and, as Theodore Sheckels puts it, must merge his voice with Bens voice (Sheckels 190). Also, we get a sense that just as Bens writing becomes less and less elaborate as his situation progresses, the narrator also becomes so wrapped up that he is less concerned with the technicalities of his writing. When the narrators voice returns at the end of the novel, he is changed. He now feels much of what Ben felt through his ordeal: that he is being drawn in to the vicious circle, but he realizes, as did Ben towards the end of his life, that there is only so much that he can do. In the end the narrator could only do what Ben was able to do- pass along the information that was uncovered in hopes that people will no longer be left in the dark as they had once been. And since the narrator passes along the information, the reader now is left in the position of the narrator himself at the beginning of the story. The narrator is able to literally put the information in the readers hands, and hence the reader is compelled to act. This key ingredient to Brinks formula is absent in Palcys film. The Bruwers, both Phil and Melanie, were not omitted in the film, but they might as well have been. The novel uses them both as counterparts of Ben- it is through contrasts, similarities, and comparisons with these characters that we get a broader understanding of Bens character. But the film completely diminishes the purpose of her character by omitting much of Melanies thoughts, past, and her love affair with Ben. Professor Bruwer, an extremely important character in the novel, one who has much influence over Ben with his words, has only one significant line in the entire film.In the film version of A Dry White Season, the professor is portrayed simply as a man who plays the piano a lot. His one significant line refers to the battle Ben is fighting. He describes it all as a dance, in which you can go backwards or forwards, but you must keep dancin...
