# Audit: Dialogue Doctor — Chapter 10, Round 2 (verification after opposing-model repair)

id: dialogue_doctor | owner: claude | tier: core | round: 2
chapter: `output/chapters/chapter_10.md` | manifest: ch10 scene 01, lines 2–143, 46 dialogue lines — one scene block required
round 1 source: `output/critiques/claude/chapter_10.dialogue_doctor.md` (5 blocking findings, 5 revision orders)
repair memo: `output/critiques/codex/chapter_10.dialogue_repair_memo.md` — **absent**; verification performed by comparing the current chapter text directly against the round 1 orders. Round 1's quotations of unrepaired passages match the current text at identical line numbers throughout, which confirms the repair was surgical to the five ordered sites; no untracked rewrites detected.
mechanical gate consulted: open=0; WATCH `legacy-uncontracted-casual-dialogue` ×9 (re-swept below)

Stance: skeptical professional edit, read cold with attributions covered. Every round 1 order verified against quoted current text; then the full failure-mode pass (1–7, fake-sharp cut-list, rule 9 both directions, voice cards, reading-guide §2/§6) re-run on the whole scene to catch repair-introduced regressions.

---

## ROUND 1 ORDER VERIFICATION

1. **(mode 7, brush-grip referent) FIXED.** Round 1 text: "You make it look like she could set the brush down whenever she wants." / "She can," June said. Current lines 117–119: "You make it look like you could set the brush down whenever you wanted." / "I could," June said, and nudged the panel straighter on the ledge. The deixis now resolves — Theo addresses June as "you," June answers in first person — and no third-person self-reference was introduced. The repair took direct address rather than the order's restore-the-raw-draft template ("the brush could leave whenever it wants" / "It can"); that is a valid execution: the line is plainer than either prior version, speakable, and inside Theo's register given the explicit license built two lines earlier ("You saw it," line 115).

2. **("That's the arrangement") FIXED.** The maxim is gone outright. Its slot is now the action beat "and nudged the panel straighter on the ledge" (line 119) — a pivot into craft/logistics exactly per the order's second option. The quit-clause subtext survives as ordered: it lives in "I could" (she could set the brush down whenever she wanted — and once did) and in exit behavior, not in an epigram. No replacement maxim was smuggled in.

3. **("It just doesn't need the label") FIXED, and the surviving line lands.** Current line 135: "It is the one with your name on it," she said. She shouldered the tote. At the door she paused. "The left hand's underdone. In mine. Don't tell anyone." The workshopped tag is deleted; the exchange now ends on the unexplained correction, with the existing self-aimed exit supplying the deflating friction the cut tag was faking — precisely the order. Decision on the remaining line, per assignment: **it lands cleanly and stays.** It is indexical to a planted object (the Week Three portrait, "his name on the back in her square capitals," line 9), it answers Theo's own invocation one line up ("It's better than the one with my name on it," line 133) as a dry correction in June's card register, the full form "It is" carries legitimate contrastive stress (rule 4 emphasis license — contracting it would kill the correction), and it passes the followability test: a cold reader can state what June refused (his ranking of the two paintings) and what she asserted (the new painting is the true portrait of him). With the explanatory tag gone, the wit is no longer announced; it is one of the chapter's at-most-two licensed oblique beats (§2), and the other slot is not in use.

4. **(Odile/jars silence-as-speech) FIXED.** "and did not comment on them, which from Odile was a comment" is deleted. Current line 17: She set a short stack of cards face-down on the model stand, looked at the jars, all eight filled to the same line, and dealt the top card. The noticing is now rendered as action (the look, then the deal), and the cost registers through Theo's focalization in the specific "all eight filled to the same line" — he knows what she saw because he filled them. No communicative weight is assigned to silence; nothing in the replacement captions speech. §2/§6 zero tolerance satisfied at this site.

5. **(Mara question social-shape caption) FIXED.** Current line 41: "What's Theo's?" Mara asked, friendly, ordinary. The trailing clause ("the way you ask a couple a question one of them should be able to answer for the other") is deleted; only the permitted manner attribution remains, and the presumption the caption used to explain is carried entirely by the dramatized beat that follows — June answering for him (line 43) and Theo's "the true number was zero" (line 45).

All five orders executed. No order was resolved by self-repair of the drafting lane's reasoning; the line 117–119 solution diverges from the suggested template but satisfies the order's stated constraints.

---

## SCENE 01 / Odile's studio, Week 4 class through lock-up (lines 2–143):

- `CLEAN — voice convergence — covered attributions across the assignment Q&A (lines 29–37), the "two" exchange (47–59), the critique rail (91–99), and the repaired sink exchange (105–135); speakers remain sortable: Odile's uncontracted imperatives, June's compressed corrections with craft nouns, Theo's practical-offer-then-plain pattern, Luis's two-word placement diagnosis, Mara's social warmth; strongest counter-candidate: the repaired "You make it look like you could set the brush down whenever you wanted." (Theo, line 117) — an observation about her ease, nearer June's optical territory than his domestic one — it survives because the repair moved it toward Theo's plainness (second-person, no figure) and the scene has explicitly built his license: an hour painting her grip plus June's "You saw it." (line 115). Second candidate: Luis's "Third easel. The screw." (line 91) against Theo's terseness — survives; Theo speaks in no two-word fragments anywhere in the chapter, and the fragment is placement diagnosis per Luis's card.`

- `CLEAN — monotone Q/A rhythm — re-tested the "two" exchange (47–59), the critique exchange (95–99), and the repaired sink exchange (105–135); weights run from one word ("Theo.") to multi-clause offers, statements outnumber questions, and the repair improved variety at line 119 by replacing a two-beat spoken tag with an action beat; strongest counter-candidate: "Did you sit?" / "Mostly not." / "Then you posed all evening." (Odile/Theo, 95–99) — short symmetrical volley — survives because the weights are unequal: load-gathering question, evasive-honest answer, and a two-beat diagnosis that breaks the meter rather than continuing it.`

- `CLEAN — missing interiority — Theo's mind stays on through every exchange: "Which was generous, since the true number was zero" (line 45), "which he took for patience" (line 71), the felt-sorry misread (line 81), the cap-on-the-tube recognition mid-conversation (line 113); strongest counter-candidate — and the one beat the repair materially changed — is June's "I could," landing without narrated reaction (line 119): a loaded short line whose weight (she did set the brush down; she quit) could trigger the cut-list's unmarked-silence bullet — it survives because the focalizer's response is rendered in his card's idiom in the very next line: "He dried his hands on the towel he'd folded two hours ago. 'I can cut glassine for yours.'" (line 121) — usefulness as visible deflection, which June then names to his face ("You don't have to do anything about it," line 127). The cost is on the page as action and counter-speech, not registered nothing. Explain-twice direction also re-tested: "understood that everyone in the room had recognized them faster than he had" (line 101) still survives narrowly on "faster than he had" (his card's delayed-recognition rhythm) converting straight into object action (the tape roll to the table).`

- `CLEAN — questions-as-statements — every question is genuine and answered: "Can Ben hold his coffee?" (Priya, line 31), "What's Theo's?" (Mara, line 41), "Did you sit?" (Odile, line 95), "Is that how I look?" (Theo, line 113); strongest counter-candidate: "Did you sit?" — Odile knows the answer and uses it — survives because she needs the answer on the record and her follow-through targets the person ("Then you posed all evening"), her card's licensed insult-as-diagnosis, not manufactured portent.`

- `CLEAN — fake-McCarthy minimalism — clipped runs stay anchored: "Brennan." / "It was tipping." / "Sit down," Odile said. (lines 75–79) carries attribution on the third beat in Odile's earned register; the repaired "I could," June said, and nudged the panel straighter on the ledge. (line 119) carries both a tag and a grounding action; strongest counter-candidate: June's one-word "Theo." (line 55) — survives because the surrounding beat (the masking tape he had no memory of picking up) keeps the reader oriented and the clip does interruption work her card licenses.`

- `CLEAN — jargon-trading without translation — unchanged by the repair and re-verified: "I can cut glassine for yours. If it's riding in the tote it'll pick up everything in there." (Theo, line 121) supplies purpose in the next breath; "I could rewax the flat-file runners. The second drawer's been catching." (line 53) translates itself; ferrule and filbert live in narration with physical context; strongest counter-candidate: "glassine" — survives for the reason quoted.`

- `CLEAN — attribution opacity — the round 1 FAIL site is repaired (verified above, order 1) and the rest of the sink exchange re-walked with attributions covered: tags at lines 119, 131, 135, the vocative "Theo." at 127 marking June, and strict alternation between; strongest counter-candidate: the untagged volley "That wasn't a pose." / "It was what you gave me." (lines 109–111) — survives because the positions are unconfusable: only Theo can disclaim the pose, only June can have received it. No new third-person referent for an addressed person anywhere in the exchange.`

- `CLEAN — FAKE-SHARP — both round 1 instances are gone (orders 2 and 3, verified above); the repair introduced no replacement epigram: the new material is "you could set the brush down whenever you wanted" (line 117, plain observation), "I could" plus a nudge (line 119, two words and an object), and deletions everywhere else. June's per-exchange density at the sink, which round 1 ruled survivable only if the pure-tag lines went, now stands at "It was what you gave me" (line 111, indexical correction), "It's how you were tonight" (line 115, ditto), "I painted it because it was true and I had an hour" (line 131, deflating tag intact), and the name-on-it correction (line 135, now unexplained) — each information-bearing or self-undercut, none a detachable maxim; strongest counter-candidate: "It is the one with your name on it." standing alone — adjudicated under order 3 above: indexical, card-true, emphasis-licensed, and no longer explained to the reader. Second candidate: "I could," (line 119) as a loaded short line — survives the quotable-not-speakable test trivially and its weight is answered in scene (see mode 3).`

- `CLEAN — INTERIORITY-OVERCORRECTION — the repair deleted narration-about-speech, not interiority: the line 17 replacement keeps Theo's noticing ("all eight filled to the same line"), the line 41 trim keeps permitted manner attribution, and the sink exchange retains the cap-on-the-tube recognition (line 113) and the folded-towel beat (line 121); strongest counter-candidate: June's exit and Odile's "Lock up... Do not improve anything." landing in silence (lines 135–137) — survives because the closing section is the reaction, rendered materially: the failed attempt at the card (lines 139–141) and the wing nut tightened anyway (line 143).`

- `CLEAN — DIALOGUE DIAGNOSIS (reading guide §2/§6, zero tolerance) — both round 1 instances deleted (orders 4 and 5, verified above); full re-sweep of narration about speech found no residual or new instance. Checked and passed: "She took that in without doing anything to her face about it" (line 59) — reads the face, not the sentence; "said nothing, which he took for patience" (line 71) — reads the person, cleared in round 1 and unchanged; "and meant it kindly, and that was the trouble with it" (line 93, on Mara's "It's very him") — strongest counter-candidate in the sweep: it rates intent and Theo's cost at being legible as a fixer, not the line's phrasing, rhythm, or delivery, and it converts into the panel-recognition beat that follows; "That is the entire comment" (Odile, line 85) — procedure of her own critique, cleared in round 1. Plain-speech floor re-confirmed post-repair: Theo's "I don't know... it's all maintenance" (line 57) and June's "You don't have to do anything about it" (line 127) stand as each principal's unguarded sentence; the chapter's one oblique beat (line 135) is within the §2 allowance.`

- `Uncontracted-line re-sweep (gate WATCH ×9, unchanged count) — all full forms remain Odile's formal-casual cutting register ("You do not work here on Tuesdays," "It is always loose," "If it is, I am sorry for both of you," "You are standing in her light," "Do not improve anything") plus June's rule-4 contrastive "It is the one with your name on it"; the repair added no stiff forms — "I could" and "you could... you wanted" contract nothing improperly. No stiffness in Theo, Mara, Priya, Luis, or June elsewhere.`

REVISION ORDERS: none. All five round 1 orders are verified executed; the full re-pass found no new failure introduced by the repair.

OVERALL: CLEAN

Note for the orchestrator: the codex repair memo was never written to `output/critiques/codex/chapter_10.dialogue_repair_memo.md`; this verification proceeded on direct text comparison and the conclusion does not depend on the memo, but the artifact gap should be logged. The dialogue scene manifest still lists chapter 10 coverage as "missing" — the round 1 file exists at the declared path, so the manifest row is stale and should be regenerated.
