One of Cousineau's central contentions seems to be that all these books are ambivalent about their scapegoatings. But if ambivalence is a key feature of these novels, chances are it will be hard to read these books very far in a single direction without running into some countervailing evidence.
Cousineau shows that these novels not only work to demystify scapegoating by defending "a solitary protagonist who has become the target of communal violence" (17), but they also, ironically, threaten to remystify sacrifice, often by inviting us to sympathize with first-person narrators who themselves are anxious to shift guilt from themselves and onto others.
In his reading of The Good Soldier, Cousineau argues that "Dowell had wanted his story to be about the scapegoating of Edward by an unfeeling community" but finally it proves "to be about his own desire to model himself, in however a desultory or cheerless fashion, upon Edward" (100).
Finally, Cousineau suggests that To the Lighthouse best demystifies scapegoating by setting up apparent scapegoats in Mr.