17. Explanation of paragraphs 17 and 18

After the police force had retired, the narrator's mother asked the narrator what had happened to the police officer. She was referring to officer whose hand was bandaged. The narrator explained that the grandfather had shot him. When the mother demanded to know the reason behind the act, the narrator simply explains that it had because 'he was a deserter'. hearing this, the mother exclaimed, 'of all things!', suggesting that she wasn't happy with the news either. Later, she adds that he was such a handsome young man.

 

At breakfast the next morning, Grandfather was as bright as a daisy and full of jokes. The narrator and his family initially assumed he had forgotten all that had happened, but he hadn't. He looked at Herman and the narrator as he sipped his third cup of coffee, and demanded to know what had happened last night. He was also specific with his question, for asked them what the "police officers" were doing. His reveal that he not only remembered the situation from the previous night, but had also realised that the visitors were police officers and not the deserters. It is unclear how he had come to the realisation, or could it be that he had known about the fact all along.

 

In the end, he also points out to his family that none of them were thoughtful enough to leave a bottle of water beside his bedside the previous night. Moreover, he puts forward a rhetorical question, 'do you have any idea what it cost a thirsty man last night to hunt for water in the dining room?', revealing that it was his footsteps that the narrator had heard.

 

Taken by the turn of events, the narrator ends the story by stating, 'he had us there'. He was shocked in realising that all the ruckus and chaos were, in the end, a result of  a small misunderstanding.