[Antoninus]

Oh come on. One can find sexual metaphors in just about any piece of writing if you look hard enough and describe anything that's longer than it is wide as a phallic symbol. I personally am SICK TO DEATH of finding sex themes, hidden or otherwise, in works of literature. They are so ubiquitous as to be the epitome of triteness.

While there clearly was some sexual tension in the Starret household, to suggest a "menage a trois" based on what was written is ridiculous. How would that fit in with the rest of the story? Shane, if nothing else, was the perfect mannered house guest and farm hand. For him to be having sexual relations with Joe Starret's wife behind his back would have made him a completely different character, totally out of keeping with the story.

This kind of silly speculation is exactly why I felt the author would have been better off leaving the whole sexual tension aspect out of the story altoghether.

[parsifal]

"While there clearly was some sexual tension in the Starret household, to suggest a "menage a trois" based on what was written is ridiculous. "

But you agree with me that there is some kind of underlying sexual tension. Perhaps my other supposition, that Shane is either Bobby's father,or was once a lover of Marian's ismore acceptable. Plus,how many households in the Old West, on a farm, only had one child like the Starretts? I submit,not many. Isthat becauseJoe and Marian did not engage in conjugal relations? I still think Shane spent way too much time with the kid. Did Marian contact Shane and ask him to come and save the family?

"Shane" is like an iceberg. 90% is beneath the surface. Literary critics have to examine this kind of stuff. parsy the explicator.