I run into students struggling with this when they first encounter the idea of analyzing authorial intent as well as talking about what happens in the story. As wormlieutenant says, you’re expecting continuity in the characters and the world they live in, so you can talk about them in context as making decisions, etc. if it’s decently written. Sometimes, however, the decision of character makes clearly also serves a purpose in the plot and it’s OK to discuss that as well. Where my students really run into trouble is when they try to apply the world created in fiction to the real one as if it’s not fictional.

So (my opinion!):

Good: Bobby, however, doesn’t launch the canoe in time because he’s paralyzed with terror.

Adding plot mechanics: It’s easy to criticize James Dickey for making Bobby, the subject of the assault, into the “weakling” of the party as well. However, Dickey is facing a challenge because, if Bobby launches the canoe on time, the protagonist Ed will be stranded on top of the cliff. Bobby has to falter in order for Ed to re-join the group, and by portraying him that way throughout the book, Dickey has prepared us as readers for that moment.

Awful: In class we’ve looked at lots of examples from history of times that quarantines have failed, but the movie Quarantine shows that sometimes they can work. (this last was an actual student paper in a history class…)