vlad, or all three of thee above, lied their ass off? Because, and this is my inside information of Steve, NOT any sort of information he has chosen to give to me.....but after living with him for a couple of years, I'd be willing to bet that he put BOTH accounts in, maliciously and sadistically, just to screw with ALL of our minds. <smiles> Not only that, I'd be willing to bet that, sometime in the future, some TRUE version comes up that isn't even close to EITHER of them. I've got $50 on both of my bets. Any takers? Peace, Caliann That's a suckers bet if I ever saw one. Of course they are all unreliable. The truth usually is a combination of all the stories told. Steve is a master at misdirection by subtle changes in different characters recall of events. It's like real life. This is what makes him a master story teller. Arguing over who is correct is fruitless, yet it does seem to pass the time for many. John D. Barbato, OD