Essay

Shrestha 2

Era Shrestha

Alexander Kurian

ENGL-1302- 77001

05-Oct- 2019

Literary Analysis of The Cask of Amontillado

“Writers who wrote at his time, the likes of James Rusell Lowell, called him the most philosophical, discriminating and fearless critic of imaginative works in America. They rhetorically suggested that he used ‘prussic acid’ instead of the usual pen ink that other writers use due to the great criticisms.”(Baraban 47) Edgar Allan Poe proved that criticism was his main motivation in writing. He was primarily a criticism oriented writer and other artists called him ‘the tormented artist’. His works include poems such as The Raven, Tamerlane and Other Poems and journals such as The Penn and The Stylus. (Baraban 47). “French Poe is less bizarre than French Freud, but more puzzling, because its literary authority ought to be overwhelming, and yet vanishes utterly when confronted by what Poe actually wrote.” In 1846, Edgar Poe published a short story, The Cask of Amontillado. The main theme of the story is revenge. Comment by Owner: This is from book sentence so quotation mark will ok or need to do other citation

Montresor, the main character and the narrator of the story, narrates to an anonymous person about how he took revenge on Fortunato, a fellow nobleman. Montresor narrates that Fortunato had insulted him and his family and had hurt him a thousand times, but Montresor had suffered in silence. “Living as we do at a time when the family has ceased to exist as political unit, we may need to make a special effort to understand Montresor’s attitude toward his rights and responsibilities as a member of noble a family.” It was now his time to take revenge by burying him alive in his family’s catacombs. Poe’s writing is explicit and clear. The only main challenge is that he leaves the reader with a lot of unanswered questions: what so great insults had Fortunato made on Montresor to deserve such kind of death? What evidence does Poe give the reader of such insults? Why did Montresor not take legal action, by taking Fortunato in a court of law to have justice done on Fortunato for the insults? The story is quite short and fast since Montresor new the exact approach to use to lure Fortinato into his trap which was by the use of wine. It doesn’t take long before Montesor manages to engage and subsequently lead Fortinato into the trap since Fortinato loved wine so much. Comment by Owner: This is from database I pick this sentence to add in body

The story is centred around two characters: Montresor and Fortunato. Montresor, the narrator and the wronged character are from an old great family. He has always had the intention of taking revenge on Fortunato for “insulting him more than a thousand time.” (Stepp 447) He takes revenge by luring Fortunato into his family’s vaults in the catacombs and buries him alive. Montresor is vengeful and manipulative. Fortunato is a nobleman who is strong and feared. He is also an insulter, according to Montresor. His main weakness is excess intoxication. According to Montresor, he loves drinking fine wine and he claimed that he was a judge of fine wine.

The stereotype in the story is that men are normally strong and are to be feared, something that was widely expressed by Fortinato by the way people treated him with nobility as well as their action of going into the dark vault where the family members of the Montresor family had been buried and even talking about them while there.. However, the break in the story comes in where as Montresor lays the final stone, he hears a half cry of fear. A nobleman is expected to behave in a respected manner unlike how Fortinato had behaved through the story which eventually landed him into trouble.

The setting of the story is in a lonely street in Italy where Montresor meets Fortunato drunk and alone in an evening in spring. The next large setting is an underground catacomb during the carnival season. The catacomb is a burial vault that has piles of bones and dead bodies. The setting significantly contributes to the horror in the story. It is dark, cold, damp and the air is heavy such that “their lamps almost went off in the catacombs” (Gargano 119). There are rows of bottles of wine lying among the bones and the piles of bones against the wall tower over their heads.

The Cask of Amontillado has an internal narration. I prefer an internal narration to an external narration. The internal narrator, Montresor, is good; he gives all descriptions of the story's setting, and the catacombs especially. From his narration, the reader gets a clear mental picture of how the catacombs might have looked. His narration also magnifies the horror and terror that is supposedly intended by the writer. His description of Fortunato is also explicit and the description of his state of intoxication answers the reader why he could not realize the questionability of the essence of moving deeper and deeper into the vaults.

The story is filled with symbolism. The vault where Montresor is supposedly storing the wine is a literal death place. There are actual piles of bones, it is dark and there is insufficient oxygen, all characteristics of a death place. The vault is a symbol that foreshadows the death of Fortunato. The cask suggests freedom and confinement, how Montresor would be free from insults from Fortunato by confining and burying him in the catacombs. The journey through the catacomb from smaller to smaller and fouler places suggests that as they move further from fresh air, Fortunato was also moving further from his freedom. Besides, the story itself is a symbol; even though Montresor has the freedom he wanted; he is still trapped by the happenings that is why he narrates the story. He cannot forget it, in his mind, he is still down there in the vault with Fortunato. Luchresi, on the other hand, represents the freedom that everyone could have attained had Fortunato accepted Montresor to continue with his ‘perceived' plan of calling him. This notion is supported by the fact that at the end, neither Montresor nor Fortunato attained full freedom since thoughts of Montresor are still trapped in the vault with Fortinato.

The main theme of the story is revenge. Montresor is devastated by how hurtful Fortunato has made him feel. It gets worse when Fortunato insults Montresor’s family name. As a result, Montresor decides that he will take revenge. He takes advantage of Fortunato's weakness: love for wine. He manipulates Fortunato into believing that there is wine (Amontillado) in his family’s vaults and that he was going to ask Luchresi to taste it with him.

The main theme of the story is love. In his quest to look for justice for his family, Montresor eventually ends up luring Fortunato in his vault found under the stone palace. The main method that he used was pretending that he had the best wine, Amontillado in the vault which he needed to be tasted by wines experts for authenticity. Fortunato is willing to go all the way down the vault where the conditions are very cold while drinking more wine that was offered to him. Although he was under the influence, the fact that he communicated and still thought about the Amontillado shows his great love for wine that blinded his thoughts about the true intentions of the tour. Montresor, on the other hand, is willing to go as far as committing murder for the love of his family because Fortunato had been laughing and mocking their family name. This greatly demonstrates how far people are willing to go to satisfy their love needs.

Works Cited

Baraban, Elena V. "The Motive for Murder in "The Cask of Amontillado" by Edgar Allan Poe." Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature, vol. 58, no. 2, 2004, p. 47.

Bloom, and Harold. "Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Tell-Tale Heart” and Other Stories." New ed., Bloom’s Literary Criticism, 2009.

Gargano, J. W. "The Cask of Amontillado": A Masquerade of Motive and Identity." Studies in Short Fiction, vol. 4, no. 2, 1967, p. 119.

Stepp, W. "The Ironic Double in Poe's" The Cask of Amontillado"." Studies in Short Fiction, vol. 13, no. 4, 1976, p. 447.

White, Patrick. “‘The Cask of Amontillado’: A Case for the Defense.” Studies in Short Fiction, vol. 26, no. 4, Fall 1989, pp. 550–555. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=7135901&site=ehost-live.