The short story, “Lamb to the Slaughter,” written by Roald Dahl, is about a pregnant women who kills her husband with a leg of lamb after he tells her that he is leaving. In the story, Dahl uses indirect characterization; specifically thoughts, dialogue, actions, and what others say about the women, to give the reader a detailed look at her inner self. Using indirect characterization, the author is able hint throughout the story that Mary, the main character, is a sociopath, and is very unstable during her pregnancy, without blatantly stating it. A sociopath is defined as Mary’s thoughts change throughout the story, showing the reader her development as a character. In the beginning, she is a caring wife, who loves her husband dearly and can not wait for him
Both, the film version by Alfred Hitchcock and the short story version by Roald Dahl of Lamb to the Slaughter had the overall message of everything a person does has a consequence. With both the film and the movie makes Mary and Patrick Maloney settle their divorce. One of the interesting things about the film and the story is the characters. As Patrick Maloney throws all the love and care that Mary gave as he explained about having a divorce with the result of getting hit with a lamb leg by Mary, which made her plan something devilish to get away with it the hard way. One of which is the lying to the officers and feeding the officers the lamb.
Additionally, after she struck her husband, she thought that it was “funny” on how “he remained standing” for a while. Usually after committing a crime, people would immediately feel guilty and sorry, but Mary though it was “funny” and even “giggled” when the detectives ate the evidence. The readers would say she went insane after killing her husband and feeding his colleagues with the murder weapon, which creates tension within the readers. Briefly, Roald Dahl uses insanity to create suspense in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ as people that are insane are unpredictable, leading the audience to anticipate the ending of the
Owing to the fact that she was so hurt, she to a lamb leg to the back of his head and there he went crashing onto the floor unable to move (Dahl 2). Later on that day, to cover up her tracks she called the police over to tell them of the tragic accident that happened to her husband but of course it was all a lie. To get rid of the evidence, She insisted that they stay for dinner and so they did. Mary Maloney was content because she got away with the murder of her husband and in that matter it seemed as if she enjoyed it which showed her to be even more demeted than she seemed in the
Compare/Contrast Essay In the two stories “Popular Mechanics,” and,”The Lamb to the Slaughter,” they both deal with deaths of family members. The couples in both didn't talk to one each other. They rather hurt each physically and emotionally then talk things out. They both solve nothing by hurting each other. Even though on both couples are fighting, their situations are different.
The Comparison and Contrast of “Lamb to the Slaughter “written by: Roald Dahl and “Jury of Her Peers” written by: Susan Glaspell “Lamb to the Slaughter” by Roald Dahl and “ Jury of her Peers” by Susan Glaspell have many similarities, but also a great number of differences. The most obvious similarity is both wives murder their husbands. Other important similarities are each woman suffer from mental abuse from their spouse and the murder motives were hidden from authority. Some of the most important similarities between the two stories were both of their husbands treat them as “silly women or can not think for themselves.” In the story “ Lamb to the Slaughter”, Mary Maloney waits for her husband to return home from work so she can complete
He did not take off his jacket, to begin; he immediately moved to pour a glass of whiskey after walking into the house, kissing Mary as he did so. He told his wife that he needed to tell her something, that she might want to sit down when he did so. The news he requested Mary listen to was this: he wanted to leave Mary for another woman’s love, he wanted to divorce her. Not being able to believe this statement, Mary retreated into a state of shock, saying she would fetch the meat to cook dinner. She hoped that if she acted as if nothing happened, the information wouldn’t be true, the suddenly serious tone of the night would lift.
So as she is now blinded with imagination, Mary believes that if she goes on as if everything is normal, then everything will be average again. But as she is just about to make dinner with a leg of lamb tha she got from downstairs, Mary is blinded with rage from something her husband said and she then strikes him with the leg of lamb and murders him. The now “widow”, pops out from her psychotic bubble, becomes filled with anxiety about everything she has done and wonders “what were the laws about murders with unborn children”(Dahl, 177). By killing her husband, Mary shifts her path in
Mary brought it up to the living room, he once again rejected her trying to give him food by saying he would be going out. (2) She suddenly swung the frozen leg of lamb at his head knocking him down, thinking of her consequences of killing her own husband. Mary didn’t care what the penalty was for her but she was pregnant and it worried her what would happen with her child. (2) She quickly thought about putting the leg of lamb in the oven and preparing to go out. (2) Mary began to practice what she would say to Sam the grocery man and how she would say it, from her “hello” to her smile, it would all have to be natural.
Another example of George and Lennie’s friendship is when George has to shoot Lennie, because he had accidentally murdered Curley’s wife. George knew that he would have let Curley get to Lennie he would have tortured Lennie. It was George’s responsibility to take care of Lennie. George knew that they could not just run away from this. For the better of Lennie, George decided that he should kill Lennie himself (Steinbeck).