Skink—No Surrender

Characters’ interactions with wildlife indicate their moral standing within the novel. Hiaasen refuses to judge his characters for their deception or violence unless used to harm the innocent. This pertains to Terwin taking advantage of Malley, which parallels his treatment of animals. Skink and Richard, on the other hand, treat wildlife with respect and therefore receive more leeway on their immoral actions.

When Richard first sees Skink eating roadkill, Richard won’t eat it, quipping that flattened animals are only good if “you’re in the mood for pancakes” (65). Skink doesn’t appreciate Richard’s outlook and replies, “Show some respect, son” (65). Skink won’t tolerate jokes about animals that died at the hands of humans. The wildlife in Florida reward Skink with advantages on his quest. Not only does the roadkill provide him with sustenance, but Skink uses wax myrtle to ward off insects, and his snake rattle necklace saves Richard from discovery by Terwin until a more advantageous moment.

Terwin, on the other hand, disrespects wildlife and receives punishment for it. Readers know that he is an immoral character not because of his lies or violence alone; his treatment of wildlife—and subsequent retribution from nature—sets him apart from the morally ambiguous heroes. When he “fire[s] at a tall blue heron that was standing on the riverbank” (173), Richard immediately attacks him. Skink arrives, and his first words to Terwin are, “why’d you shoot at that lovely bird?” (177). Richard and Skinks are allies of wildlife, and Terwin’s mistreatment of animals triggers their anger. Wildlife itself presents as a direct obstacle for Terwin. When “The dorsal spine of the catfish […] gore[s] the palm of Tommy’s right hand” (159), his injury hinders him for the rest of the novel. Another animal, an alligator, fully ends Terwin’s quest when it kills him in the river.

Whereas a character’s relationship with wildlife indicates their moral standing in the novel, weather represents the unpredictable and sometimes devastating force of nature. Nature is neither moral nor immoral; Richard’s dad tells him that evil “didn’t occur in any other species besides humans” (183). Natural weather hinders the quests of characters irrespective of their roles. Instead, it follows the pattern of the plot.

As Richard’s journey becomes more complicated, the weather cooperates less. When he and Skink close in on Malley’s location, “the sun climbed higher, the breeze quit […] the air got blisteringly hot” (116). As tensions on the houseboat escalate, “none of us had noticed the wall of weather rolling in” (178). Then, when “the situation inside was heading downhill […] the storm gave no signs of letting up” (188). It causes the anchor to break and the water pump to run “nonstop during the heavy squall, draining so much juice from the boat’s battery that there wasn’t enough left to spark the big outboard” (190).

The characters are entirely at the mercy of the weather—an aspect of nature that does not choose sides. Richard becomes more adept at controlling the situations around him, but he cannot control the weather. It is chaotic in the same way the death of his father, who had “a master’s degree in engineering” but “died in a really stupid way” (10), was unexpected.