“You should have seen how wisely I proceeded with what caution-with what foresight-with what-dissimulation I went to work! “ (Poe 692). That is until he starts explaining his motivation towards why he killed the old man, but as the narrator explains he does not know why he killed the old man that is until he speaks of the old man’s evil eye. “I think it was his eye!-yes, it was this!” (Poe, 691). The eye of the old man showed the narrators true intentions a mirror into his own mind showing him his true self.
Do you believe the insane should be held responsible for their criminal acts? The narrator in this story murdered a old man. We are figuring out if he is guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity. The narrator is not guilty by reason of insanity because he killed the victim because of his eye which is not sane, he thought that his own guilt was the dead old man 's heartbeat, and he had officers sit where the victim 's corpse lies. The narrator is insane because he wants to kill over a eye.
This shows that he is not in control of his own morals because a trivial reason made him want to kill someone he loved. So, how could you say that he is fully in control of what he is doing if he were to kill someone he loved for a trivial reason? Overall, the narrator in “The Tell-Tale Heart” kills a man, but he is not guilty due to the reason of insanity. The narrator is not guilty because he has impulsive behavior when he cuts up the old man. He also is not guilty because he cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality, and he cannot control his own morals.
George from George Steinbeck’s “Of Mice and Men” made the right decision of killing Lennie in the story, while other might disagree. George shot Lennie in the back of the head to save him from the suffering and humiliation from a mad and revengeful Curley. George did this not out of hate, but out of the love of their friendship. “George raised the gun and his hand shook, and he dropped his hand to the ground again” (Steinbeck). George is struggling to come to terms that he is going to shoot his best friend.
Beatty is puzzled and troubled by the fact that he can not make sense of the literature, and for this reason he wants to die. By killing him, Montag frees Beatty from the shackles of knowledge and allows him to move on into an ignorant and peaceful state of mind. Montag may have only burned Beatty because he was an obstacle, but the repercussions of this event makes it a renewing use of fire. Beatty is released from his life filled with burden, which is what makes this positive. Not only is Beatty’s death an example of this side of fire’s duality, but Montag and the rest of the firemen watching the woman set her house and self on fire is also an example of renewal.
Hamlet says that he “essentially [is] not in madness, but mad in craft” in order to deceive everyone and draw attention away from his suspicious activities as he tries to gather evidence against Claudius (3.4.191-2). In this passage, Hamlet tells Horatio that he will be acting mad in the near future. Indeed Hamlet begins to act mad and this is obvious to others by his responses. This shows that Hamlet is not truly mad he is just trying to deceive everyone so that he can eventually kill claudius without others being suspicious of the murder, he wants them to simply blame the murder on the madness. Hamlet stages the Murder of Gonzago which is an elaborate attempt to
Hamlet is wrong because he gets himself killed and he was not in his right mind. His conscience did not kill him but it sure helped kill him because he wanted to act tough and not back down. An example is ophelia kills herself after going into madness because of hamlet. Hamlet was not only hurting/killing himself he was also hurting the others around him too. He drove claudius into paranoidness because claudius was scared that he was going to kill him and hamlet did succeed but he also died too, an eye for an eye.
The society in this book seemed to be the type that followed the rules or if you didn’t the worst things were going to happen to you. Everybody makes mistake and they try to learn and move on from them but killing someone intentionally would stick with that person forever and they would never be the same. Therefore, some people debate on whether he was completely out of place for killing Beatty or did the best thing for society. Although Montag killed Beatty, many people debate over whether it was the right thing to do or not. Montag did was he thought was right according to him because Montag thought that he was protecting himself and Faber, killing him to give society a chance to change, and because Beatty did not want to live anymore.
To me it’s poorly written because he killed a man, but because his guilt took him over he couldn’t handle all the pressure and turned himself. Like, if you’re going to kill someone for a dumb reason at least have a smarter way of covering it up. I understand how people say it’s just a story and that it’s is very entertaining, but if you think about it the story that is entertaining you is a story of insanity and death and I don’t find that very entertaining. In the story the Tell Tale Heart a man or caregiver kills an old man because of his eye. He tells the readers that the eye makes his “blood run cold” and because of that he had to kill him.
This links to the claim because the narrator was so obsessed with the old man 's eye and his focus was on killing the old man that he started becoming mad. So, the thoughts he had for concealing the body so no one would find out was an act of pure madness. This example and analysis shows why the narrator been obsessed with the old man 's eye and how his obsessions made his mind become