Tintin Forums

In Tintin and the Picaros, Tintin strongly refused to go to Tapiocapolis because he suspected a trap, and I felt he was a cautious type of person. Later in the story, when they heard gunfire from the Picaros camp, Tintin rushed straight into the camp with General Alcazar despite the Captain's warnings of how dangerous that could be. After reading that part a few times, I wondered, wasn't that pretty reckless of Tintin, running into a camp that might be under fire?
Does anyone think this too (or not), and can suggest why he did it? Personally, I think it might be because he wasn't thinking straight, what with getting hit over the head so many times in the earlier adventures.

I think there is a practical difference between not placing yourself in danger (not going to Tapiocapolis in this case), and being prepared to take action for yourself and your comrades once one finds one’s self in a tight spot (going into the camp). I don’t see it as any way contradictory.

Furthermore, it develops the story, and plot devices don’t have to stand direct comparison with reality; otherwise, for example, the villain would just shoot James Bond first opportunity that presented itself, and not explain his masterplan while touring his lair, and showing him where the big “Off” switch was for his doomsday machine…

I think you're right that Tintin's behaviour is inconsistent, NikkiRoux, but I guess he's already abandoned the cautious side of his nature even before this scene of charging towards the Picaro's camp, by changing his mind about not going to Tapiocapolis and turning up a day or two after Haddock and Calculus. It's not even as if he uses the delay in going to do anything clever (such as setting up a back-up plan, or turning up in disguise as he might have done in earlier adventures). He just walks right into the trap that he correctly suspects is there.

Anyway, I suppose once he's decided to go on the adventure at all, from then on in he's prepared to abandon all caution and charge into whatever danger is thrown at him.

Personally, I don't mind Tintin being inconsistently cautious then reckless; we're all like that, aren't we?

In this book, maybe Tintin's inconsistency is symbolic of Hergé's complicated feelings towards producing Tintin adentures at this stage of his life - on one hand initially weary and reluctant to churn out any more Tintin books; on the other hand finding himself wanting or needing to do so, especially once he'd got started on a new story.

Along with that, Hergé still had to tell a story, so wouldn't abandon Tintin's ability to do what he had to do when it was neccessary.