Underneath the title of the short story “Cons,” by author Jess Walter reads; “Can you ever escape the bad things you’ve done?” What a true statement this is. In both “Cons” and another short story “Killings,” by Andres Dubus, it is portrayed that escaping past mistakes is sometimes nearly inevitable. Both stories share a similar layout. They revolve around murder, pain and agony. Richard killed Frank, an innocent young man and Kyle killed an innocent young couple. Their “choices” to kill—accident or not—changed their lives forever. When Kyle chose to drive while intoxicated, he received negative consequences, living with the fact he murdered an innocent couple and serving jail time. This is something that never leaves his mind and on no …show more content…
day, does it not appear in his thoughts. With every conversation he makes, Kyle finds a time to share the story of the accident (with minimal details) even on a first date. “For instance, he often told people too soon, the minute he met them. Kyle told her, ‘You should know that I was in Prison. Eight years ago, I got drunk and lost control of my car. I drove up on the sidewalk.” (Walter, 84) Richard deliberately made the decision to murder an innocent person which led him to his final resting place…the ground. Throughout the story “Cons,” it’s almost as if Kyle will never be able to escape his antagonist, the father of the girl—Shae Lynn--he killed.
He receives nasty letters constantly reminding him of the night of the crash. “I wanted you to remember how you ruined the lives of these people,” says Shae Lynn’s father. (Walter, 85) He faces two different conflicts, Man vs. Self and Man vs. Man. It is possible that the conflict he has with himself is fueled by the conflict he shares with the father of the young girl he crashed in to. Matt—the father of Frank—too faces Man vs. Self and Man vs. Man conflicts. Matt must decide whether he wants to avenge his son’s murder by killing Richard or if he should just move on and forget. This turns to a Man vs. Man challenge when Matt begins the actual process of hunting down and killing Richard. It is unknown if Richard faces a Man vs. Self conflict as well. The author makes it appear as if Richard has no remorse over his actions, so saying his death was an escape from his antagonist is not a certain argument. It goes this way for Matt too, though he got revenge on Richard by killing him, readers will never know the long-term effect this will have on Matt. Killing Richard may only be a temporary solution to getting over the death of his son Frank. The main theme of both short stories is that actions have a ripple effect. Kyle’s drinking led him to believe he was okay to drive home on his own. He did not know he was going to kill a couple walking
along a sidewalk. Richard did not play out how shooting Frank in front of his own kids and ex-wife would affect him. Little did he know Matt would hunt him down and kill him for his actions. Even Matt is unaware of the effect of killing Richard will have on him. Another similarity between “Cons” and “Killings” is the plot. In both short stories, a deceased child is what drives the main characters crazy. In “Cons,” Kyle cannot forget he killed Shae Lynn and in “Killings,” Matt is not able to let Richard be since he murdered his son Frank. Matt’s wife Ruth is also reminded on a daily basis, she sees Richard walking around town. “She can’t even go out for cigarettes and aspirin. It’s killing her.” (Dubus, 48) Characters from both stories are brought with distraught sadness due to a loss of a loved one, their families have been disrupted. It is impossible to go back in time and change the past. What’s done has been done, and one must play the cards they are dealt with. This is made evident in “Cons,” as Kyle tries to move on and live a “normal life.” It is also seen in “Killings,” as Matt takes matters into his own hands and decides to kill Richard and again when Richard must adjust to Frank fathering his children with his ex-wife. These stories also share similar conflicts with themselves and with others (which mainly focuses on murder). “Cons” and “Killings” both share a similar plot. The characters from both stories struggle internally and externally. Their actions result in severe consequences. Both stories are overall similar to one another, focusing on the fact that you cannot change what happens in the past but only respond to it as adequate as possible.
In Andre Dubus’ short story “Killings,” the character Frank Fowler is violently murdered by his girlfriend’s ex-husband. Numerous readers agree that Richard Strout’s death is the result of revenge; however, Frank’s death is rarely examined. Even though his death is the pivotal point that swings the rest of the story into action, his demise is often overlooked because Richard’s death is so prominently analyzed, calculated, and questioned. So what is the origin of Frank’s murder? Although there are numerous reasons why Frank is killed, one apparent cause is his love for Mary Ann. Lieutenant Jimmy Cross from Tim O’Brien’s story, “The Things They Carried,” can certainly attest that the love of a woman is a powerful and blinding emotion. An emotion
The Murderers Are Among Us, directed by Wolfe Gang Staudte, is the first postwar film. The film takes place in Berlin right after the war. Susan Wallner, a young women who has returned from a concentration camp, goes to her old apartment to find Hans Mertens living there. Hans took up there after returning home from war and finding out his house was destroyed. Hans would not leave, even after Susan returned home. Later on in the film we find out Hans was a former surgeon but can no longer deal with human suffering because of his traumatic experience in war. We find out about this traumatic experience when Ferdinand Bruckner comes into the film. Bruckner, Hans’ former captain, was responsible for killing hundreds
The love that a parent feels for a child is the most indescribable feeling in the world. Most parents would do anything and everything to protect their children, but not all parents are aware of the danger their child faces. In the short story "Killings," by Andre Dubus, a mother and father are faced with the tragic death of their son. Both parents, although both may not admit to it, believe that the murderer deserves the same consequences their son suffered. Matthew Fowler takes matters into his own hands, and along with his friend, Willis Trottier, kills Richard Strout. The death of Richard Strout should not be tried as a murder, but as a justifiable homicide. Matthew Fowler, the father of Frank Fowler, had every reason to reciprocate Strout's actions. A child should not be taken from a parent in the way that Frank was taken from his.
In my opinion, the author Andres Dubus presents two separate plots in his work, “Killings” - Matt’s plot and everyone else’s plot. Throughout the story you see Matt’s emotions and grieving process juxtaposed to his wife’s, his children’s, and his town’s. Of course Matt is distraught over his son’s death, but his wife, Ruth, was emotionally destroyed, his children were livid, and the town was unabashedly enraged: all over the idea that the man who murdered Frank was able to walk freely without any noticeable guilt or remorse. There is also the interesting addition of Mary Anne perceived from Matt’s eyes to be mentioned. He continuously mentally commentates on her appearance; her, “...long brown legs he loved to look at” (paragraph 75), or “wide
Bob was a smart, kind man at times, however, other times he was a wild recluse. With no discipline from his parents, and no tough love, he fell into a pit of destruction. Although Bob’s death could be blamed on Cherry Valance or Johnny Cade, it is his parents that are responsible for his death. Because they never punished their son when he did something wrong or taught him a lesson of respect, Bob suffered the ultimate consequence.
Matt’s son, Frank, was a successful young man who fell in love with a woman named Mary Ann, and this would later lead to his death—by insane ex-husband, Richard Strout. Matt soon is driven to do the unthinkable. He is going to kill the man who took his son away from him. Matt feels rage to the point of killing this man, to justify his pain by taking away another life, even when the killing itself will not bring his son back. While committing to the deed, Matt goes to Strout’s apartment, and he finds himself drawn to the life this man is going to leave behind. While Strout was trying to explain himself, he said to Matt, “I couldn’t even talk to her. He was always with her. I’m going to jail for it; if I ever get out I’ll be an old man. Isn’t that enough?” (Dubus 60). This is the only part of the story which depicts any measure of decent humanity Strout has in his body. He was upset that Matt was holding a gun to him, and he knew he deserved what was coming for him, even if he didn’t agree with Matt’s actions. Matt soon takes Frank’s life away, and he realizes killing Strout only made things worse, and made him realize even further the pain and suffering would never end. In the story, it says, “…he saw Frank and Strout, their faces alive; he saw red and yellow leaves falling to the earth, then snow; falling and freezing and falling,…he shuddered with a sob that he kept silent in his heart” (DuBus 64). Strout felt what Matt felt when he saw another man with his wife, and Matt wasn’t in the right mindset to realize both men are
As our murderers sit in a Kansas diner. Not disturbed by the four murder he has just committed, Dick chows down on sandwiches. Perry, however, is troubled. He reads and re-reads an article about the crime he and Dick committed. He just has a bad feeling...but Dick has no time for his phenomenons. To him, everything was perfectly fine Perry mentions someone named Floyd who may be a problem. Dick becomes furious and implies that he would kill the guy if he needed it to.
We change focus to Lester Nygaard, a weak willed, mild mannered man. He is in conversation with Malvo at the emergency room after a confrontation a bully, Sam Hess. Lester talks of Hess, Malvo mistakes this as an assassination request and murders Hess. Unaware of the murder Lester goes home. His wife belittles him further, just as Hess did. Suddenly Lester can take it no longer and thumps his wife with a hammer, she dies. Lester is now not only associated with a killer, but is a killer himself.
However, Matt Fowler had different reasoning for his actions. After burying his twenty-one year-old son who was just on the cusp of graduating college, he finds that Strout, his son’s murderer, has been released on bail pending trial and until then he has resumed his normal life. Watching his wife not only mourning the loss of their son, but also having to see the killer in daily activities, has caused a mental and emotional strain on their life. The affect on Fowler’s family that Strout is walking around free and seemingly unconcerned is one of the main reasoning that is posed when Fowler and his friend Willis T...
Staring Monster, and “Murder on a Sunday Morning,” if you want to find out what the book “Monster” and the documentary “Murder On a Sunday Morning” are about then you should probably go to the library and get the book, and rent the documentary. Once you start reading the book Monster you wont want to stop, and once you start watching the documentary “Murder On A Sunday Morning” you will be just like a couch potato some one will have to come pry you off of your couch. Trust me when I say you will be a couch potato then I mean you will be a couch potato. I think that you will love the documentary “ Murder On A Sunday Morning,” and the book staring Walter Dean Myers “Monster.” This book and documentary will leave you on the edge of you seat, because their is so much thrill and excitement. One thing will happen and then the book will stop right then and there, you will have to start a new chapter to get to the good stuff. Same with eh documentary you will get to a certain part of the movie and then all of the sudden another thrill pops up and
The easy way out of a dilemma isn’t worth the damage from the start, or the loss that awaits at the end. In Edith Wharton’s Ethan Frome, readers are told a tale about the consequences of not pursuing your dreams ending in tragedy that isn’t closing with death, but a painful silence. In Christopher Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus, readers are taught that what is beyond reach should stay that way, especially if the only way of acquiring it is through an unethical approach. The nature of redemption is often detected at the peak of consciousness and is oftentimes too late for any reparation before the repercussions arise, because the moment awareness kicks in there’s only so much that can be restored.
Jail: the place of confinement for people accused or convicted of a crime. Imagine being locked in a cell for 24 hours a day, but for a crime one was wrongly accused of committing. Murder on a Sunday Morning is a documentary film by Jean-Xavier de Lestrade that follows Brenton Butler’s criminal case, in which the fifteen-year-old boy was wrongfully accused of committing murder. On May 7, 2000, the African American teenager was accused of robbing and killing an elderly, white tourist, Mary Anne Stevens, in Jacksonville, Florida. Two hours later, the police arrested Brenton Butler, a fifteen-year-old boy, that was walking nearby the scene. The only witness was the deceased woman's husband and he identified Butler as the killer. Butler signed
Richard’s mother was baffled by his action, and she was able to punish him in a way that he was able to become aware of his horror of taking a life. The setting emphasizes horror: “But my mother, being more imaginative, retaliated with an assault upon my sensibilities that crushed me with the moral horror involved in taking a life.” (24) His mother forces him to bury and pray for the kitten. His mother made him repeat several forgiving sentences aloud. The lesson prevented Richard from disrespecting another life again, such as the life of the
After reading the various statements of what happened it seems Tajomaru 's testimony was the most accurate and he is the most probable to have perpetrated the murder. In the different testimonies offered the information given seemed to indicate him. In comparing the stories, Tajomaru 's confession seemed to most line up with the description given by the woodcutter. There was also inconsistencies with the other testimonies presented by the other two suspects in the proceedings. Also the policeman 's testimony pointed to Tajomaru as the murder.
Evidence of professionalism on the part of the two killers, Al and Max, is that they both wear a uniform? They wear overcoats. that are too tight for them, gloves to prevent finger prints, and Derby hats. This might be for intimidation, to suggest they are. gangsters or something similar, or it could be that they are not so.