IMPORTANT QUOTATIONS - QUOTES AND ANALYSIS (continued)

Yet another example of the outrageous interpretations the heirs place on their clues is committed by Theo Theodorakis:

By changing for and thee to the numbers four and three, Theo was able to arrange the clues into a formula (whether or not it was a chemical solution, let alone the Westing solution, was another matter).

N H(IS) FOR NO THEE (TO) = NH4NO3

But four clue letters were left out: isto, osit, itso, otis OTIS! He had it: a formula for an explosive, and the name of the murderer! He had to tell Doug. (102)

No longer limited to wordplay, there is now the search for a chemical formula, with the remaining words leading again to Otis Amber.

The interactions of the different players in the game lead to some interesting character portraits. Below, Christos Theodorakis meets Flora Baumbach and makes the following observations about her:

Then Flora Baumbach came to see him. He wasn't nervous at all with that nice lady. She smiles that funny smile because she's sad inside. She once had a daughter named Rosalie. She told him how Rosalie would sit in the shop and say hello to the customers, and how she would feel the fabrics. Mrs. Baumbach made wedding dresses, which are mostly white, so she bought samples of material with bright colors and patterns because Rosalie loved colors best. Rosalie had 573 different swatches in her collection before she died. Mrs. Baumbach said her daughter might have been an artist if things had turned out differently. (110)

In the small details, the quiet tragedy of Flora's life is revealed: the constant mention of Rosalie, the description of her wedding dress business, and the lament of what Rosalie could have been "if things had turned out differently". This also shows a sensitivity on the part of Christos, who is one of the sharper observers in the story.

Similarly, Theo's father George tells his story to Judge Ford and in doing so reveals aspects of himself as well as of the Westing family:

The subject was becoming painful, and Mr. Theodorakis faltered several times in the telling. "Mrs. Westing handpicked that politician - probably figured the guy would end up in the White House and her daughter would be First Lady. But Violet thought he was nothing but a cheap political hack, a cheap crook. Violet was a gentle person, an only child. She couldn't turn against her mother, she couldn't face marrying that guy. ... I guess she couldn't find any way out, except... Mrs. Westing sort of went off her rocker after Violet's death, and I... well, it was a long time ago." (120-121)

The descriptions of Violet - a "gentle person" who "couldn't turn against her mother, she couldn't face marrying that guy" immediately reminds the reader of Angela Wexler's own dilemma. The remark that Mrs. Westing "sort of went off her rocker" is an early clue to Crow, who suffered a bout with alcoholism before finding religion and opening a soup kitchen.

Judge Ford finds other surprises in her conversations with the tenants of Sunset Towers, not all of them related to the Westing game. When she speaks to Turtle Wexler about the bombing, she finds herself surprised when Turtle vehemently denies the real bomber is Angela:

The judge was astounded by the excited response. Angela could not be the bomber, not that sweet, pretty thing. Thing? Is that how she regarded that young woman, as a thing? And what had she ever said to her except 'I hear you're getting married, Angela' or 'How pretty you look, Angela.' Had anyone asked her ideas, her hopes, her plans? If I had been treated like that I'd have used dynamite, not fireworks; no, I would have just walked out and kept right on going. But Angela was different. "What a senseless thing to do," the judge said aloud. (128)

Judge Ford goes through a complex set of realizations. First she must deal with the fact that Angela may indeed be the bomber, then contrast that with what she thinks Angela is like. However, she realizes that how she sees Angela - how most everyone in Sunset Towers sees Angela - is precisely the reason why she would act out in such a violent manner as the bomber. This chain of reasoning exemplifies the complex relationships and motives at the heart of the novel, and of the way it rewards re-reading by constantly shifting reader expectations.

Judge Ford also comes to another important insight when she looks over her files on Sam Westing:

Stooping to gather the dropped clippings, she was confronted by the face of Sam Westing. The photograph had been taken fifteen years ago. Those piercing eyes, the Vandyke beard, that short beaked nose (like a turtle's). The wax dummy in the coffin had been molded in the former image of Sam Westing as he had looked fifteen years ago - not as he looked now. She searched the folder. No recent photographs, no hospital records, no death certificate, just the accident report from the state highway police: Dr. Sidney Sikes suffered a crushed leg and Samuel W. Westing had severe facial injuries. Facial injuries! It was the face that had disappeared fifteen years ago, not the man. Westing had a different face, a face remodeled by plastic surgery. A different face and a different name. (136)

In a way, this follows Sam Westing's advice to his heirs to consider what they don't have as opposed to what they have. That is, the absence of any photos of Sam Westing after his accident is itself an important clue, exposing the wax dummy that looked like the pre-accident Sam Westing as a hoax and putting Judge Ford on alert to find Sam Westing in a new disguise.

Knowing she must save one of the heirs, not accuse one of them, Judge Ford makes an appeal for Berthe Erica Crow when the heirs discover she is the apparent answer to the Westing game:

"Can we accuse an innocent woman of a murder that has never been proved? Crow is our neighbor and our helper. Can we condemn her to a life imprisonment just to satisfy our own greed? For money promised in an improbable and illegal will? If so, we are guilty of a far greater crime than the accused. Berthe Erica Crow's only crime is that her name appears in a song. Our crime would be selling - yes, I said selling, selling for profit - the life of an innocent, helpless human being." (151)

Aside from Sam Westing's seemingly fatuous claim that all the heirs are his nephews and nieces, this is the other significant reference to the Westing heirs as a kind of extended family, a community that must rely on each other - not for profit, but out of a deeper kind of bond. It is also significant that Judge Ford, who is African American, makes the appeal against the selling of a human for profit, as it carries the subtext of slavery. On a more personal note for Judge Ford, her parents were servants for Sam Westing and she feels indebted to him for the education that led to her becoming a justice.