If her dream of being naked in front of Simon were to come true...

[MickeyQ]

If her dream of being naked in front of Simon were to come true – and she knew, somehow, that it would – she needed to be the sveltest version of herself that had ever existed. Fries wouldn't help peel away those pounds.

2010, M. S. Simpson, Kabuki in a G-String, page 158 (excerpt used by Wiktionary)

Hello, teachers! It's an honour to be here!
I have a question about this sentence. I know that the Past Subjunctive is used for Present or Future hypothetical situations (e.g. If she were to be rich, she would be horribly obnoxious. / If I were to lose my job next year, I would probably not find a new one quickly.).
However, the excerpt is about the Past.
So, what is your opinion? Is it a mistake or it is a matter of style?
Looking forward to your answers and thank you for this opportunity!
Best regards!

 

[emsr2d2]

It's not referring to the past in that example. It means "If, at some point in the future, her dream were to come true, and she was sure that, at some point in the future, it would come true ...". The rest of the sentence means that she needs to start dieting now, ready for the day (in the future) that the dream comes true. (Of course, one's body shape in real life might bear no relation to one's body shape in a dream - the writer's trying to be amusing.)

 

[MickeyQ]

Thank You, emsr2d2, for a great answer! Appreciate it!
If I may ask one more question: Would there be any difference in the meaning of the sentence if we rewrote it like this:

If her dream of being naked in front of Simon were to come true – and she knew, somehow, that it would – she would need to be the sveltest version of herself that had ever existed. Fries wouldn't help peel away those pounds.


Thank you for your time!
All the best!

 

[jutfrank]

No important difference, no.

 

[MickeyQ]

No important difference, no.

That's what's confusing me and I need help!
Do you think that there is a grammatical mistake in the OP's sentence?

The OP's sentence:
If her dream of being naked in front of Simon were to come true – and she knew, somehow, that it would – she needed to be the sveltest version of herself...

But if it's about a hypothetical situation in the Future, shouldn't this be:
If her dream of being naked in front of Simon were to come true – and she knew, somehow, that it would – she would need to be the sveltest version of herself...

"WOULD NEED" and "NEEDED" are NOT the same, am I correct?

 

[teechar]

and she knew, somehow, that it would – she needed to be the sveltest version of herself that had ever existed.

To me, the highlighted parts above put the time frame of that sentence in the past.

If her dream of being naked in front of Simon were to come true –

That past subjunctive structure can be used to talk about a situation in the past.

 

[MickeyQ]

That past subjunctive structure can be used to talk about a situation in the past.

Thanks for the answer!
Could you, please, explain to me this a little bit more?

When we talk about the past subjunctive in the past, it must be then "were to + have + past participle", right:

If her dream were to have come true...

Past subjunctive in the present/future:

If her dream were to come true...

So, when it's possible to use "If her dreams were to come true..." to talk about a situation in the past?

 

[jutfrank]

That's what's confusing me and I need help!
Do you think that there is a grammatical mistake in the OP's sentence?

No, it's perfectly grammatical.

The OP's sentence:
If her dream of being naked in front of Simon were to come true – and she knew, somehow, that it would – she needed to be the sveltest version of herself...

But if it's about a hypothetical situation in the Future, shouldn't this be:
If her dream of being naked in front of Simon were to come true – and she knew, somehow, that it would – she would need to be the sveltest version of herself...

"WOULD NEED" and "NEEDED" are NOT the same, am I correct?

Correct. Your version (would need) says clearly that the need should happen in the future. Here, would expresses past futurity. The original version (needed) doesn't make that futurity explicit, but in such a clear context, a reader would make the same interpretation, in which case they're effectively synonymous.

Consider also this pair.

1) I have an exam tomorrow morning so I need to wake up early.
2) I have an exam tomorrow morning so I'll need to wake up early.

There's no important difference in meaning between them. The thought is essentially the same.

 

[MickeyQ]

Sorry, but I'm still a little bit confused with this!

Is this sentence (OP's) about a hypothetical future relative to the present, or a hypothetical future relative to the past?
I mean, does the writer talk about hypothetical future events from the past point of view or from the present point of view?

 

[jutfrank]

Ah, I see. No, it isn't hypothetical and it's talking about a time in the future relative to the time of narration. Here's the same thought from a present point of view.

'If I want to be naked in front of Simon, I need to be the sveltest version of myself.'

You can see there's no hypothesis there—it's stated as a fact, and meant as a resolution. You can think of this as a real condition because it's about a real future.

 

[MickeyQ]

Ah, I see. No, it isn't really hypothetical and it's talking about a time in the future relative to the time of narration. Here's the same thought from a present point of view.

'If I want to be naked in front of Simon, I need to be the sveltest version of myself.'

You can see there's no hypothesis there—it's stated as a fact. In fact, it's meant as a resolution. In terms of form, it looks like a conditional sentence but I do think you shouldn't focus on this too much, and instead get to essential the meaning, which is the second part that I've highlighted in blue.

Yes, I understand. Thank you for your answer!
But in that case, "WERE" is incorrect. It should be "WAS" instead:

If her dream of being naked in front of Simon was to come true – and she knew, somehow, that it would – she needed to be the sveltest version of herself...

 

[jutfrank]

I see your point, yes. There seems to be a conflict between the subjunctive mood of were and the 'realness' of the past simple needed. Is that what you mean?

 

[MickeyQ]

I see your point, yes. There seems to be a conflict between the subjunctive mood of were and the 'realness' of the past simple needed. Is that what you mean?

Yes, sir! That's exactly what I meant!

 

[jutfrank]

Right. Well, this conflict doesn't really bother me, so I don't count it as an error. It's not that unusual for native speakers to mix conditionals up like this.