Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 08:48:43 -0500
Subject: Re: (urth) PEACE: Smart
From: Adam Stephanides 

on 10/18/02 4:46 PM, Roy C. Lackey at rclackey@stic.net wrote:

> Adam wrote:
> [snip]
>> As for why Weer
>> inherited, Smart did have other relatives, but they were distant; and he
> may
>> have preferred to leave the factory to someone who knew the business,
> though
>> related only by marriage, rather than a distant relative by blood who might
>> wreck the business through ignorance.
> 
> Perhaps; it's just that I have a hard time believing that a man would
> willingly leave his estate to someone he wouldn't even speak to. I wouldn't
> allow it to happen; it strikes me as "contrary to everyday experience".

If he doesn't speak to Weer because of loathing, yes.  If, as I and mantis
have argued, they just don't have occasion to speak to each other, then it's
not so strange, given that we don't know of any other relatives Smart speaks
to.  In any case, your scenario seems more unlikely to me, especially given
the added twist of Smart as serial killer who lets his blackmailer live
untouched for twenty-five years.

> Neither am I attached to the idea that Smart didn't necessarily die in order
> for Weer to inherit. It just seems to me that Weer had to have had a good
> reason for sticking with that dead-end job for twenty-five years. After
> W.W.II, jobs for a college-educated man in his early thirties shouldn't have
> been hard to find. So why did Weer stay there?

If Weer is blackmailing Julius to get the company when Julius was
sixty-something, why does he have to stick around if he can get a better job
elsewhere?

> And the company _was_ Weer's. He wasn't just president; he was also "board
> chairman and chief stockholder" (108).

Well, a "chief stockholder" isn't necessarily a majority stockholder, just
the individual with the most shares.  And if Weer is indeed the owner of the
company, than why doesn't the doctor (or Weer speaking through the doctor)
just say "owner"?

> The board of a corporation is not in
> a legal position to bequeath a majority of its stock to an employee, even if
> the board were inclined to do so, which isn't likely.

As I said above, it doesn't have to be a majority.  And the board of a
corporation can grant stock options to an executive; I believe they can even
issue new stock and give that to their executives.  Or Weer could have
bought the stock himself from his salary as president and board chairman.
But, as I said before, I'm not attached to this scenario; I just present it
as oone possible solution.

> While writing about the construction of his memory mansion, Weer says:
> "Furthermore I made the mistake, when the company at last came into my hands
> and I had funds enough to build, of duplicating, or nearly duplicating,
> certain well-remembered rooms whose furnishings had fallen to me by
> inheritance." (35) It's that "at last" which makes me inclined to believe
> that he had reason to believe that he would someday get his hands on Smart's
> company.

Perhaps; but if he was lying by implication to Aaron about inheriting from
Smart, he could also have been lying about not having spoken to Smart.

Another objection to your scenario just occurred to me: if Weer were indeed
blackmailing Smart, and if the payoff were not to come for twenty-five
years, is it really likely that Weer would not once in those years have
approached Smart to remind Smart of his hold over him, and make sure Smart
hadn't changed his mind?

--Adam


--