Murder has always been a fascinating element in fiction that catches the audience 's attention. The unbalanced main characters in the two murder stories, The Cask of Amontillado and A Rose for Emily drive the plots of the stories. Montresor and Miss Emily, the murderers in each story, engage the readers, allowing them to have a different perspective on their actions and similar motives of murder. A close examination of the way Montresor, the narrator of The Cask of Amontillado, and Miss Emily, the protagonist of A Rose for Emily, commit the action of murder towards their victims demonstrates how authors Edgar Allan Poe and William Faulkner use this entire concept to display the main characters’ similar traits. Similar but having different …show more content…
In Poe 's story, for example, Montresor ensures that the house is empty before Fortunato arrives. Montresor mentions that "There were no attendants at home; they had absconded to make merry in honour of the time. I had told them that I should not return until the morning, and had given them explicit orders not to stir from the house. These orders were sufficient, I well knew, to insure their immediate disappearance, one and all, as soon as my back was turned." (Poe 180). Montresor also makes sure that Fortunato is completely drunk before he lures him to the Amontillado. In Faulkner 's story, Miss Emily is aware that she will murder Homer the moment she purchases the arsenic from a druggist. When the druggist asks her what she will be using the arsenic for, she intentionally "just stared at him, her head tilted back in order to look him eye for eye" (Faulkner 632). Faulkner indicates here that Miss Emily will not be using the arsenic for rats, but will instead use it to kill Homer. Like one another, Montresor and Miss Emily deviously plot out their murders to avoid any possible suspicion.
In addition to having the same motive and strategic planning for their murders, Montresor and Miss Emily do not feel any sympathy towards their victims. For example, Montresor is seen to feel no remorse when he chains up Fortunato and deliberately attempts to provoke him with mockery: "For the love of God!" (Poe 183). From this point on, Montresor
Since we do not have suffice information on how Fortunato insulted him, Montresor may be exaggerating on a few parts and wants to be the hero of his own story. This may have led to the reason why Montresor tells his story years later; Guilt built up because the way he was supposed to kill Fortunato did not end up the way he wanted. He is not satisfied because Fortunato did not suffer when he was supposed to be plastered up without food or water in the catacombs for days before his death, yet he died quicker than Montresor expected (par. 89). When a person seeks revenge, they want to savor every part of it and see the person suffer, but not die…quick. Apart from Fortunato not suffering, Montresor was backing up from his own plan to get his revenge. Montresor was slowed down every time he would ask Fortunato if he wanted to go back. Occasionally, Montresor would command Fortunato, “Come, we will go back; your health is precious (par. 35).” According to his own words, Montresor hesitated whether he wanted to go through with his revenge, and that was against one of the three features that he considered essential for it to be a
The two short stories “The Tell-Tale Heart” and “The Cask of Amontillado” share similar and different characteristics. Both written by Edgar Allen Poe, these stories involve murder, possibly insane narrators, and weak victims. They both also contain the theory of madness and obsession. Although these stories share many similar aspects, they differ in murder justification, murder execution, and final outcome of each situation.
In the text montresor says”my heart grew sick on account of the dampness of the catacombs”(poe 67). Montresor is saying he feels bad for what he is doing and he feels sick in his heart To where he doesn't want to go through with it. But he thinks to the fact that he has made fun of him. In that case he continued down the catacombs and on with the murder. He thinks he is going to bring justice to himself but he loves the fact that he is taking Fortunato to his death. James F. Cooney says “ He seems to be unaware but the reader is not ,of the gleeful tone of his confession”(Cooney 15 ). At first Montresor acts as though he does not know what he is doing wrong. Suddenly he feels sick and knows he is wrong but thinks to when fortunato mad fun of him and feels no longer
Edgar Allen Poe’s tale of murder and revenge, “The Cask of Amontillado”, offers a unique perspective into the mind of a deranged murderer. The effectiveness of the story is largely due to its first person point of view, which allows the reader a deeper involvement into the thoughts and motivations of the protagonist, Montresor. The first person narration results in an unbalanced viewpoint on the central conflict of the story, man versus man, because the reader knows very little about the thoughts of the antagonist, Fortunato. The setting of “The Cask of Amontillado”, in the dark catacombs of Montresor’s wine cellar, contributes to the story’s theme that some people will go
It has been established that “The Cask of Amontillado” and “The Utterly Perfect Murder” share the same first person style of narration. Both of these narrators also have the reader question their sanities. Montresor, narrator of “The Cask of Amontillado,” proves his lack of stability by murdering a man simply because he insulted him. In the case of “The Utterly Perfect Murder,” Doug Spaulding, the story’s protagonist, devises the assassination of his former friend
During those time periods the stories took place, the rich and noble class of society were not checked or questioned about their behavior, which gave them the opportunity to commit many actions including murder without being held accountable. In addition, both stories illustrate the effect of isolation on a person, which can lead to insanity. Both Montresor and Emily were victims of isolation, which impacted their behaviors and actions and drove them to commit
The story “A Rose for Emily” was written by William Faulkner. The other story I am using to compare and contrast with is “Killings” written by Andre Dubus. These stories are similar in plot and theme. Both of these stories deal with murder, love and revenge. Though, love and murder are presented in different ways in the two stories. The main character in both these stories are of the opposite sex and they are both the protagonist. “A Rose for Emily” is about a women named Emily Grierson and her mysterious life as a southern belle. While “Killings” is based on a man named Matt Fowler who commits a bad crime.
By all means, death can take on many forms, illness can take the lives of millions, and wars can take the lives of thousands, however, murder is an intimate and decisive choice. While the psychosis of hundreds of killers have been examined, there is not a singular bond that will group them together conclusively. Comparing both murders, Montresor, in The Cask of Amontillado, written by Edgar Allan Poe and The Misfit, in A Good Man is Hard to Find, written by Flannery O’Connor, will shed light on each their motives. In both stories, conflict and vantage points are used to give the reader a different encounter with the murders; however, the themes in each story have significant differences. To explore these differences will allow readers to have a clear understanding of the true morals of the stories; and how life, as well as death, can be viewed.
Feuds and arguments between individuals who may disagree with or dislike one another are a common occurrence in everyday life, often varying in degrees of intensity, but rarely reaching a point of extremity. However, in Edgar Allan Poe’s short story “The Cask of Amontillado”, This threshold of extremity is reached by the narrator of the story, Montresor, who explains that his acquaintance, Fortunato, has repeatedly and irreparably insulted him over the course of years, and uses it as justification to take justice into his own hands and seek retribution through murder, despite there being no proof of Fortunato's guilt other than Montresor’s claims. His motive for murdering Fortunato can be attributed to his state of mind, as Montresor’s lack of guilt, empathy, or remorse highlights him as a character with psychopathic tendencies. As the story progresses, Montresor’s cold and calculating nature leaves the audience full of dread and suspense while he lures the oblivious Fortunato towards his inevitable demise. The employment of rhetorical devices such as irony, theme, and structure builds the suspense for the ultimate climax of Poe’s gothic masterpiece.
This renders the tone more one of reminiscence and, if Faulkner's narrator is not as grandiloquent as Poe's, he nonetheless paints vivid pictures, as in his description of Emily later in life: “She looked bloated, like a body long submerged in water, and of that pallid hue” (Faulkner 3). What may be most interesting in the differences of narrator tone, however, is how each underscores the thrust of the story. Poe's extreme voice works to build up to a disturbing conclusion of murder; the exaggeration of Montresor's tone conforms to the trajectory of the story. With Faulkner, understatement is the key. His story ends as dramatically, if not more so, than Poe's, and the effect of the revealed necrophilia is amplified by how moderately the narrator conveys the tale.
Short stories have fully developed themes but appear significantly shorter and less elaborate than novels. A similar theme found in short stories “Winter Dreams” written by Scott F. Fitzgerald and “A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner included the social and environmental influences that encouraged and controlled the character’s life and decisions. In “Winter Dreams”, the main protagonist-- Dexter-- fell into a fixation over a young, whimsical blueblood, Judy Jones. His obsession led him to believe that Judy Jones reciprocated his feelings for her, leaving him bare and mortal-- despite prior beliefs. Following her father’s death, Miss Emily fell into a dark obscurity due to the pressure and compulsion of having to carry on the honorable family name. While using a unique point of view (first person peripheral), “A Rose for Emily” followed a mysterious and desirable woman named Miss Emily as her hometown tried to understand her peculiar ways and began to find her disgraceful. By comparing and contrasting these two literary pieces, a similar organization-- including the writers’ purpose and themes-- should become clear. By using literary devices-- such as point of view, dramatic irony, detail, and figurative language-- Scott F. Fitzgerald and William Faulkner conducted two short stories similar in aim and reasoning, probable for contrasting and comparing elements within the parallel writings.
Edgar Allan Poe portrays conflict by creating tension between Montresor and Fortunato. In the story, tension is merely only seen through the eyes of Montressor because of the animosity that he has against Fortunato for the cursing of his family's name which was one of an old and honored one. Montresor states his revenge by saying “The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed my revenge.” Montresor is stating that he had been able to bear insults, but once his family's name was insulted, he was driven to seek revenge from this humility. Montresor's evil intentions to murder Fortunato come solely from Fortantos insulting demeanor. The conflict that is shared between Fortunato and Montresor is the main factor which creates the theme of revenge in this story.
Taking advantage of him being a superior wine connoisseur, he tempts him into a death trap by saying he received a pipe of Amontillado. Montresor is very sly and uses reverse psychology to lure him into the catacombs where he buries him alive. Montresor must now live with the fact that he committed a murder for the rest of his life. Both Emily and Montresor must live with death. Both of these characters would seem abnormal to society because they have committed crimes and do not feel guilty for their actions.
The story also tells the reader she prepared for her murder by buying the arsenic. (Faulkner 456) In comparison in “the cask of amontillado” Montresor doesn't explain his motive for murder very well, and also doesn't show remorse. Montresor also tells us “there are no attendants at home” (Poe 92) prior to fortunado's arrival to the house. The reader eventually finds out that he took the trowel with him while the mortar waited in the catacombs. Another comparison is Montresor and Emily choose to to keep their devious, murderous acts to themselves, and doesn't care if the victim is aware of the reason of punishment. At the conclusion of “The Cask Of Amontillado”, Fortunado is aware of what is happening and who the person torturing him is. Emily on the other hand has been hiding the secret of the murder for years, considering homer's body was “rotted under his nightshirt” (Faulkner 458). One major difference between these stories is the fact that Emily killed homer to keep him with her forever and love him till she passed, even if he was a smelly corpse and rotted like an
Edgar Allan Poe’s, “The Cask of Amontillado” (1846) is narrated by Montressor. He is a gothic narrator, as his motives are associated with revenge and mental instability. In fact, the story opens with Montressor’s description of revenge of his friend Fortunato, who supposedly “insulted” him, and he lures Fortunato to his family’s catacombs for his death. However, Montressor is unwilling to reveal Fortunato’s insult and he is uncertain of why he wants to commit the horrendous act. Montressor’s narration is unreliable, and as the story unfolds we deduce his mental state. By carefully analyzing the tale, Montressor’s psychological dilemma encourages us to find the missing pieces of the puzzle and interpret the events in a metaphorical sense suggesting that the events are far less associated with revenge but more with Montressor’s guilt.