I reckon Patrick is pathologically shy - at least in anticipation of meeting people - he actually manages well as soon as he is in conversation with them. He avoids new encounters if possible: and introducing himself in cold blood to any of the Marlows, even Peter, would, I think have been beyond him. He met Nicola by chance and was distracted by Jael's needs (which come way above human's - even his own) so there was no avoidance possible. Had he been out with Jael and seen Nicola in the distance he would have legged it - unless that would have been completely and obviously rude. Had it been Peter there, when Jael was caught in the tree, their friendship would have been re-kindled - to a point, as I am not sure Peter would have taken coming second to hawks quite so well!
But re I wonder if he would have been nicer to Peter if Jon hadn't died? I hadn't really thought of that. (Thinks now.)
It is not clear how long the Marlows have been at Trennels before the book begins that summer, but I always feel not very, because of all the catching up of Jon which is going on - though long enough for Nicola have to have found another adult to give her a pre-breakfast meal! So had Jon not died and had taken Peter down one evening to see hawks and meet Patrick, what would have happened? The age/gender/old familiarity would presumably have linked them again - after all, throughout canon, they still get on well when they have something to do together (PR, TTA, RAH) even though Patrick does what Patrick does (as it were, so as not to spoil things). I actually wonder whether Jon being there wouldn't in fact have made a friendship between Peter and Patrick harder ... my view of Patrick is that he can only do one relationship at a time, and sharing Jon would have taxed him. Peter, equally can become quite possessive (though I say this with no real back up in canon, I fear, just my thinking) and there might have been some rivalry for Jon's attention (that would be very hard for Patrick: he's not used to it; more of the same for poor Peter though) which being them would be absolutely unmentionable and could perplex and irritate Jon rather. I think on balance, that Jon being there would not have meant an easier start to the relationship between Peter and Patrick.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Peter and Patrick
Date: 2014-08-08 06:33 am (UTC)But re I hadn't really thought of that. (Thinks now.)
It is not clear how long the Marlows have been at Trennels before the book begins that summer, but I always feel not very, because of all the catching up of Jon which is going on - though long enough for Nicola have to have found another adult to give her a pre-breakfast meal! So had Jon not died and had taken Peter down one evening to see hawks and meet Patrick, what would have happened? The age/gender/old familiarity would presumably have linked them again - after all, throughout canon, they still get on well when they have something to do together (PR, TTA, RAH) even though Patrick does what Patrick does (as it were, so as not to spoil things). I actually wonder whether Jon being there wouldn't in fact have made a friendship between Peter and Patrick harder ... my view of Patrick is that he can only do one relationship at a time, and sharing Jon would have taxed him. Peter, equally can become quite possessive (though I say this with no real back up in canon, I fear, just my thinking) and there might have been some rivalry for Jon's attention (that would be very hard for Patrick: he's not used to it; more of the same for poor Peter though) which being them would be absolutely unmentionable and could perplex and irritate Jon rather. I think on balance, that Jon being there would not have meant an easier start to the relationship between Peter and Patrick.