1. Who was the Chairman in the film (I know that somebody found info that the director said that the Chairman was a female character in the film)? Did Norris and / or Elise see the Chairman during the film or was it earlier in their lifetimes before the film ever began? (Do you buy my idea that it was the guy that said hi to Norris on the street after the second time Norris and Elise meet?)
2. When Harry said to Elise and Norris that the Chairman rewrote the plan, the book showed a blank space ahead for the two of them. What do you think that meant? Does the blank space mean that David and Elise get to forge their own destiny? Or does it mean something else? Explain. And what does this say about the mind of the Chairman, that two humans can change the
3. Kids in past classes have asked why there weren't any female adjusters. I didn't have an answer for them as to that question. I have also criticized the film's Western / Euro - centered bias when it talked about giving mankind free will during the Roman times and the Cuban Missile Crisis. Assess the film in light of these flaws.
4. Why do you think the filmmaker decided never to show the Chairman in his/her/its true form? By leaving this question unanswered, what was the filmmaker's intent?
5. Think about Harry's crisis of conscience when Elise and David broke up for the 3rd time (when he left her at the hospital), and he asked Richardson about the rightness of the plan. Put yourself in one of the adjusters' shoes and try to make sense of it all when you're only given part of the picture. Does this limited view of the big picture reflect our own view on life in general? Why or why not?
6. Do you agree with Thompson when he says that "free will is an illusion"? Why or why not?
7. What is the filmmaker saying about order and chaos when Thompson tells us about the times when humans had free will and made a complete mess of the world?
8. Looking at Harry's statement at the end (see below), what do you think is the filmmaker's message? Why?
“Most people live life on the path that we set for them to afraid to explore any other [path]/ Sometimes, someone like you comes along and knocks down the obstacles that we put in your way. People should realize that free will is a gift that you’ll never know how to use until you fight for it. I think that’s the Chairman’s real point. And maybe one day, we won’t write the plan, you will.”
Pick three of these questions and answer them for Monday, April 22 before class begins. 350 word minimum. Thanks.
Some articles on the inclusion of philosophy in Adjustment Bureau:
1. https://www.philosophynews.com/post/2011/09/05/The-Adjustment-Bureau-and-Free-Will.aspx
2. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/plato-pop/201103/what-the-adjustment-bureau-tells-us-about-free-will
3. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/plato-pop/201103/how-the-adjustment-bureau-threatens-free-will
4. https://maxandrews.wordpress.com/2011/03/06/the-philosophy-behind-the-adjustment-bureau/
5. http://www1.cbn.com/movies/the-adjustment-bureau-fate-free-will
Some articles on the inclusion of philosophy in Adjustment Bureau:
1. https://www.philosophynews.com/post/2011/09/05/The-Adjustment-Bureau-and-Free-Will.aspx
2. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/plato-pop/201103/what-the-adjustment-bureau-tells-us-about-free-will
3. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/plato-pop/201103/how-the-adjustment-bureau-threatens-free-will
4. https://maxandrews.wordpress.com/2011/03/06/the-philosophy-behind-the-adjustment-bureau/
5. http://www1.cbn.com/movies/the-adjustment-bureau-fate-free-will
Jake Stollman
ReplyDelete4. I think the Chairman is God. The metaphors (the adjusters, the Chairman’s subordinates, have been called angels), and the Chairman’s physical absence from the film, suggest this. This analogy, however, is rather predictable, and I think is why the film has not become more famous. If there had been something like a Board of Directors in place of a a single almighty Chairman, there could have been suggestion of a polytheistic religion, far less symbolized in film than the Abrahamic god. But there is one choice the filmmakers made that caused at least this level of speculation to occur: the Chairman was not shown in the film. This, to me, echoes a filmmaking decision 43 years prior: In the climax of the Sci-Fi epic 2001: A Space Odyssey, the astronaut David Bowman goes on a galactic voyage in an iconic and psychedelic scene. Co-writers Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke wanted to depict alien life. They contacted the 1968’s foremost expert on extraterrestrial life, Carl Sagan, who suggested not showing the aliens at all. This lack of alien life found its way into the movie, and the cryptic nature of the aliens is preserved to this day. This same decision influenced the writer/director; the Chairman was absent and thus Adjustment Bureau is more interesting.
7. What Thompson is saying about humanity is that it is, on its own, animalistic and flawed. Thompson argues the Hobbesian critique of humanity, saying that it is not suited to govern itself. Thompson backs this up, citing the two instances in which humanity was left with free will. These two instances brought about A. The Dark Ages, and B. The World Wars. These great tragedies of humanity, Thompson believed, are in the true nature of humanity.
8. Considering Harry’s statement at the end, I believe the filmmaker wanted to express that free will is earned. Not all people have it (Charlie, who at one point in the movie, is pictured completely still and under the Bureau’s influence, and also does exactly what it commands at another point.) The filmmaker wanted to express that those with free will should prove their worth, and should that proved worth seem great enough, that free will should be granted to all.
I think that the director didn’t want to show the “Chairman’s” chosen form because he did not want to step on any religious toes and so that he could help us connect better to Norris by having us look back and try to find out who the “Chairman” was while Matt Damon's character did the same. Although it also makes some sense since this way we don’t have the scene where Norris spends another few hours questioning the “Chairman” on literally every possible event in human history. So with these three options the directors intent was to make it easier on everyone and to help us feel for Nottis more not to mention it just makes the movie end a lot cleaner instead of adding a new character at the end you just get the impression of a character.
ReplyDeleteHarry’s quote at the end of the movie on free will is put there to explain to the watcher that this manipulation will probably not last forever and that “God’s” plan ultimately ends with the people who were planned becoming the planners. I think that the end of this quote also rings true for a lot of other things such as a form of government or a way of life you don’t understand how much you like it until you are faced with the threat of it being taken away.The quote also tells us that harry believes that the “Chairman” wants humanity to have free will but hasn’t shown or hasn’t found a way to do it yet.
In the section of the movie where Thompson is telling Norris about the two times that the angles/ bureau agents have let people make their own choices the world has tossed itself into a terrible mess such as the dark ages and the two world wars the messes were so bad that the bureau had to intervene again to make sure mankind didn’t end up destroying itself. I also think that it is an interesting argument against anarchy and for government because if you think of the Bureau as a government and the nations as demographics of people it raises an interesting point that if you leave people to complete freedom then they will end up destroying the rest of humanity.
The Adjustment Bureau is a rather interesting movie; about a politician named Norris who tries to get his love of his life, though destiny, controlled by man with hats calling themselves the adjustment bureau, is standing in his way. He tries to cheat the system, but he does not have the resources or mobility to outsmart the adjustment bureau. But some questions arose while watching this movie that I would like to discuss, they are: Do we have freewill or is it just an illusion? What is the filmmaker saying about order and chaos? And what is the filmmaker’s message at the end, when he is saying that we should fight for our freewill because it is not easily given.
ReplyDeleteI have watched a lot of movies on the topic of freewill and read some books on it. So far, no one has come up with a real explanation to what conciseness is, but scientist theorize it must have something to do with chemical reactions in our brain that give us the illusion of choice and freewill. But you might be wondering what conscience has to do with freewill and choice. Its simple. If we only have the illusion of sentients, then how do we know that our actions aren’t just preprogrammed reactions to external factors? For example, us humans tend to do things what the majority wants us to do. In other words, a great definition for that would be heard behavior. It’s a classic phenomenon where human choices are influenced through the decisions of others around them. You could pretty much compare that to peer pressure for instance. You may not want to have that cup of tea but everyone else is making you feel bad about it, so you do it anyway. Its only natural for us humans to do that.
Lastly, I want to discuss the various messages the filmmaker was trying to convey in his movie on the topic of order and chaos, and if we should always walk the path given to us as portrayed in the last couple minutes of the movie. When Thompson—one of the bureau men—tells us that we had freewill previously in our history but just we failed to keep order which lead to the collapse of Rome and the Cuban missile crisis. They had to step in and make sure that we don’t annihilate ourselves. The filmmaker’s message to this is that freewill is dangerous and it shouldn’t be easily given which ties in with this quote relatively well.
“Most people live life on the path that we set for them to afraid to explore any other [path]/ Sometimes, someone like you comes along and knocks down the obstacles that we put in your way. People should realize that free will is a gift that you’ll never know how to use until you fight for it. I think that’s the Chairman’s real point. And maybe one day, we won’t write the plan, you will.”
We aren’t ready to make decisions on own yet, but we should still fight for it. We need to prove to ourselves that we are indeed ready to make our own choices. I think that’s what the filmmaker is trying to convey.
I think the chairman was Norris’ Father. If you think about it, Norris becoming an influential leader was his main purpose, radically changing his plan when he spoke with Elise. Norris spoke about how inspirational his Father was in his political quests, in fact, prompting his interest in politics altogether. When Norris’ Father took him to the Congressional Gallery, he made Norris want to become a political figure. It would make sense that the Chairman’s mark on Norris’ life was to drive him to be a public figure. Second, When Norris and Elise see the blank page in the book holding their fate, I think it alludes to the fact that they can write their own destiny as their lives go on. They are in control of their fate because they showed the Chairman they could break his plan if they wanted to. “Fortune favors the bold” encapsulates the entire scenario precisely in my opinion. Norris was bold enough to the challenge the Chairman. He could have had his entire memory, therefore existence erased to be with the person he loves. Third, I think the filmmaker decided to leave the Chairman anonymous because they are anonymous to everyone in our real life. To me, the Chairman is alluding to God. No one really knows who God is, what they look like or where they are, so leaving the Chairman anonymous keeps the movie in some realm of reality. Lastly, Harry’s final statement is a plea to the masses to fight for the things you want, and take control of your life. Otherwise, you may literally fall into someone else’s plan, in the case of the movie, the Bureau’s plan. I think it is very important for people to think about what they want in life, visualize it, but then, the very important step most people never get to, take action. We all have dreams and aspirations and things we want to do with our lives, and we must all take steps and take action to achieve them or they will just become regrets. Or we will all have our memories erased, either way.
ReplyDeleteRiana Richards
ReplyDelete(Question One)
Im not really sure who the chairman was in The Adjustment Bureau. The whole time we were watching I was asking myself: who could it be? The only logical explanation to me would be that it could be the bartender that handed Norris the note. Not only just because it's a woman so it makes sense, but because that note really shifted the whole movie and without that note none of this would have happened. I'm not sure if they had seen the characters Elise and Norris in their lives before but it would make sense seeing that she knew exactly who he was and his friend who left the note. No I really don't buy that it could be the man that waved to Norris during the film I just think that would be entirely to simple.
(Question 4)
I think that the reason that the author chose to leave the chairman out of the movie was to add suspense. It does make u really think at the end of the movie about the entire thing as a whole, but i would have way rathered for it be shown. Although suspense is always needed in movies and it adds to the entertainment, I would have just enjoyed a clear ending. I'm not a big fan of cliffhangers and to me this felt like a huge one. I'm also interested to know if the chairman would have played a major role in the movie. Would the chairman have been introduced in the beginning such as Harry and Richardson or would it have been a reveal at the end?
(Question 8)
I think that Harry’s statement at the end of the film is talking about society today. Although we are free to make choices government still monitors them in some way much like the bureau. It's also saying that we are given the privilege of freedom and shouldn't take it for granted no matter the situation. The statement also relates to the movie in the ending when it says “And maybe one day, we won't write the plan, you will”. That line makes me think about the blank section in the book and how Elise and Norris’ story will be rewritten in their favor this time.
The Adjustment Bureau was a fantastic movie and did well to illustrate the philosophical idea of free will. Throughout the movie, it was constantly ingrained in David that the adjusters were manipulating people’s lives and that there was nothing he could do about it. People did not have free will; that was the point that the adjusters were trying to make. The end of the movie, however, shows how David and Elise end up together, contrary to what the adjusters wanted. In the journal the pages surrounding David and Elise become blank, which I interpret as them having the ability to forge their own destiny, without the influence of the adjusters. They are able to go about their lives and make something of it. This possibly could be displaying a change in the Chairman’s thinking, as now the Chairman is giving humanity another chance to have free will. One day we could actually be worthy of having free will and would use it to improve society, not destroy the world.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most renown adjusters in the movie, Thompson, tells David how when they allowed humanity to have free will the world was thrown in chaos and was on the verge of destruction. One can say that when given the ability to make your own decisions, people will only end up looking out for themselves and what benefits them. If you want to get biblical with it, God flooded the Earth in order to restart the world, the only survivors being Noah, his family, and a pair of each animal species. This was an example of humanity being so sinful to the point that the world was horrible because of it. The filmmaker wanted to show how throughout history, people make decisions that put others at risk and could bring about the end of the world.
The final moment of the movie was a quote given by Harry. The last line states how there could be a day when the adjusters won’t write a plan, people will. With free will, people have the potential to spiral in chaos or bring about a positive change in the world. And despite there being tons of people who choose to do some really bad things, there are also people who do great things. There shouldn’t be a higher power dictating what we do and how we do it, as making choices is a part of life, it is a part of what makes us people.
-Jordan Matthews 5th Hour
I decided to answer questions 1, 2, and 4. I personally think that the Chairman in the film was Elises friend from the dance studio and the girl from the day he broke up the wedding. I believe the Chairman was the girl that told Norris that Elise was not in the wedding room yet, and the dance studio lady who told him where to find her. She was helping guide Norris to Elise on multiple occasions. So by that idea, I believe that they saw the Chairman during the film. I do not personally believe your idea that it was the guy that said hi to Norris on the street after the second time Norris and Elise meet because I don’t believe that man played a big enough role in affecting how Elise and David feel about each other or them continuing to talk to each other.
ReplyDeleteI believe the blank space in the book means that Norris and Elise have earned the right to write their own story and create what happens to themselves next. The Chairman let them create their own story instead of writing it out himself because he was so wrong the first time, and they got it so right on their own that he decided to continue letting them have power over their own future. The Chairman's mind realized that even he or she makes mistakes. The Chairman is starting to realize that two humans, if willing, can change their predetermined lives.
I believe the filmmaker’s intent of not showing the Chairman in his/her true form was to let the audience have an imagination of their own and create their own ideas on the movie. By leaving the question unanswered on who the Chairman was, it gives the audience chances to argue and debate in class or among their friends or acquaintances on who THEY believe the Chairman was. The Chairman could be the man in the street that shouted Norris name or the dance studio lady, or Norris’ friend or it could even have been Harry. Each person notices different specific details than their friend so their final idea of the movie will be different.
-Brody Hiipakka
The movie was very interesting. I don’t know what I initially expected, but I really did not expect it to be the way it was. I thought it would be very dull, hard to follow and very boring. But instead, the movie kept my attention and I actually wanted to watch more of it. A lot of the aspects of the movie were confusing when they were first introduced. Once I became familiar with the adjustment bureau and what their importance to the story was, my thoughts were a lot clearer. Throughout the movie, I had several thoughts and these questions closely resembled them.
ReplyDeleteI think the blank space in front of David and Elise meant their destiny was now in their hands. They were free to choose exactly the routes they wanted to go down, without interference by the bureau. At the end of the film, when Harry says that people must fight for their right to control their destiny, it directly relates to David’s ongoing passion and drive to do things his way. He worked hard to forge his own destiny and I think that is why the Chairman gave him the opportunity to. This act by the Chairman shows me that he is willing and hopeful for humans to have their own free will, but only if truly deserved. It shows that he may be open-minded, but is critical about who he selects to do so.
I think the film kept the identity of the Chairman a secret because they wanted to replicate a higher power as much as possible. By leaving their true form hidden, the author’s intent might’ve been for the audience to view the Chairman in the same light as God. In some religions, Christianity for example, God is the image in which he created you. So this basically means, God is whatever you think he is. I think this is why at the end Harry mentioned that David had met the Chairman but he comes differently to everyone.
I think Harry’s ending message was meant to get people to understand the value of the lives that we have. Instead of doing everything in an exact way, we should be more willing and open to the changes that life can bring. Once we are open to those, we can accept and fight for our free will, to make life more unpredictable and well lived.
Alexandra Cvetko
ReplyDelete5th Hour
Blog #83 - Adjustment Bureau
Question 2:
When Harry told Elise and David that the Chairman rewrote the plan, he opened the book and revealed a blank space where their future would normally have been mapped out. I believe that this is because the Chairman is giving Elise and David the opportunity to write their own future for themselves. The Chairman has realized that no matter what he/she maps out in advance for David and Elise, they are going to follow their hearts instead, even if that means straying off of the paths that were originally designed for them.
Throughout the entirety of the movie, David fights against the Bureau in order to stay with Elise. When the Bureau burns Elise’s phone number, instead of accepting that he might never see Elise again, he takes the same bus every day for three years in the hopes that he’ll run into her again someday.
Question 4:
By choosing to never reveal the Chairman’s true identity to the viewers of the movie, the director has given us the chance to determine for ourselves who the Chairman really is, much like the conclusion of the movie where Elise and David get to determine their own fate, as shown by the blank space left in the notebook. The idea of thinking freely and for yourself is what the entire movie is centered around, and by leaving the Chairman’s identity unidentified, we as viewers get to think for ourselves and decide who he/she really is.
I also believe that the filmmaker chose to leave the Chairman’s identity a secret because it adds an element of mystery to the movie. In class, after we finished watching, we couldn’t stop talking about who we thought the Chairman might be. It got people talking about the movie, and I think that the director made an excellent choice by not telling us who he/she really was.
Question 7:
I believe that the filmmaker is saying that we need to be more careful with our choices moving forward. We as people have made some irrational decisions in the past, such as participating in wars, etc. Instead of fighting with one another and creating chaos, we need to work alongside each other and not make such hasty decisions that can cause more harm than good.
Riley Montgomery
ReplyDelete1. I think that the chairman of the adjustment bureau was Elise’s friend, also maid of honor at her wedding and clerk at the dance studio. She is around during a lot of important moments of the film. For example, she leads Norris to the dance studio that Elise is in when he has reached maximum ripples and she again shows Norris where Elise is at the courthouse, even though he didn’t introduce himself, but she still knew who he was and who he was looking for. If she was not the chairman wouldn’t the adjustment bureau’s map or men guide her to tell Norris she didn’t know where Elise was or mistakenly point him in the wrong direction? She is the only person that wants Elise and Norris to be together when they are not supposed to be. She also asks Elise if she is sure before entering the courthouse to get married, which would suggest maybe she knows Elise is not ready.
4. By never showing who the chairman is the film gives the character more power. The chairman is more like god without an identity and the identity is not really important to the plot of the film. The reference to the chairman has a lot more ominous power than any identified person could. Revealing the chairman’s identity could also raise a lot more questions and that’s not what the film is about. The film wants a character that has all power and can control everything. Giving that human form would make the chairman too much like us.
6. Yes, I agree with Thompson that free will is an illusion. The choices we make have already been decided based on our previous experiences and genetics. We may feel like we can choose, but it is the environments we have been raised in and genetic factors that make the decision for us. The decisions you make are not your own, they are very complicated occurrences that come from a variety of factors interacting with each other. I chose to come to school today because of the incentives offered for coming to school (good attendance and good grades -> good college), because my parents tell me to, and because its whats I always do.
1.) I think that the chairman was receptionist and friend of Elise, Robyn. One because the Director of the movie said that his intention was to have all the "angels" be men and the chairman be a woman for a sort of surprise twist. Two she makes appearances at crucial moments of the movie. When Norris is going to the dance studio to see her and Harry says that this is the maximum ripple point Robyn is there and opens the door for him. Her second appearance comes when Norris is making his great run to stop the wedding, and without even asking Robyn gives Norris Elise's location.
ReplyDelete3.) The director previously has said in interviews that his intention was to make all of the adjusters were men, then at the end reveal that the chairman was a woman (when I read this I imagined Emma Thompson not sure why). But this was to empower women I guess like Ariana Grande's God is a woman. However he made the decision in the end to never reveal who the Chairman was or their gender. This makes it seem like it was oversight, or patriarchal tyranny. But really it was a creative decision to keep the identity of the Chairman up to each person's own interpretations with the remnants of an idea.
6.) I think the free will is an illusion is much like the psychological determinism that we have discussed in class. I can do this blog or I can not do it and take a bad grade it seems like it's my choice. But really there is an immense series of cause and effect going back to the Big Bang that has influenced every choice and decision ever made. It seems like I have free will but truly I'm making a choice off of my past decisions and lessons learned from those events.
1) My immediate thought when it was revealed that Norris does know the chairman was that Norris is the chairman himself. I didn't have all the little nuances worked out but I thought it was really cool how it all tied together and the ending really impacted me and left me with my thoughts. I figured that as I continued to think about the plot and the characters, it would start to make sense and wrap itself up with a pretty bow. I was really surprised in class when people started talking about which background character they thought it was. I do think it would be cool/is cool that the chairman could be a background character that we see only once because it leaves everything up for interpretation/speculation. But since it is all up to speculation anyway, I like my theory that we all are our own chairman. This puts an emphasis on the whole concept of unlocking your own freewill and it supports the fact that the chairman always takes a different form. Because when David and Elise kissed on top of that building, they were rewriting their fate, and in that moment, the chairman rewrote the fate. Coincidence??? Yeah. Maybe. I also think its cool that their fate was readjusted when they kissed. Just how the second time they were together, their fate would have been changed if they kissed then.
ReplyDelete4) This may not have been the director's true intent, but by leaving the Chairman's identity up for interpretation, he/she takes different forms in each of the audience members' minds, just like he/she takes different forms for each individual in the movie. To me, the chairman is Norris himself, but to other people in class, she's the bartender, or he's the supporter on the street. Our speculation, once again, reinforces one of the major concepts of the movie.
6) I have to agree that free will is an allusion, because I do not really know what free will is. I could be experiencing free will, but I have no way to prove it. I could not have free will and I have no way to know. Which ever side of the argument you take, free will is still an abstract idea.
I've chosen questions two, four, and seven. When Harry showed David and Elise the blank book at the end of the movie, I think this means that their path is blank... undetermined, rather than being decided for them. I think this is The Chairman's way of letting them choose the path they want: whether they want to be together, or not. David fought for years against the adjustment bureau, which eventually paid off. He was determined and worked to get what he wanted, which was Elise, and he got her. I think this shows that The Chairman has a heart too. I think The Chairman gives people the fate that they desire if they work long and hard for it which definitely radiates a god-like/ higher power entity.
ReplyDeleteI don't think The Chairman was ever shown in their true form because The Chairman in a way is much like the God of this movie. The Chairman is considered the all-controlling, all-powerful, and all-knowing -- just as God is described. I think The Chairman's true form is never shown because The Chairman may come up as many different people in different situations or may even take on the role of someone for a short time to check in on someone, and may have a true form of their own. I think the absence of The Chairman brings about a lot of speculation and suspense. The possibilities seem to be endless with the power of the Adjustment Bureau especially considering the fact they literally freeze people.
It seems as though the idea that the filmmaker is attempting to portray is the idea that people can't be trusted with their own fate and free will. The filmmakers emphasize this point several times throughout the movie. But more specifically, Thompson describes two times when they'd attempted to give people free will and nothing but destruction came out of it. The first time, the Dark Ages was the result, and the second time, war and the great depression followed. Human beings are flawed and make mistakes, which is why we they are not to govern themselves. Humans inevitably think with their emotions - a fact stated in the movie. Thinking and 'ruling' with your emotions is not the equivalent of thinking completely rationally. Positive vs. negative connotations or emotions towards something or a person may change the way you do or perceive things. Your own bias may get in the way of thinking and making rational decisions.
Rebecca Burke
In the film Adjustment Bureau the true identity of the chairman was never really shown to the audience. Norris and Elise were told that they had already met the chairman, but they too didn’t know they had met him/her. It is hard to say who the chairman actually is, because I think it could be many people throughout the film. One guess of mine is the bartender from early in the movie. The reason I think so is because when Norris walked into the bar, the bartender immediately recognized him and she handed him a paper note from Harry. Maybe she was the chairman and knew Harry was one of the adjusters? Otherwise, how would she be able to distinguish Norris so easily from everyone else?
ReplyDeleteI think the blank space in the book meant a new start for Elise and Norris. Since the chairman along with the other adjusters realized how resistant Norris was to leaving Elise, they also realized that no matter what, he would do anything to be with her so why not let them be together? I think it was good that the Chairman allowed them to make their own destiny because it shows that the chairman doesn’t completely hat the idea of free will, and will allow those who fight for it the right to it. It shows that in the mind of the chairman, two humans can change the course of their lives for the better (in this case).
By not showing the chairman, I think the filmmaker made the point that your life can be influenced by anyone around you and you might not even notice! For example, if the chairman was the bartender, she influences Norris’s life by handing him that slip of paper, or he would have never been given the helpful information from Harry. If he hadn’t gotten that information from Harry, Norris might have given up on getting Elise! It makes me think more about who influenced my life and who would be the “chairman” in my life, but honestly I still don’t know! My guess is it would be one of my parents, or maybe it is myself and my conscience?