I suppose there is multiple ways to view this story. Madden believes that it is the authors flaw to start the story in an omniscient view to quickly change to a third person view. I believe it was for a reason to compare the "forecast" (as Madden stated) to Elisa's self struggle. I agree that she felt you must be a man to experience all out of the town. I never put any thought into what the man who spoke to her was trying to do. At first I thought he was a bit creepy and the author was getting somewhere to explain what he was after but then it carried on and I lost interest in him.
Upon this choice to ignore him I didn't realize he was "conning" her into getting what he wanted. Maybe I was as clueless as Elisa to see that he was taking her weakness that she presented to his own advantage. Just like Elisa figuring this out in the end I was too hurt and na " ive. The author is presented her to be gullible or just distracted by someone taking interest. She was so vulnerable to this change in interaction it states, "Kneeling there, her hand went out toward his legs in the greasy black trousers. Her hesitant fingers almost touched the cloth.
Then her hand dropped to the ground. She crouched low like a fawning dog." This was almost lust or passion she was taken over by. As for when Madden was talking about how the author was making parallels between Elisa and the man it confused me and I didn't notice any sort of parallels in the story. I believe Madden is making more emphasis on the conversation with the man explaining her feelings rather then the intro.
I believe the intro was set for a reason and maybe I'm just over reading the intro.