The Dream house: recollection of the past/ finding truth
Explore how the novel unpacks the idea that the problem of history is that even relying
on the words of others provides an unsatisfactory account of the truth.
The dream house reveals that there is no single truth, but rather that it is a subjective and
personal experience. Each character in the novel creates a truth that consists of his own
experiences as well as the words of others. This is shown through Patricia’s, Looksmart and
Beauty’s conflicting recollections and accounts of Grace’s death, Looksmart’s first time fishing
and the relationship between Looksmart and Patricia when he was a young boy. The3 novel
demonstrates that relying too heavily on other’s accounts of the past may result in a lack of
satisfaction, but that it is also important for each character to create a version of the truth in
order to facilitate reconciliation and growth.
The conflicting recollection of Grace’s death occurs because neither Patricia, Looksmart or
Beauty were present for the entirety of Grace’s death and therefore none of the characters can
know the full truth of the incident, having to “ rely on the words of others” to build an
understanding of how the event unfolded. Patricia's version of the truth around Grace’s death is
centered around what her husband, Richard, had told her. According to Richard, Grace was
“taunting the dog” and it “ wouldn’t have bitten her had she not provoked it”. According to
Patricia’s own memory, she also does not remember Looksmart being at the incident and that it
was her who had to step in and save Grace. Looksmart’s visit to the farm forces Patricia to
acknowledge that there is more to the story and that her truth is not completely accurate.
According to Looksmart, he saw the dog attack “as a murder”. When explaining his version of
the incident, he explains to Patricia that “ it was your husband that caused it”, explaining that
Beauty saw Grace and Richard in the dairy, where Richard was holding her down and he was
raping her. According to Looksmart’s truth, Richard unchained the dog and let it loose on Grace
and then drove away in his car. He then remembers how Patricia would not let Looksmart put
Grace in her car because she didn’t want “blood on her seats, yet Patricia completely denies
this saying “ {she} would never have cared about getting blood on her seats”. Looksmart also
states that while he was busy trying to save Grace, Patricia was “hiding in the house”.
However, Beauty also has a different version of the incident. Beauty’s discussions with Patricia
confirm that Looksmart’s account “ is not the full story” as she reveals that Richard was paying
Grace for sex “each and every time”, and that it was a mutual agreement. Grace then fell
pregnant with Richard’s child and Richard let the dog loose on her. All of these conflicting
testimonies demonstrate that the “problem of history” is that it comprises multiple narratives that
are not necessarily true, therefore providing an unsatisfactory account of the truth.
Another incident that illustrates the subjectivity and inaccuracy of the past is Looksmart’s first
fishing experience. While Patricia recalls the excitement of the event, Looksmart claims that his
“mind mis a blank”, causing her to wonder if she “might have imagined it”. When he admits to
remembering the event the objective part of the truth is revealed: Looksmart and Patricia did go
Explore how the novel unpacks the idea that the problem of history is that even relying
on the words of others provides an unsatisfactory account of the truth.
The dream house reveals that there is no single truth, but rather that it is a subjective and
personal experience. Each character in the novel creates a truth that consists of his own
experiences as well as the words of others. This is shown through Patricia’s, Looksmart and
Beauty’s conflicting recollections and accounts of Grace’s death, Looksmart’s first time fishing
and the relationship between Looksmart and Patricia when he was a young boy. The3 novel
demonstrates that relying too heavily on other’s accounts of the past may result in a lack of
satisfaction, but that it is also important for each character to create a version of the truth in
order to facilitate reconciliation and growth.
The conflicting recollection of Grace’s death occurs because neither Patricia, Looksmart or
Beauty were present for the entirety of Grace’s death and therefore none of the characters can
know the full truth of the incident, having to “ rely on the words of others” to build an
understanding of how the event unfolded. Patricia's version of the truth around Grace’s death is
centered around what her husband, Richard, had told her. According to Richard, Grace was
“taunting the dog” and it “ wouldn’t have bitten her had she not provoked it”. According to
Patricia’s own memory, she also does not remember Looksmart being at the incident and that it
was her who had to step in and save Grace. Looksmart’s visit to the farm forces Patricia to
acknowledge that there is more to the story and that her truth is not completely accurate.
According to Looksmart, he saw the dog attack “as a murder”. When explaining his version of
the incident, he explains to Patricia that “ it was your husband that caused it”, explaining that
Beauty saw Grace and Richard in the dairy, where Richard was holding her down and he was
raping her. According to Looksmart’s truth, Richard unchained the dog and let it loose on Grace
and then drove away in his car. He then remembers how Patricia would not let Looksmart put
Grace in her car because she didn’t want “blood on her seats, yet Patricia completely denies
this saying “ {she} would never have cared about getting blood on her seats”. Looksmart also
states that while he was busy trying to save Grace, Patricia was “hiding in the house”.
However, Beauty also has a different version of the incident. Beauty’s discussions with Patricia
confirm that Looksmart’s account “ is not the full story” as she reveals that Richard was paying
Grace for sex “each and every time”, and that it was a mutual agreement. Grace then fell
pregnant with Richard’s child and Richard let the dog loose on her. All of these conflicting
testimonies demonstrate that the “problem of history” is that it comprises multiple narratives that
are not necessarily true, therefore providing an unsatisfactory account of the truth.
Another incident that illustrates the subjectivity and inaccuracy of the past is Looksmart’s first
fishing experience. While Patricia recalls the excitement of the event, Looksmart claims that his
“mind mis a blank”, causing her to wonder if she “might have imagined it”. When he admits to
remembering the event the objective part of the truth is revealed: Looksmart and Patricia did go
