The Cask of Amontillado is one of Poe writings that give the American Literature sense of thought. Although Poe has been one of the best mystery and horror writers in the American Literature, in his book ‘the cask of amontillado’, there are some things he misses. This essay critics his writings in relation to the current horror stories developed by literature writers.
Just like any other literature writer, Edgar Allan Poe uses different styles in developing the story. Instead of constructing the story in a unique way Poe fails simply because he uses those artistic approaches that develops the story in the manner he wants. The point of view used by the author reveals the aspect of spirit perverseness something that is common in most of Poe’s work.
Narrator’s point of view is one of the approaches used by the writer in the work. He fails in the first place when introducing the work simply because he tries to influence the perception of the reader in his side of thinking. From the first line it is clear that Poe fails in his work simply because he fails to give the reader an opportunity of thinking the way he wants. “The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult I vowed revenge” (231) , (Lynn, 2010).
Although Montresor develops revenge to Fortunato, the reader does not clearly understand where the revenge came from. The author of the book uses a wise attempt of winning the reader initially but after the entire thing the reader does not get the exact point why Montresor kills Fortunato as a way of revenge. Being a great writer of American literature, the author fails in developing things in his mind and trying to put them into the readers mind.
The reader has the freedom to analyze the writing and not what Montresor has done. It is ironical killing somebody out of nothing. A clear explanation should have been developed in justifying why the author of the novel had to take such actions something that is not present in the story. The greatest question in this section is whether the author was justified in his acts and whether Fortunato had done anything bad to the author, (poe, 2009).
The author of the book affects the reader’s emotions. Unless Montresor gives an explanation on a given areas. The reader only relies on what the author provides. This prevents the reader from making any assumptions simply because the writer has in the first place won the readers attention in the book. Most of current literature writing, the reader is actively involved in the story where one is given an option of developing his or her own decision.
In this case the author of the book dominates the entire development of the story. Since the reader knows what the writer has, it is difficult to have a thought on any other direction for the author restricts what you should be thinking. The author entirely restricts the reader on what might be readers opinion simply because he tries to show how justified he was in developing a revenge that it is not know whether it was justified or not, (Lynn, 2010).
From the writings of the author, the reader does not get reliable information about the concept developed. The reason why the author is unreliable is because he uses first person narration in the story. Unlike modern short stories, the author of the work fails because the use of first person in the story gives no evidence on the claims he develops. Fortunato is not given a freedom to express his rights meaning that the author might be taking an advantage of the situation. Although he tries to justify his actions, it was wrong for the author to develop the story in the first person simply because he does not give Fortunato a chance to express his views.
The author foresees the death of Fortunato to a point where he tells him that he will not die a noble death. Montresor is dishonored in his acts simply because he knows what will cause the death of Fortunato and does not entirely allow the reader to know the exact cause of his death. “‘The cough is a mere nothing; it will not kill me’” (Poe 189). Montresor just laughs when Fortunato says this simply because he knew what would kill him, (Lynn, 2010).
Having developed the story in first person, Montresor uses some setting in order to capture readers mind and see that what the author is talking about is true. In ‘the cask of amontillado’, the author uses two types of setting that are quit important in the development of the story. “It was about dusk, one evening during the supreme madness of the carnival season, that I encountered my friend.” (231). As it can be seen, it is a clear indication that the author had some hidden plans on the death of Fortunato. The dusk environment gives the author a good chance to exercise his desires. Modern stories are not descriptive simply because the author in the first place gives the reader freedom to develop his or her arguments that supports his decisions, (poe, 2009).
In Latin the word Fortunato means fortune. The name has been ironically been used in this context simply because the way Fortunato dies does not translate to be something good. The reader expects Fortunato to be a blessed person something that turns to be different. On the other hand, as much as the name has been used ironically, the reader does not expect the author to foresee the death of Fortunato, (poe, 2009).
The author suggests that Fortunato’s life was surrounded by mischief’s that resulted to his death. It is clear that he organizes for the death of Fortunato simply because all the employees are given an off so that no one could had seen what was going around. Although Fortunato is a proud man who believes that his life is not in any danger, things changes simply because the way he dies does not reveal what he thinks, (Lynn, 2010).
The story is quite interesting although the author wins the attention of the reader in the first place. Different ironies have been used in developing the plot of the story.
Work Cited
Poe, E. A. “The Cast of Amontillado”. The Seagull Reader: Stories. Joseph Kelly. 2009
Lynn, J. S. Texts and Contexts: Writing About Literature With Critical Theory: Prentice Hall. 2010
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
