Revenge and guilt in "The Cask of Amontillado," "Fleur," and "Killings

Revenge

Edgar Allen Poe's "The Cask of Amontillado," Andre Dubus's "Killings," and Louise Eldrich's "Fleur" are all short stories about revenge. Although they treat the theme of revenge differently, the authors show that the exacting of revenge can indeed be a satisfying finale to a life consumed by tragedy. In each of these three short stories, revenge is depicted as an act that fulfills the protagonists' deepest need. Therefore, guilt does not enter into the minds of protagonists like Montresor, Matt Fowler, the narrator of "Fleur," or Fleur herself. Revenge is dealt with differently in each of these three short stories, but in all three, the main characters do not feel remorse. Their vengeful acts are somehow justifiable, both to themselves and also to the reader. In "The Cask of Amontillado," "Fleur," and "Killings," the three main characters do not feel any guilt because they have suitable reasons for revenge.

In Poe's "The Cask of Amontillado," protagonist Montresor opens the short story with the simple statement, "The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge." Montresor has been plotting his killing of Fortunato for an unmentioned amount of time, but enough that the protagonist devises a clever plot to lure Fortunato into his own grave. The setting of the story in the "damp ground of the catacombs of the Montresors" is surely grave-like and suitable for the death of Fortunato. Although Montresor declines to offer readers a clear reason for his vengefulness, he does seem to bear a great deal of resentment towards his enemy. It seems, based on Fortunato's symbolic name, that envy may be a key reason for why Montresor seeks to annihilate his opponent. Regardless, "The Cask of Amontillado" is the quintessential revenge tale because of Montresor's complete absence of guilt. In fact, Montresor himself claims that guilt impedes the entire purpose of revenge, let alone its satisfaction for the avenger. He states, "I must not only punish, but punish with impunity. A wrong is unredressed when retribution overtakes its redresser. It is equally unredressed when the avenger fails to make himself felt as such to him who has done the wrong."

Like Montresor, Matt Fowler of Dubus's "Killings" premeditates his revenge killing for an indefinite period of time and feels little guilt in exacting his vengeance. Matt Fowler is driven by a sense of justice that is far better articulated than that of Montresor, though. Richard Strout killed Matt's son, and it is for that crime that Matt needs to exact revenge. If any guilt is evident in "Killings," it is only in Matt's feeling that he somehow failed his son. After all, much of the short story is taken up by the background tale that leads up to the eventual revenge killing. Interestingly, the killing of Frank by Richard Strout was itself a revenge killing. Frank Fowler was dating Richard Strout's ex-wife. When Richard first begs for his life, he pleads with Matt to spare him based on this notion. It is as if one vengeful person knows another. Yet like Montresor, Matt feels no guilt: "And beneath his listless wandering, every day in his soul he shot Richard Strout in the face, while Ruth, going about town on errands, kept seeing him." Matt has been cultivating the idea of revenge for so long that to ignore the longing would be to disrespect his son. Given that the author makes no mention of what law enforcement will do in this case, the killing of Frank Stroud is ultimately a satisfying one. Just as Montresor notes that "for a brief moment I hesitated," there is a note of trepidation at taking the life of another human being but certainly no guilt.