I suppose if I have to explain it then I failed :-(
The story was about the children needing to be tested for magic. Rachel has magic, but the testing process failed to detect it. The doll she has imbued with a kind of magic is evidence of this. We don't know how many times it failed, as the testing that Kaylie has undergone shows that they do, at least sometimes, test more than once. Rachel is completely okay with the idea of not having magic.
The interaction between the faculty shows the indifference that many have to the prospect of magic and the incredible things that could be done with it. Jaded adults? Or just realists? They live in a land of powerful magic, but in a way it's so commonplace that people don't realize the value of it.
In the end, Kaylie is on her way to be tested. The bit of dialog at the end was supposed to be more of a big reveal showing that at least one of the children does have magic. Kaylie discovered the names of the doll and the girl by talking to the doll. But that wasn't enough of a twist. So earlier on in the story, Kaylie asks the doll if it can speak, but there's no reaction. This could lead the reader to believe that it was actually Kaylie that brought it to life, but then, how could it have spoken previously to Rachel? Well, either she made it up as a result of internalizing her experiences of interaction with adults, or the doll really did speak to her and it was, in fact, Rachel's magic that brought the doll to life.
I was hoping to leave the impression that since Kaylie has been tested multiple times, someone thinks she has the potential, even though no one has detected it. Her interactions with Rachel are to show the typical innocent child-like acceptance of the facts of the world as they're presented to them by adults and authority figures. They lack the experiences of adolescence where children begin to doubt what they're told and begin to realize that adults and people of authority or in archetypal roles do make mistakes.
Kaylie's interaction with Rachel helps to demonstrate some of what I've explained, but I think as the story evolved she became more of a tool to tease information out of Rachel rather than to become her own distinct character. I think it might have been a stronger story if I had put more emotion into Kaylie's character to show that she was actually enthusiastic to go to take part in the testing.
I suppose if I have to explain it then I failed :-(
The story was about the children needing to be tested for magic. Rachel has magic, but the testing process failed to detect it. The doll she has imbued with a kind of magic is evidence of this. We don't know how many times it failed, as the testing that Kaylie has undergone shows that they do, at least sometimes, test more than once. Rachel is completely okay with the idea of not having magic.
The interaction between the faculty shows the indifference that many have to the prospect of magic and the incredible things that could be done with it. Jaded adults? Or just realists? They live in a land of powerful magic, but in a way it's so commonplace that people don't realize the value of it.
In the end, Kaylie is on her way to be tested. The bit of dialog at the end was supposed to be more of a big reveal showing that at least one of the children does have magic. Kaylie discovered the names of the doll and the girl by talking to the doll. But that wasn't enough of a twist. So earlier on in the story, Kaylie asks the doll if it can speak, but there's no reaction. This could lead the reader to believe that it was actually Kaylie that brought it to life, but then, how could it have spoken previously to Rachel? Well, either she made it up as a result of internalizing her experiences of interaction with adults, or the doll really did speak to her and it was, in fact, Rachel's magic that brought the doll to life.
I was hoping to leave the impression that since Kaylie has been tested multiple times, someone thinks she has the potential, even though no one has detected it. Her interactions with Rachel are to show the typical innocent child-like acceptance of the facts of the world as they're presented to them by adults and authority figures. They lack the experiences of adolescence where children begin to doubt what they're told and begin to realize that adults and people of authority or in archetypal roles do make mistakes.
Kaylie's interaction with Rachel helps to demonstrate some of what I've explained, but I think as the story evolved she became more of a tool to tease information out of Rachel rather than to become her own distinct character. I think it might have been a stronger story if I had put more emotion into Kaylie's character to show that she was actually enthusiastic to go to take part in the testing.
But then, three hundred words, right?