The Cask Of Amontillado Essay

The lack of mental stability, homicidal tendencies, and the large gap in time, it is safely said that Montresor is not a reliable narrator. It is apparent to the reader that he does not have all his marbles. In what society would someone who is not all mentally there be seen as a reliable source? The fact that he is able to pick up on Fortunato’s weakness and exploits them proves how unreliable he is. “He had a weak point… He prided himself on his connoisseurship in wine…” (Poe, 360). Montresor use of verbal irony demonstrates that the murder is premeditated. “... the cough… it will not kill me…” states Fortunato who receives “True-true…” as a response from Montresor (Poe, 362). He exploits this and deceives the man to go down into the caverns that housed the supposed Amontillado. Furthermore, Montresor never tells the reader what Fortunato actually did. He only states, “The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could, but when ventured upon insult I vowed revenge” (Poe, 360). Insults do not call for homicide. Additionally, it seems to be a retelling from an event fifty years ago. “For the half of a century no mortal has disturbed them.

In “The Cask of Amontillado”, Edgar Allan Poe displays the theme of revenge and manipulation. The narrator Montresor pledges revenge on Fortunato for an insult that is never explained. He maintains an appearance of goodwill towards Fortunato and decides to make use of Fortunato's weakness for fine wines against him. During the carnival season, the narrator approaches Fortunato, telling him that he has come across something that could pass for Amontillado a rare and expensive wine. Fortunato being excited about the news insists on accompanying Montresor to the vaults to determine whether it is Amontillado or not.

Many stories in literature are not complete without an Antagonist. The Antagonist can be the embodiment of evil or just a roadblock for the main character to overcome. In the short story Sweat, written by Zora Neale Hurston, features an abusive husband, Sykes, as the Antagonist. Sykes dominates and abuses his hard-working wife, Delia. Whereas, Edgar Allen Poe, author of The Cask of Amontillado, uses an ambiguous relationship between Fortunato, a man full of ego and arrogance, who wrongs protagonist Montresor. In both stories, the Antagonists believe themselves above the laws of society and nature; and this ultimately leads their respective demises.

In The Cask of Amontillado, the narrator, Montresor, lures Fortunato into his wine vaults in order to murder him. The reason behind it is never clearly stated in the text. Montresor merely says, “A thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could; but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge.” (Poe 1108) Montresor never reveals the exact nature of the insult, nor the multitude of injuries that he had supposedly borne. The audience cannot even be certain that the insult ever occurred. Perhaps the slight is only in Montresor 's mind. Fortunato seems blind to Montresor 's true intentions, meaning he is either completely oblivious and insensitive to those around him, or, what Montresor has deemed a horrible crime punishable by

later regrets. “No answer.” This shows that Montresor killed Fortunato. As Montresor was building the wall, Fortunato was laughing because he thought it was a joke, although it really wasn 't. At the time Montresor didn’t care that he killed Fortunato

The final reason why Montresor should be charged with this horrendous crime is that screams were heard coming from the catacombs on the night of Fortunato’s disappearance. Perhaps they were screams coming from an argument that led to Fortunato’s murder, or perhaps they were the pitiful screams of Fortunato as he died a painful death. I guess that is up for u to decide

Poe’s “The Cask of Amontillado” and Browning’s “My Last Duchess” both revolve around revenge. We are introduced to men who swear vengeance on other characters. Yet, the mindsets of these men are, in some aspects, very different. To truly comprehend a story, we have to understand why authors make their characters behave the way they do in addition to the message being presented. In the case of “The Cask of Amontillado” and “My Last Duchess,” why do both narrators believe murder is totally necessary? To fully recognize underlying meanings, we need to analyze characters from a narrative and scientific perspective. For example, there is actually scientific reasoning to classify narrators of these stories as “psychopaths.” It is very likely that the narrators of these two stories suffer from several mental disorders, which fully give reason to the events of the stories. To see the true perspective of how both stories handle murder, revenge, and the mental health of the narrators, we need to look at why the narrator of “My Last Duchess” feels offended, why the narrators choose murder, and how the narrator of “The Cask of Amontillado” carries out the murder.

In this essay I will explain how Montresor’s execution of Fortunato was carried out like an expert. I will list examples of how Montresor manipulated Fortunato, and how he enjoys his revenge. In this story Montresor, the murderer, used reverse psychology, and utilized cunning precondition to fulfill his scheme. He also used clever paronomasia to deceive Fortunato.

The fictional short story “The Cask of Amontillado” by Edgar Allan Poe takes place in the catacombs of Montresor’s palace, during the carnival’s climax. The story begins when Montresor, the villain of the story, vows revenge on Fortunato. Throughout the story, the author doesn't tell us what the revenge will be, but his choice of words in the details creates a mood in the reader. The author’s detailed description in the short story creates different moods in the reader like anger, satisfaction, curiosity, and victory because the chosen words connect with the audience.

Montresor is a grudge holder. In the beginning, Montresor, explains why he is angry with Fortunato, but didn’t come into detail of what he did to him. Evidently, Fortunato injured and insulted Montresor, who says that he has endured peacefully as Fortunato repeatedly offended him thousands of time. Fifty year ago, Fortunato use to deny what Montresor would say about, who he was or what he had done, as if it was untrue. Montresor would argue back and forth with him explaining that it was true. Like when they were going to the catacomb, Fortunato didn’t believe that Montresor was a “Mason” and when Montresor said that was Amontillado he gave Fortunato to drink. Fortunato deny that it was and said to him it tasted like Sherry. Montresor wanted

Zaroff and Montresor are two characters in the short stories ‘’ The Most Dangerous Game’’ by Richard Connell and ‘’The Cask of Amontillado’’ by Edgar Allen Poe. Montresor and Zaroff are both wealthy characters who are the antagonist in their respective stories and murder other characters. The motivation behind the killing is what makes them apart from each other. Both of these characters are considered crazy but Montresor seems saner than Zaroff. Do they both have an exceptional excuse for what they did?

Edgar Allen Poe is a famous writer who is well-known for his short stories. The Cask of Amontillado is one of Poe’s short stories which is about two men, Montresor and Fortunato. Fortunato did something to Montresor, the act is unknown, but it angered Montresor badly enough to make him feel the need to seek revenge. The story portrays Montresor’s long, drawn out plan to kill Fortunato. In the story, it is clear that he was set on killing Fortunato, because of his actions and emotions shown toward Fortunato. The ongoing argument of whether Montresor should be held to capital punishment or not hasn’t been solved. Facts and evidence back up the claim that Montresor should be killed for his wrongdoing.

Based on the fact that Montressor is able to indulge in fine wines and thinks highly of himself leads me to believe that he is at least of average social class. However, you can tell that people such as Fortunato still look down upon him. Montressor is an unreliable narrator because he never provides proof as to how Fortunato has “injured” him in the past and he always tries to cover up his flaws.

In Poe’s “The Cask of Amontillado,” Montresor has an evil plan to get revenge on his “friend,” Fortunato. Montresor's plan involves drinking the wine, Amontillado. Fortunato loves wine, and he will do anything for it, or with it. Wine plays a huge role in Montresor's plan. Montresor gets Fortunato to really think that they are “friends.” Montresor told Fortunato that he is a “rich, respected, admired, beloved” (86) man. He does not actually think that. When he says he “must not only punish” (83) Fortunato, but he must “punish [him] with impunity” (83), which he does. The first step in Montresor's plan is to get Fortunato to go in the catacombs. He says to Fortunato, “Come, we will go back, your health is precious” (86). Montresor is doing reverse psychology.

Martin Luther King Junior once said, “There is nothing more dangerous in all the world than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity” (Luther 1963) While blunt, Luther beautifully explains that ignorance is not a human virtue and instead is dangerous. Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Cask of Amontillado” is another example of how sincere ignorance is dangerous to the individual. Fortunato is well liked among his peers and is a respected individual when it comes to the connoisseurship of wine. However, unbenounced to him, he has also made an enemy of Montresor. The night of a great carnival, Fortunato is found highly intoxicated and eager to follow Montresor by any means to acquire the taste of the rare amontillado that was promised (Poe 3-4). Through Montresor’s narration of this classic tale, the theme ignorance is dangerous, exemplified through the