I didn't say that Marcella wants to leave because of Cal - the question of Marie and Milena I guess? was why Marcella would stay in Ireland. And therefore I said, she probably stays because of the illness of her parents-in-law. And out of this assumption I reasoned that she could make Cal responsible for the problem that she now can't leave without feeling bad.

Yeah, maybe some time to think would be a start. ;)
I guess, I'd like him better, but that's not the point. He has gone through so much and in my opionion whether I like him or not he deserves to take some good out of it, you know?
From what I've learned, bad experiences do make you stronger and a more thoughtful and maybe even individual person. So that's why I thought about this emotional push in the first point. But yes, every person is different, so I can't know for sure, what will go on in Cal's head while he's in prison, probably the author has left that for everyone to decide on his own for good.

Most people aren't rational (I use that word a lot lately, feel like I'm imitating Jonathan..) when it comes to things like that. Of course he's not the direct reason for her misery, but I guess, she wouldn't see clear to that. He has something to do with the death of her husband, how small or big his role was, isn't important. So, I would think of Marcella as being blinded by her astonishment and anger, so that as I said, she wouldn't think straight. In combination with the exasperation about her situation she would break down and put all her stored (angestaut?!) feelings in the hatred of Cal, unleashing all her fury on this single person that gave her some little reason to feel like projecting her anger on him was justified.
You now know, what I mean?

Well, what you wrote reminds of what I said about looking at it in a rational way, so I do unterstand your point.
You say, it maybe would have been too easy if he got a better ending. But when I think of the ending it always comes to my mind, that maybe the author even made it too easy - for himself.
I think it's totally lame (well, okay, it's kind of realistic, but who cares) that he's just taken away by the police. That way, Cal gets his "push" or punishment or whatsoever from the law.
Even if I wouldn't wish anyone, that he gets mentally hurt, I think it would have been way more enthralling if he didn't get punished by the police for his deeds, like helping the IRA, but if he had to feel the consequences of his deeds or like you said of what he had missed to do in a more drastic or mainly in a more personal way. Everyone who commits a crime goes to jail, but I think to learn what you've done wrong in respect of treating other people you need an emotional push, not an imprisonment. I don't say I would wish him emotional pain, but I think it could have helped him grow. And to see, that after the small change he already had, he's getting even closer to being a strong person - that would be an end, I'd totally appreciate. ;)

I totally get your point of him lying to Marcella! Hope, that doesn't go too far near the topic "Cal and Marcella" but, how can you hide such a big lie from someone you want to have a serious relationship with? In my opinion relationships are a lot about trust. And if you're lying to your partner how should he (or in this case: she) have trust in you? And how can you expect her to be trustworthy (can u say that? :D) if you're not honest in the first place? I think in that point he doesn't think far enough. If the end wouldn't have been Cal being arrested - who knows what happens afterwards - what would he have done? Live a happy life with Marcella? I don't think it would have worked that well without telling her the truth. But before Lennard's pointing out the fact, that Crilly was "just the driver" again: We know that Lennard, but he IS kind of responsible for the death of her husband, even if he didn't pull the trigger - my opionion. Oh, and sorry, Milena for the dashs :P
Back to the topic. You don't like Cal either, Milena, so did you like that he got arrested, or would you have wished him worth? :D

I also agree with the fact, that religion isn't the main problem here.
But to go back to the first question: Yes, they would kill, even if they weren't religious. The religion doesn't effect their deeds in my opionion but the justification of their deeds - as Jonathan already mentioned - their trying to legetimatize their deeds.
And that's also the basis for the other way around - if they weren't religious at all they'd still kill for their (not religious, but political) believes. Maybe some of them would hesitate a bit longer because they had no religious wall to hide their real intentions behind, but they'd still have their believes, which they would fight for either way.

One thing to Julz: you said it wouldn't be a matter of "political parties or social differences", but of "ethnical differences" - political and social differences are simply a consequence of the ethnical differences, aren't they? I don't really think you can seperate this clearly.
There were already ethnical differences leading to social differences back when the British "conquered" Northern Ireland. And out of these ethnical and social differences the political differences evolved. And now all of this together with the fact, that there are two confessions precisely defining both sides, is quite an awkward mixture - don't you think?

Zitat von The Kütty im Beitrag #9

---

I agree with Milena’s last sentence. In my opinion Marcella’s relation to Cal is like a rush. You have to think about what she has done in the last few years. First her husband is murdered in her own house, then she has to live in a house with her parents in law she doesn’t like and who always remember her of Robert. And in this whole time she doesn’t even have a friend to talk to. Her only gleam of hope is her daughter. In this situation appears a young man, who lets her feel alive and young again. This rush lets her forget about all her problems.
If Cal would tell her now, that he more or less directly helped to kill her husband, this illusion of love and a future with him would totally break. In my opinion she would react with big anger. She would accuse him, that he utilizes her weakness, and forbid him to approach her family ever again. Then she would call the police because she feels humiliated by Cal.

---

I totally agree with that!

I also liked what Marie said about Marcella being unpredictable at first, but the longer I think about it the more I disagree. Her staying with the parents of Robert has nothing to do with what she wants or has to do, but with what she thinks, she has to do. She puts their needs before her own, even though they're not anywhere close to being as grateful for that as they should. And that is a very selfless and caring behavior.
But I could imagine it's also very draining in a physical but mostly emotional way. So therefore I would tell the exact opposite thing of what Marie wrote ("I think for Marcella, Robert is the reason of her trouble, her terrible live and her depressions. Even if she doesn't say it in a special sentence I think, that Marcella hates Robert. That's why I'm confident, that Marcella wouldn't break up the relation with Cal [...]") could happen.
That is to say, that Marcella would make Cal responsible for the miserable situation she's in. If he wouldn't have driven Crilly, who killed her husband - maybe she would have been able to gather the strength to leave her husband. I guess, it is easier to leave someone, who's not good for you and therefore not good for your daughter either, not harming him that much, than leaving two ill persons who now depend on you. That's why I agree even more with the last sentence of Lukas.

I have to say that I couldn't really bond with Cal either. As you said - he's way too passive.
But at first I thought he would change - what he did, but not in the way I thought - and that it's just out of his situation, because if I'm really honest, I disliked the father more.
How can he be so stubborn and not only endanger himself but his own son by being too proud to move?

Whatever, back to Cal's character.. If I try to look at it rationally I come to this conclusion:
I think he behaves like a typical teenager who doesn't know what to do with himself. He's got no friends, even more, most of his neighbours detest him - so he's all on his own, we shouldn't forget about that when we're judging him.
Why doesn't he go out there and get himself an employment? Probably because his father isn't that good of an example. Yes, his father is working, but no, his father doesn't do anything to make his situation more comfortable, as I already mentioned before. So I guess, Cal's just a poor sod - but that doesn't make him any more likeable to me.

And to refer it to the topic "Cal and the end of the novel" a little more: would a change of a character also change our view on the end?
I really think it would with me, because when I read the end I just thought something like: "oh, kind of pretendable, hmm, ok, finished reading".
I guess, if I had been more into the character of Cal it would have had a stronger effect on me, like I maybe would have more pity on him or be disappointed in how the conflict had to end for him.
Because somehow it was kind of sad, that after he finally gets his mind together and stands up for what he wants and thinks is right - he gets caught by the police. Honestly?
But as I said, it was kind of sad, not really carrying away.

So do you think a character change would have also changed your feelings on the end?