Challenge 417 Response

“Name That Tune”

with Donna Hole

In Vivian Rinaldo’s “Name That Tune”:

At the end, Frank basically accuses Leddie of callous careerism. His criticism is justified, but is it entirely fair?

Frank must have been accumulating doubts about Leddie during their long conversation, or he must had have some experience of his own to justify breaking off with her when he does. Is the ending adequately foreshadowed? What might account for Frank’s reaction?

Perspective is everything in the success of this story. I understand how hard it is to gauge the sincerity of a modern-day man and how hard it is for a man to approach a woman. So many variables, especially among professionals.

No, the ending isn’t fair, but it is acceptable to me as a reader. While this “Walk Away Joe” seemed to be taking the time to get to know Leddie, he displayed the typical fast-track dating tactics at the end. But the overall story works because it hits on the dating fears of today. All three of these characters were vividly real to me.

No, the end isn’t adequately foreshadowed. Everything seems to be going smoothly; the couple should have ended in exchanged phone numbers at the least — in a perfect world. But I think if Leddie — and therefore the reader — had an inkling of Frank’s doubts, then the entire story would not be plausible. I think the story played on the ambiguities of trust. And faith.

Perhaps Frank is looking for a reason not to “hook up” with Leddie, and it takes him all night to come up with something. Some people are like that.

I like the “dropped bomb” effect of the ending. Sometimes that’s just how it goes. We — meaning people in general — don’t always know the reasons why something does or doesn’t go our way; we’re left with the emotions and consequences and then move on. I’d rather not speculate on Franks motivations.

Thank you for the thoughtful response, Donna! I agree with you that perspective counts for a lot: women will probably understand the story better than men. And that is a big problem.

I can’t agree that the “dropped bomb” ending is satisfactory. Yes, it may happen that way “in real life” or what passes for it, but it can’t happen that way in literature.

I can think of three ways to handle the situation, any of which could be made plausible:

Frank accepts Leddie’s story about her career as being interesting but of no immediate consequence. Leddie’s personal history would then be simply a tidbit of character development in a larger story.
Frank gives Leddie the benefit of the doubt and applauds her ambition and initiative. That would tell us a lot about Frank but not necessarily about Leddie.
Frank reacts as he does: he’s repelled and disgusted. But why does he react so strongly?
- Has he had an experience with which Leddie’s account resonates badly? If so, what is it? I think we need at least a hint.
- Has Frank been accumulating doubts about Leddie throughout the evening and does Leddie’s account push him past a tipping point? What might those doubts be? And in the face of such doubts, why would Frank want to suggest a change of scene and prolong the evening?

The story tells us a lot about Leddie but relatively little about Frank. Perhaps that’s the point. At the end, Leddie dismisses Frank as a “walk-away Joe.” What does she learn, let alone understand? As you say, it is a “modern-day” story — and, I would add, a minor tragedy of incomprehension.