Death and the Compass by Jorge Luis Borges

1642 Words4 Pages

Secret Morphology and a Vicious Series: Shape and Pattern in Borges Ford Maddox Ford famously thought that an author should open with “the note that suggests the whole book.” In the short story “Death and the Compass,” Borges’ third sentence accomplishes this: “But he did divine,” he writes of his detective-protagonist Erik Lönnrot, “the secret morphology of the vicious series.” Indeed, fixation on shape and form, pattern and symmetry – for conformation – is fundamental to Borges’ story. This is not surprising: After all, the equidistant triangle that connects the locations of the three enigmatic crimes on the city map is “the key” that solves the mystery. But even in less high-profile positions, geometric shapes are pervasive: The Hotel du Nord is a “high prism;” the paint shop that serves as backdrop for the second murder displays “yellow and red rhombs”; the harlequin-costumed kidnappers sport “yellow, red, and green rhombs… diamond designs.” And consider the “rectangular” water in the adjoined dock basin, and the “rectangular belvedere of the villa of Triste-le-Roy; the “quadrilateral jail,” and “that perverse cubicle on the Rue de Toulon.” Order is imposed on chaos; the skewed outlines of reality adjusted into tidy, parallel lines. Which makes sense, because Lönnrot is a shape maker. When Police Commissioner Treviranus suggests that the first victim, Rabbi Yarmolinsky, was murdered by chance, that the intended victim was likely the wealthy Tetrarch of Galilee who was staying in an adjoining room, and that the robber simply went into the wrong room, Lonnrot dismisses the theory. “In the hypothesis you have postulated, chance intervenes largely,” he says. “A rabbi is dead. I should prefer a purely rabbinical explanati... ... middle of paper ... ...gh the Yiddsche Zeitung that you were perusing the writings of Yarmolinsky for the key to his death,” Sharlach tells Lönnrot. This is a peculiar thing to do, but Sharlach understands it – because that’s what he would have likely done: To find structure in everything. This deepens Borges’ commentary even further. For in this final scene, this confrontation of sleuths, Borges does not pit Lönnrot against an Other; he sets him before an opposing mirror, against a reflection of himself. Notice the language Borges uses to describe them: Sharlach is “indifferent,” displaying “fatigued triumph” and great “sadness”; Lönnrot feels “an impersonal, almost anonymous sadness.” And with one final metonymic twist, Lönnrot ’s own hamartia is his undoing: With Lönnrot ’s personal gun in hand, Sharlach “stepped back a few paces. Then, very carefully, he fired.”

Open Document