Why do you think the author chooses not to reveal the "defect" in Harriet's baby to the reader? What effect does this create?
The authour doesn't tell you what the 'defect' is in Aunt
Harriets' baby to keep you reading and build suspense. Also, I think maybe Aunt Harriets' baby could come back later in the book and meet with David and they will get along well because they both have 'defects', Davids' just isn't visible.
The author chooses not to reveal the "defect" that Aunt harriet's baby had to keep the reader interested. The reader would keep reader to see if they find out what the defect is to keep it interesting. He also doesn't tell you maybe to make you think what the defect could have been. He also might have done it to make you mad that he didn't tell you.
I believe one of the reasons that the author doesn't tell you what the defect of Harriets baby is like Alyssa said, "to keep the reader interested". It was an exciting part in the novel and if the author had mentioned what the defect was, the reader very possibly could've lost interest. I also believe though, that the auhtor doesn't reveal the defect is to make the reader think about it. It brings realization that "such a little thing" (70) is really a big thing in David's society. If Harriet says it's only a little defect, why do Emily and Joseph react so cruel towards Harriet? It really makes the reader think about the defect of the baby and what it could've been and why it wasn't an "image of God".
The auther does not say what deviation Harriet's baby has because he wants to show readers how seriously this world takes mutants. Like Ashley said, the fact that it is 'such alittle thing'(70) dose not matter to anyone but Harriet who would most likley not feel the same way if it was not her child. "This is the third time"(71) thefact that this is not just the life of her babie that is at stake but her own it makes the situation far more heart breaking and the auther is trying to show that what is wrong with the baby is not important. In this world it dose not matter what is wrong with anything, weather it be big or small, beause if there is somthing wrong then it will be distroyed. I think the auther was just trying to show how sad that is.
Like everyone has said, I think that the reader chooses not to reveal the "defect" of Harriet's baby to keep the reader interested. Not knowing what the defect is makes you want to keep reading to see if it was something very abnormal, or something simple and silly. Like the girls said, it also shows how seriously the people of Waknuk take deviations, if they won't accept something little like an innocent baby, then how will they ever accept David if they found out.
Everything everyone has said, but the author could've meant almost anything as to why he didn't say what the so called defect was. Maybe it was a grave one or even something barely even noticeable. John wants you to keep guessing, but I assume it's because he wants to see of what your mind will assume because of what the book has taught you, so it's slightly like a trick, you want everyone considered equal and that having something is different, but your mind will still wonder what could possibly be "wrong" with the baby.
The reader has to imagine the defect. This means it could be something horrible or maybe something simple, such as Sophie's toes. This shows how cruel Waknuk can be.
I think the main reason the author chose not to reveal the "defect" in Harriet's baby to the reader is because in real life we don't point out defects in people. "Defects" are a part of one's individuality. In society people are allowed to be accepted being unique and different. I think the author didn't tell the reader what the deffect was is because it really shouldn't matter what it was. People should be accepted no matter what, and I think that is what he is trying to prove. Since he didn't tell us, we wouldn't make a big deal about it as that's the way it should be.
The author chooses not to reveal the babies defect because he needs to keep the reader interested and want to keep readin to find out the babies defect, and what mayy have happened to the other babies she's had. As it says on Pg.(71) "it's the third time she's had a baby witha a defect." And also to keep the reader readin to find out what happens when you have 3 babies with defects.
The author doesn't reveal the babies "defect" because it's not really important as to it's difference, all you need to know is it would be considered a deviation. This also keeps the reader reading and wondering if they will find out what the deviation is or if the baby will some how play a role later in the book. It is also a small thing that the author lets the reader go on thinking about, leaving loose ends for the imagination