How do the Brinkman's, Patricia Westerford's and Neelay Mehta's stories tie in to the novel?

Doug, Mimi, Adam, Nick and Olivia are all tied together in a plotline revolving around ecoterrorism. How do you think the Brinkman's, Patricia Westerford's and Neelay Mehta's stories tie in with theirs? How are they relevant to the author's message?

At first I thought the book just contained short stories until each character interacted and the overall "Overstory" was introduced in the Trunk or main chapter of the book.

I am unsure of their contribution to the "Overstory", but they helped keep my interest over too much terrorism from other characters. Overall, Powere knew how their stories would interact and help the reader come to grips with the environmental theme.

This may be a stretch, but I sense evolutionary patterns at play between these stories: divergence, parallelism, and convergence. These three groups of characters have or sustain physical differences that contribute to the need for them to adapt to life in ways that encourage isolation. Paralysis affects the Brinkmans and Neelay, while congenital auditory and speech issues beset Patricia. All alight upon nature and develop the urge to help understand and protect it, just like the five, radical activists. They act upon this urge, however, in their own fashions.

I believe Andrea has pretty much nailed this one. I agree with her response and see these characters, all having physical challenges, needing to grapple with life in different ways that lead them to nature. In each his own way, they connect to it deeply and show us, just as those who are more outspoken characters, how to value and interact and protect nature. All of us, they prove to us, in some way can contribute.

I think Patricia was a vehicle to give us some scholarly information about the trees and what we are doing to them, and how this will hurt us.I think she also represents how some do not want to listen to scientific facts and how we are not in tune with Nature. I did not really get why Ray, Dorothy and Neeley were part of the novel. Andrea's thoughts are interesting, but I do not feel they really contributed to the story.

I confess I didn't fully understand the role these characters played, and kept expecting some big connecting reveal--and thus am intrigued by the thoughts in this thread regarding their purpose. Now I look back on them, to expect their stories to neatly dovetail together is arguably exactly the human-centric thinking that Powers is asking us to move away from--can they not simply be like the branches of a tree with twigs that touch from time to time?

One thing I am sure on is that I wouldn't have wanted to miss out on any of their stories. I was particularly moved by Neeley's relationship with his father--the scene where the two of them are traveling through the virtual reality landscape just before his father's death was, for me, particularly moving. Perhaps Neeley represents the new generation of activists--whereas the generation before him had to physically climb trees to get their message across, he and his generation have new and powerful tools available to them, and the science to back them up.

Patricia's story was entirely necessary to provide the scientific backbone, not just for the reader but for the characters who read and were influenced by her work.

As for the Brinkmans, perhaps they are the "everyman" of the story - the ones like us, going about our daily lives not particularly paying attention to the nature around us until something happens that causes us to be stopped in our tracks and take note.

They offer other reactions to environmental issues other than activism. Patricia Westerford provided scientific analysis and efforts to save the trees and wildernesses, handicapped and less than articulate science struggles on. Neelay Mehta illustrates the electronic disconnect from nature. The Brinkmans are the weak majority who come late to environmental concerns. Finally at the end they let their small world go wild. Some species respond, but the political body is still not ready for wildness.

davinamw, I really like your response to this question and Neelay seems to me to be the most different of all these characters in that he is handicapped and confined - yet he has found a new way to contribute - he represents, as you say, the newest, electronic ways of activism. He was an exciting character for me. Thanks for expressing this so well.

I confess that I wasn't quite sure how those characters connected differently than the others until I read the discussion between Andrea, Susiej and Davina. Yes agree that each of them is physically limited which encourages them to overcompensate in other areas and which draws them even closer to the environment. Thanks for the clarity!

Thank you paulagh for your response. I agree with you entirely.
I found these characters’ stories a nice break from the more intense stories of the activists.
These stories were easier narratives to understand...more concrete, less symbolic.

Patricia Westerford was key to the understanding and importance of trees. We need more like her who are dedicated to their protection.

I felt that Patricia and Neelay represented the hope for the future of our planet and that Ray and Dorothy showed that trees (and nature) could bring people together. For me, the entire book was about human relationships to each other and to nature.