Montresor and Rainsford are two intelligent individuals who are on a journey to beat an opponent. Both of these protagonists are good planners. Their goals are different, revenge and survival, but they both succeed in carrying out their plans. Both men are intelligent and skilled, as Montresor carries out his plan perfectly, kills Fortunato, and is able to get away with it. Similarly, Rainsford uses his hunting skills and quick thinking and is able to defeat Zaroff, who is a very skilled hunter. Another similarity is that both protagonists have a dark side. Montresor's dark side is evident from the beginning of the story, whereas Rainsford's is not. Montresor's dark side can be seen in the pride and pleasure he gets from trapping Fortunato as can be seen from the following quote; "I continued, as was my wont, to smile in his face, and he did not perceive that my smile now was at the thought of his immolation." Poe, 635. Rainsford's dark side is less evident. Rainsford's dark side can be seen in his hunting nature. He doesn't accept that animals have feelings of fear, and sees them only as prey. This can be seen from the following quote;"The world is made up of two classes—the hunters and the huntees. Luckily, you and I are hunters." d. (Connell, 600) -. …show more content…
First, Montresor seems to be irrational and unreliable as a character and a narrator. The story opens up with Montresor saying, "The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could" (Poe,635). This seems to be exaggerated, as Fortunato seemed to be a nice fellow during the course of the story. Rainsford, on the other hand, is more rational and stable. He tries to reason with Zaroff, this can be seen in the following quote “Civilized? And you shoot down men?” “Suppose he refuses to be hunted?”. Connell, 611, here Rainsford is trying to reason with Zaroff, who has already made up his
He gives very little information about Fortunato, past that he is a wine connoisseur. There is no mention of what Fortunato does for leisure, his family, or even his job. In fact, the only details the reader receives on Fortunato paint him as a fool, with his costume, his drunken attitude, and obliviousness Montresor is focuses on the facts that make Fortunato look bad; he not only wants Fortunato dead but he also wants Fortunato’s name discredited. Montresor tells the reader even less about himself because there is no background to who Montresor is, what he does, or even what kind of contact he has with Fortunato. The only true details of Montresor that are given must be implied and give a sense of intelligence. In addition, he gives little to no details about the carnival, such as where it was, why the carnival was happening, or even why he chose this particular day to enact his plan. From these details, or lack of details, it seems Montresor doesn’t want his audience to know this information. The audience is supposed to simply look at Fortunato a fool and Montresor a genius, the harbinger of death. The facts such as who these people were, the time, or the setting are not important to Montresor’s focus in the
Therefore, he thinks that humans are more of a challenge because humans can beg not to be killed, unlike animals who can’t talk to humans. But, he only hunts humans for fun, so it’s like the Capital watching the “ Hunger Games”. As, Rainsford chose a weapon he was on the run thinking of a strategy to kill the general, then Rainsford found and killed General Zaroff. Meanwhile, Montresor is manipulating Fortunato.
Montresor is a man who feels pride in himself and in his family, so when Fortunato—an acquaintance of Montresor— “venture[s] upon insult,” Montresor “vow[s] revenge” against him (1). Montresor hastily decides that he must kill Fortunato, even though his use of the word “venture” implies that Fortunato had not yet insulted him, but nearly did. Montresor’s impulsive need for revenge causes him to formulate a plan to murder his acquaintance. He keeps Fortunato intoxicated by “presenting him…[with] wine,” he “fetter[s] him to the granite,” and he “plaster[s] up… [a wall of] new masonry” to trap Fortunato in the catacombs (39, 71, 89). All of these acts are signs that the need for revenge has made Fortunato insane. A person who has any sense of morals would not commit crimes such as Montresor’s. His impetuous decision to exact revenge caused him to lose his
Montresor does have some disconnect or mental problem. He wishes to kill Fortunato for insulting him, but he never specifies what insult it was. He also states he has borne a thousand injuries. This is an exaggeration- Montresor only says this because he needs a reason to kill Fortunato. If Fortunato has done anything to deserve a painful death, he would certainly know, but Montresor does not let fortunato know what he has done and states "neither by word nor deed had [Montresor] given Fortunato cause to doubt [his] goodwill." Montresor's madness is also made clear by his method of killing Fortunato; he suffocates him in a wall built in f...
Montresor is filled with regret that he took revenge so cruelly, “My heart grew sick,” (Poe 548). He was manipulated by his own pride and became the fool in the end, rather than Fortunato. Poe displays the Fortunato as a proud man at first, however Montresor’s pride is shown when he feels the first pangs of guilt but refuses to release Fortunato. He regretted his decision to kill Fortunato, however Montresor’s pride wouldn’t allow him to stop. Poe used these moments to subtly reveal Montresor’s
These imperfections cause him to murder his former friend Fortunato, because “when he ventured upon insult, [Montresor] vowed revenge” (212). Montresor goes to severe measures in order to maintain his pride, demonstrating that he is arrogant, cruel, and a generally imperfect person. However, while Montresor appears cold and cruel on the outside, after he killed Fortunato “[his] heart grew sick” (216). Although Montresor perceives his emotional response as a physical reaction to the dampness of the catacombs, the reader sees it for what it truly is: a sign of remorse.The reader can discern that Montresor’s pride and cruelty are battling against his conscience, and that his flaws catalyze his actions. Observing Montresor’s faults instead of speculating he is comprehensively inhumane conceives him to be a profound and deep
“The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had Borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge.” (Poe, 1108) Right away Montresor states this and as a reader, we start to feel sympathy for Montresor, he is the first character we are introduced to and because of this we naturally take his side. Of course at this point we don’t know what “revenge” really means, but by the end when we find out what his “revenge” entails our opinion of him most likely changes. His “revenge” of course is murdering Fortunato. He could no longer put up with the injuries he had borne and wanted to put an end to his own humiliation from being “insulted” by Fortunato. . Before he proceeds with the killing of his once friend Montresor thinks to himself, “It must be understood that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good will. I continued, as was my won 't, to smile in his face, and he did not perceive that my smile now was at the thought of his immolation” (Poe, 1108). This text is so haunting and terrible how one could smile at the thought of a person’s immolation. We can also see in this text that the murder of his friend has been pre-determined and well thought out. This almost makes what he does worse because he knows how horrible of a murder he is going to commit. Although we
1. What can the reader infer about Montresor’s social position and character from hints in the text? What evidence does the text provide that Montresor is an unreliable narrator? We learned from paragraph 23 to 24 that Montresor owns a Palazzo and also has lot of retainers based on that evidence, the reader can infer that Montresor is a very wealthy and successful man. About his character, the reader can imply that Montresor is a heartless, cold blooded, sneaky, manipulative, and untrustworthy man, as well as a man who hold on to grudges. Moreover, Montresor is an unreliable narrator, because he reveals in the first paragraph that he intends to have a revenge on Fortunato, but he did not indicate or clearly prove to the readers how Fortunato
“The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult I vowed revenge” (Poe 173) is how the story begins. Straight to the point and certain, it is clear to see that Montresor has an unstable state of mind. Edgar Allan Poe’s short story “The Cask of Amontillado” shows this through Montresor’s perseverance, his plan of retribution, and his verbal statements.
Hoping to obtain revenge, Montresor, the narrator, lures Fortunato, one of his friends, into the depths of his catacombs to be murdered. Montresor says, "The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could, but when he ventured upon insult I vowed revenge"(149). This is the first line in the story, and this is why Montresor seeks revenge. There is no explanation of the insults that Montresor received, so the reader may infer that Montresor is just lying. The insults that were received could possibly be just outdoing in the business arena. Montresor might be using that excuse for his desire to kill Fortunato, because he may be killing Fortunato out of jealousy. Montresor is likely telling this story to a family member, friend, or his doctor while lying on his deathbed. Montresor says, "…your health is precious. You are rich, respected, admired, beloved; you are happy, as once I was. You are a man to be missed. For me it is no matter."(150). Montresor just admitted that he knows Fortunato is better than he. Montresor may have been under the influence of jealousy. Redd 4 There are different theories to ...
The major theme in the story is the deep hatred buried within the outwardly congenial Montresor. This makes it vital that the story be told with Montresor's thoughts known to the reader. The tale simply would not work if it were told from Fortunato's point of view, or from a dramatic/objective angle. An omniscient view would function, but by knowing only Montresor's thoughts the reader develops a trust in him, and this causes the story's theme to have a more personal effect on the reader.
Montresor is the main character who is narrating from the viewpoint of someone in the story that is being told. This gives bias towards Montresor because the audience feels the need to root for him since he is telling the story. Montresor, in the beginning, is able to justify the acts he is about to do, while we are not able to hear Fortunato defend or explain what he has done to Montresor that would cause him to take those actions. “…but when he ventured upon insult I vowed revenge.” (Poe 108). Since it is told through Montresor, the readers are also able to hear what his thoughts are. This adds an extra layer to the story by giving not only what he is saying to Fortunato to get him to do what he wants, but also his true intentions and thought processes while he is executing his master plan. He explains to the readers that he manipulated his servants into leaving his house for the night so that no one would witness Fortunato at his home. “These orders were sufficient, I well knew, to insure their immediate disappearance…” (Poe
The first indirect factor that could contribute to Montresor’s vengeful act, and thus the story’s theme of revenge, is the character of Montresor. Montresor tends to harbor feelings of resentment and has a hard time not taking things out of context (Womack). He also plans the murder of Fortunato in advance and devises it in such a way that he will not be caught. In killing Fortunato, Montreso...
The story begins with, “The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge.” Montresor cites what must have been in his mind, the ultimate betrayal imaginable, at least in his mind. A betrayal that
The Bridge on the Drina a Nobel Prize winning novel, distinctively depicts the agony and suffering that individuals of Bosnia experienced throughout the late sixteenth century to World War I. An extraordinary bridge, that compasses generations and nationalities and assumes the focal point throughout the novel, was constructed hundreds of years ago when a ten-year-old Christian kid who was captured grows up to be Grand Vizier Mehmed-paša Sokolović. The bridge is a witness to incalculable stories of bliss and suffering that occurred upon it. Throughout the novel, the aspect of intimidation on individual and the society is encountered. The practice of Devshirme where young boys are taken away from their parents and the merciless killing of local people terrify the Bosnian people. Thus, this paper particularly examines the fear and suffering that Bosnians experienced.