The Docker and the Water: Choosing Between Two Readings
Two students are preparing for a comprehension task on this passage:
'Mr Rolle reached the dock at five, as he had every morning for nineteen years. He did not look at the water. He counted the crates twice, wrote the figures in a small notebook, and buttoned the notebook into his shirt pocket. When the boy asked whether the boat was coming, Mr Rolle said, 'It comes when it comes,' and counted the crates again.'
Aisha says the passage shows that Mr Rolle is frightened of the sea. Devon says it shows that he is a careful man who dislikes uncertainty. Their teacher asks them for the reading the passage best supports, and for the one detail that would most weaken it.
1. Which reading does the passage better support? Justify your choice with two details, and name a single detail that would weaken it.
Read the worked answer
Devon's reading is better supported, but only in its first half.
Every action the writer gives us is a checking behaviour: Mr Rolle counts the crates twice, records the figures, and buttons the notebook away. Repetition plus record-keeping is evidence of a man who wants certainty about the small thing he can control. Nineteen years of the same arrival time points the same way.
'Frightened of the sea' is not supported. 'He did not look at the water' is one negative. It is consistent with fear, but equally with habit, boredom or professional discipline: a docker watching the water instead of the cargo is not doing his job. Aisha's reading needs a detail the writer has not supplied - a physical reaction, a refusal to board, a remark about the sea.
The second half of Devon's reading over-reaches as well. 'It comes when it comes' sounds less like a man who dislikes uncertainty than one who has stopped arguing with it. So the accurate answer is narrower than either student's: the passage supports carefulness, not a settled attitude to the sea.
A detail that would weaken Devon's reading: Mr Rolle abandoning the count half-finished when the boat appears, or writing the figures from memory without checking.
2. Aisha calls 'He did not look at the water' her strongest evidence. Explain why an absence is weak evidence, then add one sentence to the passage that would make her reading the better-supported one.
Read the worked answer
Why an absence is weak. A negative tells us what did not happen, not why. Not looking at the water could be caused by fear, but also by routine, boredom, short sightedness, or the belief that watching water is a waste of a working morning. The reader has to supply the cause, and a reader who has already decided Mr Rolle is frightened will supply fear. The more striking the behaviour, the more corroboration it needs: one odd detail is a hint, not proof. Aisha has turned a gap in the text into a fact about the character.
A sentence that would do the work: 'When the ropes slapped against the hull he stepped back from the edge and kept his eyes fixed on the crates until the sound stopped.'
Why this works. It supplies a stimulus (the sound), a reaction (stepping back) and a duration (until the sound stopped). That converts an absence into a pattern of avoidance, which is what Aisha's claim actually requires.