Well, this is a very interesting question because some
critics would say that you can't consider "The Cask of Amontillado" as a typical revenge
story, because we as readers are unsure of how reliable Montresor is as a narrator, but
leaving that behind, the first paragraph establishes the position of someone who feels
(at least) that he has been grievously wronged by someone and wants to get his own back
against him - the two classic ingredients of a
revenge:
The
thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could; but when he ventured upon
insult, I vowed revenge. You, who so well know the nature of my soul, will not suppose,
however, that I gave utterance to a threat. At length I would be avenged; this was a
point definitively settled - but the very definitiveness with which it was resolved
precluded the idea of risk. I must not only punish, but punish with impunity. A wrong is
unredressed when retribution overtakes its redresser. It is equally unredressed
when the avenger fails to make himself felt as such to him who has done the
wrong.
Montresor thus here
expresses how insulted he has been by Fortunato, and also is defiant in his desire to
see revenge visited upon Fortunato, but interestingly, in a way that lets Montresor get
away with the crime and also express to Fortunato how much he has been insulted. Thus
the stage is set for the rest of this chilling story...
No comments:
Post a Comment