The Dear At Providencia Response to Kelsea 1

I agree with you, Kelsea, but I think of it a little differently. I do believe she cares about the suffering of the dear and that she reflects it by herself, but I do not think she does it to avoid being a 'woman who makes a scandal', as I believe you said (I don't recall perfectly and cannot go back to view your post.)

I think she cares about the dear and reflects upon its suffering, but does this to further understand the concept that there are some things in the world which need to suffer. She silently questions the men from the big city, she says "...what surprises you? That there is suffering here, or that I know it?" Clearly, she is aware of the suffering which the dear goes through, and she deliberately does not want to help it because she knows that there is suffering in the world.

The same goes for the newspaper clipping she reads "every morning". The man who was burnt and his wife declare that "it just isn't fair." I think the speaker does not agree with this statement, because a few sentences further on, she asks if "someone [could] please explain to Alan McDonals [the burned man] in his dignity, to the deer at Providencia in his dignity, what is going on?" Therefore, she understands that this suffering cannot be called "unfair" or "unjust", and that these creatures need both to understand that this is their life. I also believe that through her last sentence, she conveys the message that not one should feel pity for them, that that would just be "a ridiculous thing to" do, because this is the role they carry in life, and thus, should not be pities upon.

Now, I cannot say I agree with her in the sense that we should simply let suffering individuals suffer because it is their role, but I do believe that this is the argument she is trying to bring to light.