But to say “poor Eddie” is to overlook the knowledge that Eddie’s self-
interest has put him on the verge of doing what Dillon accuses him of doing.
In that respect, Higgins’s rhetorical readers have another layer of irony to add
to their reconfiguration: Eddie takes the fall for Wanda’s betrayal of Scalisi—
but only because she beat him to the punch.
THE AFFECTIVE, THE ETHICAL, AND THE IMPLIED HIGGINS
Indeed, by the end of the novel, Higgins’s dispassionate dissection of the inter-
action between self-interest and the unreliable flow of information across the
criminal network leaves his audience with a highly negative view of that net-
work not only because the criminals prey on law-abiding citizens but because
they also prey on each other. It’s not just Eddie who has no real friends,
because the ethic of self-interest means that in this world, finally, it’s every
man for himself. This ethic of self-interest exists alongside a faith in informa-
tion that travels along the network, but this faith is often misplaced. Foley and
his colleagues do not live by the same ethic as the mob, but they, too, are hard
cases who will use others for their own ends—even as they have only a limited
success in achieving those ends. Higgins does not invite rhetorical readers to
grow progressively more sympathetic or otherwise attached to Eddie, though
Higgins does guide those readers to remain fascinated by the intricacies of the
networks and to develop a grudging respect for those who are able to manage
their own survival. Ultimately, the ethical and the affective dimensions of the
progression lead back to the implied Higgins, who exposes the way this world
works by letting his characters act and especially speak in pursuit of their own
ends and then guiding rhetorical readers to share his dispassionate judgments
of them. Higgins is not an implied author who endears himself to his audience
through the affection he displays for his characters and his storyworld but
rather one who commands his audience’s respect for his clear-eyed, uncom-
promising vision of a Hobbesian world in which life for most is nasty, brutish,
and short. Indeed, that uncompromising vision leads him—and his rhetorical
readers—to the cold consolations of dramatic irony.
AUTHORIAL DISCLOSURES ACROSS CONVERSATIONS IN
“APPEARANCES”
Higgins was himself an admirer of John O’Hara’s use of dialogue, and, indeed,
it was reading Higgins’s comments in On Writing about “Appearances” that
CONVERSATIONAL AND AUTHORIAL DISCLOSURE IN DIALOgUE • 185