The Cast of Amontillado Analysis
The Cask Of Amontillado The story was written by Edgar Allan Poe and took place during carnival season in Italy in 1846.
In the story the author used the first person narration style and this keeps the originality of the story. The reader get to know exactly what the protagonist was thinking because he was telling the story. So the effect is that he let the audience feel the main character which was Montressor. And this gives a better understanding of the story. We see that Montressor revenged Fortunato for insulting him. Through the story, there is no evidence of those insults. If we look at “thousand injuries” and “insult” from the text, we don’t see how those insults came about. The character didn’t change till the end. In fact the last paragraph tells hoe he achieved his goal. It is a good setting. In fact each paragraph described an idea making it easy to follow. On page seven, when he said “another draught of the Medoc” and “I broke and reached him a flacon of De Grave” we see and feel the scene going on. And another one “proceed”, “I said” too. The conflict in the story is Montressor having been wronged and willing to pay back. I was solved by the death of the antagonist. All the readers’ questions are not answered. In fact there would be a police investigation and montressor could be thrown to jail. And the story doesn’t say any of that. So the readers are still wondering. The shortness of this story allows the reader not to get lost. It helped stay on track and therefore have a better understanding. He focused on the essential. He created this effect also by the first person narration style. Like “I said”, “presenting him the wine” on page
In the story the author used the first person narration style and this keeps the originality of the story. The reader get to know exactly what the protagonist was thinking because he was telling the story. So the effect is that he let the audience feel the main character which was Montressor. And this gives a better understanding of the story. We see that Montressor revenged Fortunato for insulting him. Through the story, there is no evidence of those insults. If we look at “thousand injuries” and “insult” from the text, we don’t see how those insults came about. The character didn’t change till the end. In fact the last paragraph tells hoe he achieved his goal. It is a good setting. In fact each paragraph described an idea making it easy to follow. On page seven, when he said “another draught of the Medoc” and “I broke and reached him a flacon of De Grave” we see and feel the scene going on. And another one “proceed”, “I said” too. The conflict in the story is Montressor having been wronged and willing to pay back. I was solved by the death of the antagonist. All the readers’ questions are not answered. In fact there would be a police investigation and montressor could be thrown to jail. And the story doesn’t say any of that. So the readers are still wondering. The shortness of this story allows the reader not to get lost. It helped stay on track and therefore have a better understanding. He focused on the essential. He created this effect also by the first person narration style. Like “I said”, “presenting him the wine” on page