Detective Invertion in The Cask of Amontillado - Essay Example

Inspector Reader: How Poe uses character in “The Cask of Amontillado” to invert the detective story genre A skillful literary artist has constructeda tale. If wise, he has not fashioned his thoughts to accommodate his incidents; but having conceived, with deliberate care, a certain unique or single effect to be wrought out, he then invents such incidents — he then combines such events as may best aid him in establishing this preconceived effect … In the whole composition there should be no word written, of which the tendency, direct or indirect, is not to the one pre-established design. — Edgar Allan Poe, in Graham’s Magazine (May 1842) Edgar Allan Poe has been credited with inventing the detective story genre — his Inspector Dupin was the original clue-assembling master of detection, solving baffling cases like “The Purloined Letter” and “The Murders in the Rue Morgue” long before Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot began to puzzle out flabbergasting mysteries — so perhaps it’s not surprising that Poe was also the first to deconstruct the detective story. His short story “The Cask of Amontillado” is a fascinating inversion of the detective story genre, in which the reader assumes the position of detective and is in a position to solve not the mystery of the murderer but the motive for the murder. By providing the reader with narrative clues in the form of character, Poe creates a story which the reader must construct — and deconstruct — for himself. “The Cask of Amontillado” is essentially a crime story, related by the criminal, who lavishly details his great crime with vividly nuanced details, though it has been 50 years since he committed it. (Poe 43) Montresor’s telling is no remorseful confession; his tone is “calm, matter-of-fact, and dry,” says Mikhail Bakhtin. And while many have speculated that the unnamed “you” to whom Montresor’s story is addressed is likely to be a priest, perhaps hearing a deathbed confession, if this is true, the confession is not one of a man who thinks he needs forgiveness. (In fact, Montresor magnanimously grants his murdered enemy the absolution a priest grants the departed: In pace requiescat (May he rest in peace). Like a good crime story, Montresor’s confession is full of clues and of blind leads. “The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could, but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge,” Montresor begins his tale. (Poe 37) The insult is not specified, but we can paint a vivid picture of the man who delivered it. Poor Fortunato is a bit of a buffoon. When we meet him for the first time he is drunk and dressed in motley like a clown, reveling in the fun of Carnival. Though Montresor says that Fortunato is a connoisseur of fine wine, it is a statement that must be ironically intended: As L. Moffitt Cecil points out, no wine connoisseur would act the way Fortunato does: Fortunato, in "The Cask of Amontillado" … is but a sad travesty of the true expert. Montresor entices Fortunato into his cellar by challenging him to attempt what Poe presents as a very delicate and difficult test — to distinguish between amontillado and sherry. … Although Montresor declares in the story that he is ‘skilful in the Italian vintages himself’ and that Fortunato, a ‘quack’ in some ways, is ‘sincere’ in the ‘matter of old wines,’ their conduct on the excursion into the cellar would seem to belie any such claims. In the first place, Fortunato is intoxicated, a disqualifying condition for any serious wine tasting. Had he come safely to the wine and sampled it, his testimony would have been worthless. He would have failed the great test, which — the distinguishing of amontillado from other lighter and drier or heavier and sweeter sherries — is not an especially difficult challenge. As they proceed into the cellar, they pass some stored Medoc. Montresor recalls that he ‘knocked off the neck of a bottle’ and handed it to Fortunato to drink. Later Montresor "broke and reached him a flagon of De Grave," which Fortunato ‘emptied . . . at a breath.’ It seems preposterous that some of the nobler wines of France should be treated so cavalierly by reputed connoisseurs. … It is plain that Fortunato is not a connoisseur — he is an alcoholic. (41) Fortunato is also a nouveau riche, a jovial, jocular man (even as his death seems obvious to him, he tries to laugh it off as a joke) who must have infuriated the aristocratic Montresor — hence, the “thousand injuries” Montresor cites as infuriating but not deserving of capital offenses. Still, despite his buffoonery, Fortunato has a power and social standing that Montresor cannot achieve. He is a member of the Masons (and is surprised — and a little pleased — to discover that the old-family Montresor is not), wealthy, married and respected. Montresor admits “he was a man to be respected and even feared.” (Poe 37) The character of Fortunato — and what Montresor’s explanation of his character reveals about Montresor’s own character — is clearly a key element for solving the crime/motive of this murder story. If Montresor is not mad — and his careful planning and success in avoiding apprehension for his crime suggest that he is not — then he must genuinely believe that Fortunato has committed a capital offense, for which he deserves to die. Montresor is clever: He sets up a situation in which he can tell himself that he offered his victim opportunity after opportunity to avoid his fate when it’s clear that Montresor knows that each of his suggestions they turn back is couched in such a way that Fortunato, by virtue of his character as drawn by Montresor, must go on towards his doom: He cannot have his expertise dismissed or his health questioned. He will go on, as Montresor knows he must. Poe is telling his reader/detective what he must do: Just as Montresor uses his knowledge of Fortunato’s character to understand Fortunato well enough to lead him to his death, the reader/detective must use his knowledge of Montresor’s character to understand him well enough to understand his motive for murder. And so, what do we know about Montresor? He is an aristocrat but one who is part of a declining tradition that is quickly being overrun by newly rich men like Fortunato. As Elena Baraban points out, it is significant that Fortunato cannot remember the Montresor’s coat of arms or their family motto, two things that would have been important details in their Italian society (and details which might symbolically had warned Fortunato of his coming doom): “The display of family insignia was an indispensable part in the life of a socially prominent nobleman. Since a rich and powerful man such as Fortunato cannot remember the Montresors insignia, it is logical to assume that Montresor was not an active participant in the life of local aristocracy.” (50) The family tradition is important to Montresor: He lives — literally — on the bones of his ancestors, in a palazzo built over the family crypt, and he strolls easily through the labyrinth of underground chambers. Montresor also chooses his family crypt — and by extension, chooses his dead ancestors as the audience — for his vengeance on Fortunato, further evidence that his family history is a key to understanding Montresor’s character. Montresor is witty and wants his wit to be appreciated: He lingers lovingly over his ironic comments and actions in relating his tale: how he agrees with Fortunato that a cough will not kill him, how he offers his victim a bottle of the aptly named de Grave to drink on his way through the catacombs, how he uses the trowel that will seal Fortunato in his walled tomb as an ironic symbol that he is a mason. Montresor invites the reader/detective to see his actions as clever, both the spontaneous and carefully planned. He is stylish: No fool’s costume for him. His black cloak and matching mask are sleek and polished. He is vindictive: When he drinks a toast to Fortunato’s long life in the catacomb, the reader/detective knows that long life for Fortunato is really a long death. What do all these elements tell us about Montresor’s reason for murdering Fortunato? As in classic detective fiction, the detective/reader is the only person who can solve the mystery. If he cannot put the pieces together to determine the motive, then the motive will remain unknown. Poe provides no helpful afterword, no useful epilogue to assist baffled readers in their speculation. His mystery is a mystery in the truest sense of the word: The answer must always be found and is always uncertain — a guess, mad or informed, that may or may not be truth. Perhaps this confidence in his readers — or the implied challenge of this confidence — is what makes Poe’s work continue to resonate. Works Cited Baraban, Elena V. “The Motive for Murder in ‘The Cask of Amontillado’ by Edgar Allan Poe.” Rocky Mountain Review. Fall 2004. pp. 47-62. Bakhtin, Mikhail. "Forms of Time and Chronotope in the Novel." The Dialogic Imagination. Trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1996. 84-259. Cecil, L. Moffitt, “Poe’s Wine List.” Poe Studies. Vol. V, No. 2. December 1972. pp. 41-42. Poe, Edgar Allan. The Best of Poe: The Tell-Tale Heart, The Raven, The Cask of Amontillado, and 30 Others. New York: Presswick House. 2006. Read More