Comparing An Invitation To Murder And The Dying Detective

The captivating mysteries “An Invitation to Murder” by Josh Pachter and “The Dying Detective” by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle contained numerous similarities and differences. Within the texts there were multiple parallels. For example, one comparison is both murders were premeditated. In “An Invitation to Murder,” Eleanor Madeline Abbott planned out every detail of the event—including the time, date, and method of the murder. Similarly, in “The Dying Detective,” Culverton Smith prearranged the poison in the ivory box; hence, the person opening the box would become a victim to the disease in the poison. In addition, both mysteries were foul play—meaning that they involved unfair and treacherous conduct and murder. Finally, a commonality is both were interlaced with situation irony.

Holmes pretended to be ill and led Mr. Smith to believe that he had succeeded in poisoning him. This was situational irony because it created a twist. Comparatively, in “An Invitation to Murder,” an example of situational irony was Eleanor inviting twelve men while twelve people serve in an official jury. The group of men ended up serving as her jury and sentencing her to death for her actions. As well as sharing similarities, the two mysteries additionally had several differences. “The Dying Detective” and “An Invitation to Murder” had multiple contrasts. “An Invitation to Murder” was a locked room mystery—the murder was unexplainable as no one left or entered the room. Whereas, “The Dying Detective” did not involve a situation in which the detectives had to figure how someone was murdered. Sherlock Holmes feigned his illness and imminent death. He was not actually going to die from the Black Formosa Corruption. On the other hand, Gregory Elliot Abbott had a serious, fatal issue. Mr. Abbott was dying—not pretending to be dying. Poison was used as a murder implement in both stories. However, it was the lack of it that killed