How intriguing. I think he'd somehow fudge it - an economy with the truth which siad neither and both, if you follow me. The sort of thing politicians are good at.
He could give them details of the memorial service--the grief of the crew, which dignataries attended, etc.--but neglect to say whether or not there was a body present.
At first I thought 'this', but then there is HH's perverse guilt and honour complex. He feels to blame for Bush's death, so he can't take any action that would appear to absolve himself or remove him from the full glare of responsibility. Even if nobody else would think this way, it's as much about how he appears in his own eyes, as much as to anyone else. So weirdly enough he is capable of slightly hurtful things, purely in order not to create a 'nicer' version of himself than he believes to be true. All this stems from him blaming himself. So I think eventually he might put the truth in there, phrased very simply and with no detail.
That's another possible scenario, anyway. I stand to be corrected or dissuaded, though, he's such a complex bugger. In any case, it's a fascinating question.
I third this. Hornblower's guilt would produce an honest letter. I think that the majority of the letter would praise Bush on the last, and other missions, but that the truth would indeed be written.
Comments 5
Reply
Reply
That's another possible scenario, anyway. I stand to be corrected or dissuaded, though, he's such a complex bugger. In any case, it's a fascinating question.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment