No because he is insane. Montresor tricked Fortunato so he could also be trying to trick the reader. Also he is not reliable because he is a biased narrator and we did get to hear not Fortunato’s side of the story.…
First, we will speak about Fortunato’s tragic flaw: His ego. We see throughout the story that Fortunato believes himself to be the best at what he does. Believes himself to be the best wine connoisseur there is. It is due to this flaw that Montresor was able…
Directions: Using complete sentences, answer the following questions about the themes in "The Cask of Amontillado":…
Edgar Allan Poe is known for his horror stories in 19 th century. Readers at that time were impressed by his scary writings. Edgar uses figurative language to create a morbid atmosphere throughout the story. His most famous story “The Cask of Amontillado” makes readers feel a macabre atmosphere because of the ironies he uses.…
In “The Cask of Amontillado”, Edgar Allan Poe uses irony to develop the central idea of revenge. He uses irony in naming the character of Fortunato. Fortunato’s name means “fortune”. He is a man of wealth who is being blindly led to his death by Montresor in search of justifiable revenge. Poe also uses irony in the dialogue, “My dear Fortunato, you are luckily met. How remarkably well you are looking today”. Montresor is pleased to see him. Although Fortunato looks good now, he will be dead by the end of the story when Montresor puts his plan into action. Later, Montresor is concerned about his coughing. Montresor said, “We will go back. Your health is precious. You are rich, respected, admired, beloved..”. Montresor tells him to go back because…
In “The Cask of Amontillado,” Poe engages the reader by using point of view to emphasize the untrustworthiness of Montresor's, the narrator’s, character. For example, when Montresor had described how Fortunato had inflicted him with “[a] thousand injuries” and “ventured upon insult”, “[Montresor] vowed revenge” (1). This is the moment when the reader first experiences his unreliability as a narrator. Montresor had never specified the copious wounds that he had supposedly suffered from Fortunato and the severity of his offense. Furthermore, when Montresor had voiced out that Fortunato had ventured, in order words proceed with knowledge of risks, he had let bias trickle into his words. Us, the readers do not know whether or not Fortunato had intentionally insulted Montresor with malicious intentions, but in Montresor’s phrasing of words, it implies that he did indeed intended to do so. This not only makes the reader question the extent of exaggeration that Montresor inserts into his statements, but the reliability of the narrator as the story progresses. In addition, after Montresor had successfully, albeit reluctantly, finishes burying Fortunato in the alcove, he remarks: “My heart grew sick—on account of the dampness of the catacombs” (9). Here, one can see that Montresor had almost a moment in which he had felt guilt, yet had been quick to disregard it to the scenery. The dash indicated that Montresor added the latter portion onto his thoughts as more of an afterthought, rather than a…
In Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Cask of Amontillado,” Poe uses various types of irony to develop his theme of revenge as tool of justice. Poe’s use of irony deals the audience a vast knowledge of the story’s conclusion, and gives the narrative a dark humor that was signature of his work. In this story of an unreliable narrator in the first-person point of view, the dark humor and irony makes this tale of cold-blooded murder interesting and entertaining to the reader.…
It was a cold October night when I first heard of Fortunato’s case, I was very amused at the thought of someone doing something so unhuman to a person. I guess some people can’t control their actions, but then again those people belong in a mental institution. This case in particular was very peculiar because it had gone five years without being solved. It was about a week ago when our department heard about this case, it wasn’t long before the case landed on my hands. I am after all the best detective in this state something to be proud of course. Going out to the other side of the world to solve a case was something I had never done before but this case was overdue and someone had to do something to the aggressor in order to obtain justice.…
Montresor, from “Cask of Amontillado”, is one example of a flawed narrator altering how the reader perceives the story. He claims that “The thousand injuries of Fortunato [he] had borne the best [he] could” (Poe 212). Montresor leaves out what exactly Fortunato has done. In doing this, he limits the reader’s perspective so that they cannot fully understand the story. Montresor is led on by…
As you can see in The Cask of Amontillado, “He had a weak point this Fortunato-although in other regards he was a man to be respected and even feared. He prided himself on his connoisseurship in wine.” Through this quote we can see that Montresour already had studied his victim. He knew that he had to be careful with Fortunato’s power, and he had to take advantage of his sky high vanity of knowing a lot of wines. On the other hand, in the Tell Tale Heart the Narrator had trouble defining why exactly he wanted to kill the old man. When he did it, he realized it was only for his eye and once he knew it he couldn’t stop desiring it. As a result, I think Montresour took the time to control his emotions, so when the time of the crime came, he could trick his victim. While the Narrator let his emotions run, which blinded his actions and left loose…
To begin with, Montresor is an unreliable narrator. I think this because in the beginning of the story,(174) Montresor does not give any background or evidence of being insulted by Fortunato. The texts says, “ The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could...” Usually, when you are blaming someone that has done wrong to you, you would give a background, or evidence that they are in the wrong. My reason number two is that Montresor exaggerates his feelings and actions in the story, which is also why I believe he is bragging about his crime. “There were no attendants at home; they had absconded to make merry in honor of the time...I well knew, to ensure their immediate disappearance, one and all, as soon as my back was turned.” (176) Here is a perfect example of Montresor's bragging. He's basically saying that, he the best of the best, the head chief, and everyone knows when he says to do something, they do it.…
it may be possible that the reason he waited that long to tell anyone was for his own safety, but if that is true, there is no reason he should ever tell anyone. while he tells the story, montresor does not inflate the insults that fortunato causes nor does he omit his own lessor misdeeds. montresor does not try to make himself look better because he is not ashamed by his actions. when his story is finished, montresor says a phrase in latin which translates to “rest in peace.” this acts as a final stab at fortunato and shows that montresor shows no remorse for his past actions.…
Still, it also is a complex situation open to individual interpretation. Montresor plan of murder is motivated by a number of insults which are never mention in the story. However, the constantly indication of his family to be involved on the conflict may well take the reader to believe on a possible payback for some past encounter between families of society and power. The narrator’s tone when describing Fortunato, is a held feeling of likely envy, “You are rich, respected, admired, beloved, you are happy, as once I was.” Montresor sees on Fortunato, what he proclaims had once and misses at the moment. Therefore, Montresor reliability is to be…
No, Montresor is not a reliable narrator because if he’s capable of plastering Fortunato into a vault, we can’t trust him. If he’s lying, and he didn’t kill Fortunato, then we still can’t trust him.…
I think Montresor is an unreliable narrator as he is clearly mentally unstable who ends up murdering his friend over an insult. On the point that he has killed his friend, for that reason I wouldn't have confidence in him as he is not trustworthy. Furthermore, there is no evidence that indicates that Fortunato had insulted or do anything of great harm to Montresor. Therefore, Montresor, is a perfect example of an unreliable narrator whose actions reflects the way that his madness or character influences what he tells us.…