Moral Ambiguity In Agatha Christie's Attwn And Murderie

908 Words2 Pages

Agatha Christie books brings up the problem of peoples morals, especially in the books ATTWN and MOTOE. The moral ambiguity presented in both books further shows that there are questionable areas in the justice system, and if the readers are left to question if whether or not the culprit was justified in what they did then, there must be some unreliable sections in the law. It’s made even harder to make it any clearer with Freud’s concepts on psychoanalysis, it questions the previously held assumptions on human nature, making people to acknowledge that they still hold some of their instinct back from primitive times.
ATTWN’s culprit’s actions can be classified into one of the biological drives that fuels a person’s instincts, Wargrave’s actions …show more content…

The insanity defence is a controversial aspect of law, and an argument has been made that some criminals would not have committed their crimes if they thought they wouldn’t get away with it by pleading insanity . He even admits that the murderer “is a dangerous and possibly insane criminal”, at that point Wargrave essentially admits that he is insane and is not sound of mind. This statement might be seen as Wargrave having fun playing with the victims, he is fully aware that he is the one doing the killings, and yet uses language that sends people into a panic. Wargrave uses “dangerous” without elaborating on it, this could lead people into over thinking what the criminal is capable of, dangerous is a common word for warning people for possible destructive happenings, yet it’s usually followed up by explaining on how it’s unsafe. Wargrave just follows it up with another extreme word “insane”, this would just further alarm people, as now all they know is that the murderer is seemingly capable of anything and nothing is off limits to them. Wargrave could be seen as not sane, allowing him certain freedom within the law. The flaws in the law become more apparent once this is suggested, the man who had managed to murder all the people on the island, could …show more content…

As Cassetti is presented as a man with no redeeming qualities, not a single passenger on board the express had a good thing to say about him. Throughout the book each of the passengers expresses their distaste for Cassetti, and that they “cannot regret that he is dead”, this suggests that everyone on the express believed that he got what he deserved and they are grateful that he is gone. MOTOE doesn’t want to question whether or not the victim deserved what they got like it does in ATTWN, it instead wants to question if the murderers were justified and morally correct in taking the law into their own hands. However, much like ATTWN, the murderer’s actions can be placed under Thanatos, as their “death instinct” is directed towards another person, taking the form of aggression and violence . Yet unlike ATTWN the murderers were not born with the desire to kill, instead they were driven to murder through the lack of justice they got through the law. Their actions can also be classed under Horkheimer’s classification of reasoning, subjective and objective. Subjective is having a calculating mentality, implied to be amoral, their primary concern is efficiency, such as Wargrave’s mentality. Objective is them establishing universal validity of end themselves, examples being freedom, justice, equality and happiness . The murders in MOTOE can be put under objective, they want to achieve justice, something the court would not grant them.

Open Document