Various questions on meaning and context in three sentences

Various questions on meaning and context in three sentences

The passage below is from Fathoms: The World in the Whale by Rebecca Giggs.

---------------------

One woman broke free from the crowd and strode into the water with the wilting wreath in her fists overhead. She sang, bell-clear. Her skin was tanned. It took three wildlife officers to pull her off the side of the whale, kicking. She had spiritual reasons, she said. She had spiritual skills. Her fury wasn’t dignified. It was incandescent. The whale never wore the sodden wreath.

The following is my reading of this passage.

On the scene of people listening to a beached whale’s labored breathing, a women approaches whale, which was not permitted.

But she says she has some spiritual ability (perhaps) to heal the stranded whale.

She got furious because three wildlife officers forbid her to take care of the whale by taking her away from the whale against her kicking (and may be screaming).

But people don’t agree.

So her fury wasn’t dignified, that is justified, because people didn’t nod their assent.

(Am I right in seeing dignified as justified?)

Even if it was not dignified ‘it was incandescent,’ that is, her fury was furious.

Am I right?

If I am right thus far, I still have a problem with the sequence of the last two sentences.

To me it seems better the last sentence(It was incandescent.) precedes one before the last sentence(Her fury wasn’t dignified.).

My line of thought goes like this.

Her fury was incandescent but it wasn’t dignified.

Seems like better order of logic.

Can you give me a OK?

The next sentence breaks me down, totally.

The whale never wore the sodden wreath.

What does the author imply in this sentence?

Why ‘the sodden wreath’ instead of at least ‘the wilting wreath’ she fisted?

What does the author try to imply with this sentence?

Thanks. Thanks a million.