I talked about this post with Nila a while back after I posted my article about Anohito’s voice, smile and open arms in the CCFS Epilogue, however, I didn’t remember to post it until now. It’s a short post, but I might post another (longer) article tomorrow or on Sunday if time permits.
It started with me receiving the Italian version of the CCFS. I flipped through the books and realised again something odd with the Epilogue.
Before I resume with my explanation, let me quote what an Epilogue means. The Cambridge Dictionary states that an Epilogue is “a speech or piece of text that is added to the end of a play or book, often giving a short statement about what happens to the characters after the play or book finishes”. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary gives three main meanings of an Epilogue. One of them is related to a book, thus an Epilogue is “a concluding section that rounds out the design of a literary work”. In contrast, a Prologue is “a part that comes at the beginning of a play, story, or long poem, often giving information about events that happened before the time when the play, story, or poem begins” (The Cambridge Dictionary). Although the Merriam-Webster version is very straightforward, I like using the Cambridge Dictionary’s version more because it stipulates that an Epilogue usually discloses what happens to the characters after the last chapter (pre-Epilogue) of the book.
An Epilogue is where we learn about what happens to the main characters. If we read a Dan Brown novel, the epilogue will tell us what happens to the hero, the heroine, and the bad guys (if he/she has not died at the last chapter preceding the epilogue). The Epilogue of my favourite Indian novel “The Shiva Trilogy” tells us what happened to Shiva, Ganesh, Kartik, Kali, and their gang after the obliteration of Devagiri/Tripura (and after the death of Lady Sati). At times, I’ve seen that a novel doesn’t have a specific “Prologue” and a specific “Epilogue”. Some Agatha Christie novels are like that. It doesn’t mean that the novel doesn’t have an introduction section; it does. It is just built into Chapter 1. All Jane Austen novels don’t have Prologues and Epilogues. The prologue was sewn into Chapter 1; the epilogue was sewn at the end of the last chapter. Despite the lack of a specific “Epilogue”, we learn what happened with Elizabeth and Jane Bennet, Mr Darcy, Mr Bingley, and even Lydia and Wickham in “Pride and Prejudice”. In “Sense and Sensibility”, we learn that Marianne Dashwood would marry Col Brandon, and her sister Elinor Dashwood would marry Edward Ferrars. I can't remember if Harry Potter books have specific epilogues or not; but in the last section of the last book, we learned what happened to Harry, Ron, and Hermione and their offsprings.
In Candy-Candy the Final Story, we have a specific chapter called the Prologue. We also have an Epilogue, where we should ideally know what happens to our main characters. I would say that our main characters in the Candy Universe are definitely Candy, Anthony, Albert, Terry, Annie, Stear, Archie and Patty. We know what happened to Stear… he died in the French sky (still painful…). From Candy’s unsent letter to Stear, we know that Patty was studying to be a teacher in Chicago. We also know that Annie and Archie were finally married; that Archie finally loved Annie wholeheartedly (Candy’s letter stating how anxious Archie was when the two families were against his marriage with Annie was a good evidence of that change of heart). Annie-Archie’s wedding was the third last event in the chapters preceding the Epilogue in real-time. Susanna Marlowe’s death and Terry’s letter to Candy are the second and first event before the Epilogue.
That leaves us to wonder about what happened to Candy, Anthony, Albert and Terry in the Epilogue. Because CCFS is a romance novel, I think it’s logical to expect that its epilogue would contain information about these four characters. I have earlier argued that Candy’s unsent letter to Anthony and her letter exchanges with Albert should have chronologically be placed way earlier in the chronology. The nature of Candy’s “conversation” with Anthony is such that she could not have written it when she was already married to Anohito. She would write the letter right after her second visit to Lakewood with Albert. By the same token, the letters between Candy and Albert should have been exchanged soon after Candy realised that Albert was also the Prince of the Hill. I proposed that these letters were exchanged within a year after Candy learned, hence after the end of the manga. I do not retract my hypothesis in this article. I am certain that those letters should still be placed earlier in the chronology.
In another word, I believe that the Albert-Candy letters, and the letter to Anthony should not be in the Epilogue. The real Epilogue is when Candy finished reminiscing her past and Anohito returned home. The mixed emotions Candy felt during her recollections made her jump off her seat and flew into her husband’s open arms as he asked why she was sitting in the dark.
Thus, if we remove the letters between Albert-Candy and Candy’s letter to Anthony, we are left with the passage where Candy returned to her present, where evening had fallen on the bank of the Avon River.
Yet, remember that Mizuki Kyoko wrote three loves for Candy: 初恋 hatsukoi (first love for Anthony), 恋 koi (passionate love for Terry) and 愛 ai (general love for Albert). Thus, in the Epilogue, we need to know what happens to the main characters. In this case, Candy’s three loves.
Then let’s go back to the time I received my Italian CCFS. Upon flipping through the Epilogue, if we read without analyzing the chronology of Albert’s and Candy’s letters, I realised that the Epilogue does tell us what happens to Albert and Anthony, two of Candy’s love.
The Epilogue makes me understand that Albert was still a very important person for Candy; the invisible ties (mienai ito, 見えない糸) indeed existed between them. Letters between Albert and Candy show the nature of their relationship: there’s trust, there’s deep love (which I don’t see as amorous, but more platonic). There’s sadness too in Candy, because she had not yet moved on from Terry in her last letter to Albert (despite her saying she was happy).
Letter to Anthony was in the Epilogue to show the readers the state of Candy’s love to Anthony. Her love to Anthony has morphed into a more platonic love, yet still beautiful and deep. We know that Anthony was still very important for Candy. In reading Vol 1 (p. 230-235), we will know that Candy still had dreams of Anthony. In her dreams, the gentle Anthony would ask if she was happy, and Candy would reply with an affirmative, for she is now living with someone she loved.
Then… what about Terry? After knowing about Albert and Anthony, logically we should know what happened to Terry. After all, Terry was the second most frequently-mentioned name in CCFS after Candy. (Footnote #1).
And yet… Terry’s name was only mentioned
Thus, the second Lakewood visit (and Albert returning Candy’s diary to her) and Candy's unsent letter to Anthony should precede Terry’s letter to Candy by a good few years. Thus, not mentioning Terry at all after Candy’s letter to Anthony is weird because we couldn’t find out what happened to Terry afterwards.
Has Terry suddenly fell out of grace in Candy’s eyes that she didn’t even want to think of him after Susanna’s death, let alone replying to his letter? I don’t think so. Candy even accepted Terry in his darkest hours. If she was in a relationship with another man, Candy would still reply to Terry’s letter, if only to tell him that she had moved on.
Thus to me, the only logical way is to see the Epilogue as three blocks of information: 1) info about Albert; 2) info about Anthony, and 3) info about Terry… which is gained by understanding Anohito’s identity.
You see…Nagita Keiko liked to put layers upon layers of clue in CCFS. She is akin to Jane Austen in her riddles. Although Albert-Candy letters and Candy’s letter to Anthony should chronologically took place immediately after the end of the manga, Nagita deliberately placed those letters in the Epilogue for two reasons: 1) to purposely confuse their readers; 2) to give a blatant clue to the identity of Anohito.
I have laid out my arguments for Reason #1 (Nagita deliberately confusing us) that Anohito is definitely Terry (click this link and follow the links inside that article). Yes, also the voice, the smile and the open arms of Anohito’s… those were Terry’s.
Now… for Reason #2 that Terry was not mentioned in the Epilogue…
WHAT IF Keiko actually dropped one of the biggest hints of Anohito in the Epilogue? In the Epilogue, she explicitly talked about Albert and Anthony. Yet she did not talk about Terry there. No direct reference to Terry, such as a letter to Terry or from Terry (Candy’s letter to Terry and Terry’s short letter to Candy were placed rightfully before Epilogue) other than when Albert returned Candy’s diary.
And to me, it could be Keiko’s last bread crumbs. She has given pages of Albert-Candy letters in the Epilogue that showed the invisible ties between them. Nagita had made Candy writing a letter to Anthony in the Epilogue, thus showing us how Candy’s love to Anthony has indeed turned into a platonic love.
Yet, Nagita wrote no section for Terry in the Epilogue. It is not because Terry had fallen out of grace in Candy’s eyes. Terry was not mentioned in the Epilogue because he was there as Anohito, returning home. The page reserved for Terry in the Epilogue is the last page, where he as Anohito (now I’m gonna cry) returned home to hug his lovely wife…
1. Mention-analysis from Lady Gato and Holly
In 2014, Lady Gato counted the number of times Candy, Terry, Albert and Anthony were mentioned in CCFS. Holly then re-counted the scores to include some pages that were not translated into English yet. The final result: Candy was mentioned 2,412 times, Terry was mentioned 791 times, Albert was mentioned 465 times, and Anthony was mentioned 493 times. I understand that both Lady Gato and Holly counted the name variants, including "the Prince of the Hill", "Great Uncle", "William", "Bert", etc., for Albert. I am not certain whether "Tarzan" or "Freckled Tarzan" etc were included in the count for Candy, but I suspect so. I am certain that "Anohito" was not included in the analysis for it will be bias on interpretation. Holly originally counted Mr McGregor and Albert's father (Mr William Ardlay I) within the count for Albert, but I have excluded those counts to arrive at 465.
2. The allusion of Terry in Candy's letter to Anthony
Cindy reminded me that Candy actually referred to Terry in her letter to Anthony. Candy wrote the letter after the second visit to Lakewood. Thus, we have one instance where Terry was alluded in the conversation (i.e. in Candy's letter to Anthony) and one instance where Terry's name was mentioned (i.e. in Candy's letter to Albert). I have thus revised the section about Anthony's letter. Thanks, Cindy!
This revision does not change the fact that there is no specific section in the Epilogue for Terry (as in, clearly plastering his name in the passages). One still has to re-read the CCFS carefully to realise that the Epilogue's last page about Anohito returning home actually refers to Terry, and no one else.