Patrick White The Cask Of Amontillado

In Patrick White’s article “‘The Cask of Amontillado’: A Case for the Defense,” his stance on Montresor’s murder is one of justification and comprehension. White’s foundations for this stance is based upon the perspective that Montresor was acting on behalf of the Montresor’s family, similarly to how soldiers kill as a patriotic duty. White makes connections between the family motto’s origin being from the royal house of Scotland and the coat of arms resembling the American-Revolution flag. White claims that the Montresor family acts as a political unit with the same right to take action against an opponent as a governmental group would (White 550-555).

Reasonably, Patrick White points out, “…what [Montresor] did, he is convinced, was justified.

He was carrying out an obligation to his family as he saw it—as he was culturally conditioned to see. Now, fifty years after the event, he can recount it with pride” (White 554). There is sufficient evidence in the story to support White’s claims. For instance, Montresor shows pride for his actions by finding pleasure in hearing the distressed screams of his victim, he recounted, “[t]he noise lasted for several minutes, during which, that I might hearken to it with the more satisfaction, I ceased my labors and sat down upon the bones” (Poe 18). In fact, this was not the only time Montresor stated that he feels satisfied by his vicious deed. Shortly after in the tale Montresor remarked, “I placed my hand upon the solid fabric of the catacombs, and felt satisfied” (Poe 18). This reoccurring theme of satisfaction Montresor experienced goes hand in hand with Patrick White’s proposition. White goes to the extent of illustrating how this pride and satisfaction Montresor senses is paralleled to that of a soldier by declaring, “[Montresor] can relish what he is doing because he can feel that what he is doing is right as surely as a soldier in the service of a modern state can take pleasure in the killing he does because he is carrying out a patriotic obligation and being of service to his country” (White 553). This is an insightful, innovative perspective on Montresor’s murder which can inverse the previously misunderstood case.
Moreover, Patrick White expands his point by explaining that even though Montresor is fulfilling this murder with pride, he is still aware that he must keep his procedure hidden.

White regards this by asserting:

[f]or even though Montresor acts with a sense that what he does is fully sanctioned, he still must act in a covert manner. His family can assert sovereignty openly in its motto and coat of arms, but he knows that the actual implementation of this sovereign power must be muted. And so he carries out the killing of his adversary in secret. (White 553)

It is distinct in The Cask of Amontillado that Montresor goes to great lengths and meticulous planning to keep his assassination concealed, regardless of how justified he feels, like White notes. For example, Montresor mentioned:

There were no attendants at home; they had absconded to make merry in honor of the time. I had told them that I should not return until the morning, and had given them explicit orders not to stir from the house. These orders were sufficient, I well knew, to insure their immediate disappearance, one and all, as soon as my back was turned. (Poe

15)
Montresor had to master this reverse psychology on the maids to insure there were no witnesses of his killing. This exemplified how Montresor was aware that he had to keep his actions on behalf of his family hidden. Another occurrence in which Montresor demonstrated his extensive plotting for the killing was when he revealed the tools to wall up, and bury his victim, Fortunato alive. Indeed, Montresor confessed, “…I soon uncovered a quantity of building stone and mortar” (Poe 18). This evidence revises a vast quantity of thought from Montresor, well it is clear that he carefully schemed the horrifying murder and secretly placed these tools in the catacombs at an earlier instance.
Regarding the previous two points of Patrick White, there is sufficient in-text evidence to purport these conclusions that Montresor felt just in his actions as well as awareness of their necessary secrecy.

Though, the conclusion that White makes that is arguable is the fact that, “…we, the gentle reader, might similarly welcome Montresor back into the human community with our horror-stricken hearts” (White 555). This is debatable because even though humans want to defend their units, whether that be family or country, not everyone is exempted for the guilt that comes with murder. All in all, the act of taking the life from another human, still is rarely —if ever— justifiable, especially to the torturous extents that Montresor takes the action. So not everyone would forgive Montresor in this manner, this can bring valuable insight to us as a humanity, and how if we feel extensive discomfort over Montresor’s assassination of his rival, then perhaps we should feel the same way about the annihilation of our countries own

rivals.
All things considered, Patrick White brought to light many profound ideas in his article “‘The Cask of Amontillado’: A Case for the Defense.” Even the arguable conclusions he makes bring forward the opportunity to the opportunity to ponder our morals of right and wrong. Because of this White’s article is substantial.