Stuff and Nonsense by Amy Cockram is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
A few posts ago I read "The Last Werewolf" by Glen Duncan, and I wrote about it here and took part in the discussion panel on "The Readers" podcast. I'm now reading "Talulla Rising," the next in the trilogy, and I'm still finding the narrative compelling. However, there is something bugging me....(spoiler ahoy)
At the start of the second book, Talulla gives birth to twins who are also werewolves. Now Glen Duncan has already established that, once a person has been bitten and becomes a werewolf, they don't age. So does that mean that the twins will be forever babies?
Of course it's fiction and of course werewolves don't exist, but there is still a potential logical loophole there that is playing on my mind. If sure you can argue that all bets are off if a child is born of two werewolves - which might well be the way that Duncan will go with this, as there isn't really anywhere you can go with the characters if Lorcan and Zoe never get beyond the screaming and puking stage - but I can't put away this niggling idea. That's probably my OCD side manifesting.
If someone knows something I don't about the werewolf myth in literature that gives him a get-out clause on this, please let me know.
Perhaps it revolves around the fact that the twins haven't been bitten they've been born as werewolves - after all, they've already spent 9 months growing from conception, so why would they stop after they're born.
ReplyDeleteI think that probably will be the way to justify it.
DeleteBut then if they grow up, does that mean they will continue to age and die as a human does?
Or perhaps I'm thinking about this too much....
Perhaps they'll stop ageing at that angsty teenage time... Poor parents!
Delete