Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Hellow Guys Can Some One Pls Summarize This Paragraph By Paragraph ? It Would Be Great If You Guys Do Thanks Btw (First Part)
ESSAY ON A SHORT STORY
Blake Long
Prof. Johnson
English 212–04
3 April 20—
Montresor’s Fate in Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Cask of Amontillado”
Montresor, the narrator of Edgar Allan Poe’s story “The Cask
of Amontillado,” tells the story not to us but to someone else. We see this in the first two sentences: “The thousand injuries
of Fortunato, I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured
upon insult, I vowed revenge. You, who so well know the nature
of my soul, will not suppose, however, that I gave utterance to a
the threat” (167). In the story, Montresor reveals that fifty years ago
he murdered Fortunato and no one found out. He committed the
perfect crime. Why would he be telling anyone about it now?
Details in the story suggest that Montresor’s listener is a priest and that the story is a confession. If this is correct,
Montresor’s motive for telling the story would be to gain
absolution for his sin. Montresor is the right age to worry about
the fate of his soul. At the time of the crime, he had to be old
enough to live through Fortunato’s “thousand injuries” and
worldly wise enough to plan his complicated revenge. Let’s say
he was about thirty. Fifty years have passed, so Montresor is now
about eighty. Death is staring him in the face. His categorization
of the listener as someone who “so well” knows “the nature of
my soul” points to someone whose calling is to care for souls—
a priest. The final line of the story—In pace requiescat!—echoes
the words a priest would say at the end of service for the
dead: “May he rest in peace.” A priest would know these
words as a pious expression. Montresor perhaps thinks that the
priest will take them as an expression of remorse, as if, after much
refl ection, Montresor is sorry for what he did and now wishes
“peace” for Fortunato in the afterlife. In his own mind, Montresor
might also be applying the phrase to himself: “Since I am about
to die, may I rest in peace. And I will if this priest will only
absolve me.”
If the listener is indeed a priest, will he do this, grant
Montresor absolution? Since the story ends before the listener
speaks, Poe leaves it to us to imagine the ensuing scene. What
will the priest decide? In order to answer this question, we need
to judge two things: the magnitude of Montresor’s crime and his
attitude toward it.
First, did Fortunato deserve to die? A priest might be
willing to grant absolution if Montresor had been an instrument
of justice. Maybe Fortunato had done terrible deeds but escaped
the law. In that case, Montresor’s crime would have visited just
retribution upon Fortunato. From what we see of Fortunato,
he is not especially likable. He is so egotistical that he goes
on a wild goose chase just to prove his superiority to Luchresi,
his rival in wine connoisseurship. He pooh-poohs his ill-health
with macho bravado, as if he is above mortal limitations. His
pretense of not knowing Montresor’s family crest (171) reveals
his disdain for people. His drunkenness and costume—that of
a fool—underscore his boorishness and stupidity. All of these
qualities support Montresor’s claim that Fortunato is guilty of
committing “injuries” and “insults.” But does someone deserve
to die for being boorish and stupid? Montresor doesn’t say what
the injuries are, but they don’t seem to have harmed him greatly.
He is still alive, still the owner of a palazzo, still a person of high
station. His unwillingness to specify what Fortunato did makes
us suspicious that Fortunato wounded Montresor’s pride rather
than caused him serious harm. The punishment Montresor dishes
out seems to far outweigh the “injuries” and “insults” of which
Fortunato stands accused.
also there two parts this is the first one I divided it because it has reached the limit thanks
Blake Long
Prof. Johnson
English 212–04
3 April 20—
Montresor’s Fate in Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Cask of Amontillado”
Montresor, the narrator of Edgar Allan Poe’s story “The Cask
of Amontillado,” tells the story not to us but to someone else. We see this in the first two sentences: “The thousand injuries
of Fortunato, I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured
upon insult, I vowed revenge. You, who so well know the nature
of my soul, will not suppose, however, that I gave utterance to a
the threat” (167). In the story, Montresor reveals that fifty years ago
he murdered Fortunato and no one found out. He committed the
perfect crime. Why would he be telling anyone about it now?
Details in the story suggest that Montresor’s listener is a priest and that the story is a confession. If this is correct,
Montresor’s motive for telling the story would be to gain
absolution for his sin. Montresor is the right age to worry about
the fate of his soul. At the time of the crime, he had to be old
enough to live through Fortunato’s “thousand injuries” and
worldly wise enough to plan his complicated revenge. Let’s say
he was about thirty. Fifty years have passed, so Montresor is now
about eighty. Death is staring him in the face. His categorization
of the listener as someone who “so well” knows “the nature of
my soul” points to someone whose calling is to care for souls—
a priest. The final line of the story—In pace requiescat!—echoes
the words a priest would say at the end of service for the
dead: “May he rest in peace.” A priest would know these
words as a pious expression. Montresor perhaps thinks that the
priest will take them as an expression of remorse, as if, after much
refl ection, Montresor is sorry for what he did and now wishes
“peace” for Fortunato in the afterlife. In his own mind, Montresor
might also be applying the phrase to himself: “Since I am about
to die, may I rest in peace. And I will if this priest will only
absolve me.”
If the listener is indeed a priest, will he do this, grant
Montresor absolution? Since the story ends before the listener
speaks, Poe leaves it to us to imagine the ensuing scene. What
will the priest decide? In order to answer this question, we need
to judge two things: the magnitude of Montresor’s crime and his
attitude toward it.
First, did Fortunato deserve to die? A priest might be
willing to grant absolution if Montresor had been an instrument
of justice. Maybe Fortunato had done terrible deeds but escaped
the law. In that case, Montresor’s crime would have visited just
retribution upon Fortunato. From what we see of Fortunato,
he is not especially likable. He is so egotistical that he goes
on a wild goose chase just to prove his superiority to Luchresi,
his rival in wine connoisseurship. He pooh-poohs his ill-health
with macho bravado, as if he is above mortal limitations. His
pretense of not knowing Montresor’s family crest (171) reveals
his disdain for people. His drunkenness and costume—that of
a fool—underscore his boorishness and stupidity. All of these
qualities support Montresor’s claim that Fortunato is guilty of
committing “injuries” and “insults.” But does someone deserve
to die for being boorish and stupid? Montresor doesn’t say what
the injuries are, but they don’t seem to have harmed him greatly.
He is still alive, still the owner of a palazzo, still a person of high
station. His unwillingness to specify what Fortunato did makes
us suspicious that Fortunato wounded Montresor’s pride rather
than caused him serious harm. The punishment Montresor dishes
out seems to far outweigh the “injuries” and “insults” of which
Fortunato stands accused.
also there two parts this is the first one I divided it because it has reached the limit thanks
Answers
1 to 7 of 7
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by shanks889. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.1 to 7 of 7
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.