If objects were said to have the same capacity for thought and feeling as that of Man (which they do), the Shirt would say that it felt a great sense of remorse in the events that lead to its current position.
Had the Shirt not been so comfortable, its Owner would not have worn it to the point of repair.
Had the Shirt not looked so dashing, its Owner would not have caught the eye of the Seamstress as he tried on the mended garment.
And, had the Shirt not been so clean and white, the Owner's Wife would not have noticed the Seamstress's lipstick on its collar when the Owner returned home.
Now, as the Shirt lay on the floor, wrapped around the body of its Owner, a flower of blood blooming from the ragged hole the Bullet tore through the Shirt's left pocket, the Shirt did indeed feel remorse.
Not for its role in the situation at hand (for the Shirt selfishly decided in the end that it was actually NOT to blame), but remorse for the fact that it had become so stained and damaged that Another Shirt, who knew nothing of what transpired here, would carry the honor of accompanying the Owner to his final resting place, and be worn forever more.
Why do so many people get killed in these stories? I had no idea shirts were so dangerous.
ReplyDeleteThey're dangerous bastards, and should never be trusted.
DeleteWhen I first started reading, it made me think of "For Want of a Nail." Maybe it was the repetitive use of "had the shirt..." Was that at all intentional? Or am I reading too much into things?
ReplyDeleteIf you are referring to JLA: The Nail, a DC Elseworlds story that explores a world where the Kents never discovered Kal El as an infant, then yes, absolutely.
DeleteIf you are referring to the parable, For Want of a Nail, then no. Never heard of it.
Um, no not intentionally. It certainly has a similar rhythm to Nail, but they're both based on a structure of using repetitive forms to set the pace.