warning – brainstorming ahead – possible spoilers contained within
It has been bothering me a while that when it comes to the ‘final conflict’ in Blood & Fire, however it’s occurred to me whilst making my Icelandic-inspired fried fish in cheese sauce for supper that it need not be all that complicated. The evil capitalist scientists and Aluminium plant developers need to be stopped, however, Helen and Co. have do not need to be the one’s to do it in some lame Fantastic Five inspired adventure.
Yes, it’s true that the Alcoa plant is destroying the environment and causing the sudden climatic differences to the country. However ‘the authorities’ do not need to know this come the end of the story. The Alcoa Plant will no doubt be destroyed, and it will be near to impossible for such an audacious plan to be launched again. The cause of the massive jökulslaup that engulfs the region is enough of a reason, as far as ‘the authorities’ and any ‘scientific’ readers are concerned. The mythical element of the story can continue unabaited, and we can learn, truly, what Helen’s part really is in all of this, and what happened to her in the mountains…
Any of this make sense? Or am I just waffling in the wind? Were those rhetorical questions…?