This essay examines the relationship between killer and victim in three canonical American short stories: Flannery O'Connor's "A Good Man is Hard to Find," Joyce Carol Oates' "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?," and Edgar Allan Poe's "The Cask of Amontillado." Through close textual analysis, the paper argues that each story offers a distinct but complementary commentary on notoriety, morality, and inevitability. O'Connor frames the killer-victim dynamic through the lens of mother and son to implicate society in the creation of killers. Oates extends this by showing how society glamorizes killers, granting them celebrity-like power. Poe's first-person killer-narrator synthesizes both ideas, demonstrating an idealized killer who operates without restraint.
The paper demonstrates comparative literary analysis with a thematic through-line. Rather than analyzing each story separately, the writer identifies a shared structural feature — the killer-victim conversation — and uses it as a lens to draw progressively deeper conclusions about how literature reflects and reinforces cultural attitudes toward killers. Each story is treated as a variation on a central theme, with Poe's narrator serving as the culminating synthesis of arguments built through O'Connor and Oates.
The essay opens with a framing introduction that identifies the shared feature across all three texts. It then moves through each story in order of increasing complexity: O'Connor establishes the social-moral framework, Oates introduces the element of glamorization and celebrity, and Poe's first-person narration is used to synthesize both. The conclusion draws the three threads together into a unified claim about how cultural images of killers both reflect and enable real violence.
The relationship between killer and victim has been one of the most enduring topics throughout horror and suspense fiction, and it is this relationship which ties together three ostensibly distinct stories: Flannery O'Connor's "A Good Man is Hard to Find," Joyce Carol Oates' "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?," and Edgar Allan Poe's "The Cask of Amontillado." In each case, the majority of the story consists of the killer talking to his victim or victims, some of whom are unaware of their fate at the beginning of the conversation but who gradually come to realize the killer's true intention. The relationship which develops between killer and victim — however brief — in each story reveals something about how killers are treated by society as people, and within literature as characters and archetypes. Considering how each of these stories intersect and diverge in their treatment of the killer-victim relationship will demonstrate how each story interprets and comments upon popular notions of notoriety, morality, and inevitability.
Flannery O'Connor's story is the ideal starting point for considering the relationship between killer and victim, because it actually duplicates that relationship in order to suggest that morality is a function of society, and furthermore, that societal influence is so strong it can predetermine behavior to the point that it appears inevitable. In a somewhat telling move, the first relationship that appears in "A Good Man is Hard to Find" is not between killer and victim, but rather mother and son, because the story opens with a disagreement between "the grandmother" and her son Bailey. The grandmother wants to visit "some of her connections in east Tennessee" while her son is determined to take the family on a vacation to Florida, and it is this oppositional relationship that mirrors the eventual relationship between the grandmother and her killer, the escaped convict who calls himself The Misfit (O'Connor 404). The two relationships are linked, because although The Misfit is ultimately the one who kills the grandmother, it is Bailey's decision to ignore the grandmother's concerns about the Misfit that leads to her eventual death. Recognizing that the killer-victim relationship in this story is grounded in the initial relationship between mother and son is important, because the grandmother's interactions with The Misfit increasingly take on the air of a mother talking to her rebellious son.
When the grandmother first sees The Misfit, she has "the peculiar feeling that the bespectacled man was someone she knew. His face was as familiar to her as if she had known him all her life," and indeed, after her initial shock at recognizing him as The Misfit, she immediately begins talking to him as if she knows him (O'Connor 407). She tells him that she just knows he is "a good man" and does not "look a bit like [he has] common blood" (O'Connor 407). She continues on, and although she is pleading for her life, her actual dialogue is that of a mother concerned for her son. Upon hearing about The Misfit's youth, the grandmother tells him to "think how wonderful it would be to settle down and live a comfortable life," as if The Misfit has merely lost his way, and just before she dies, she literally says, "why you're one of my babies. You're one of my own children!" (O'Connor 408, 413). The grandmother cannot interact with The Misfit in any way other than a mother would interact with her son, and this forces the reader to consider what the story is saying about upbringing. Furthermore, this consideration must extend to both the immediate family and society in general, because while the grandmother's dialogue is couched in the terms of a mother talking to her son, The Misfit's replies are directed not specifically at the grandmother but rather at the society that gave birth to him.
The Misfit takes each of the grandmother's statements as an opportunity to reflect on his own past and his place within society, doing so from the position of a rebellious son questioning the received wisdom of his societal parentage. He refutes the grandmother's entreaties for him to pray, saying "I don't want no hep, […] I'm doing all right by myself," and recognizes the inequality inherent in human society, claiming that he always signs things now so that "you'll know what you done and you can hold up the crime to the punishment and see do they match and in the end you'll have something to prove you ain't been treated right" (O'Connor 409, 410). In this way, The Misfit represents a son abandoned by the very social institutions the grandmother cherishes — such as "good blood" and Christianity — because these institutions, far from encouraging him to become the "good man" hoped for in the title, only serve to reveal the meaninglessness inherent in life. All meaning, regardless of whether it claims the imprint of divinity, is ultimately the result of human cultural production.
The Misfit recognizes that he is "ain't a good man," but he also "ain't the worst in the world neither," and thus his animosity is aimed at the society that raised and encouraged him to become the man he is, aware that there is "no real pleasure in life" but unable to effectively attack the social institutions which make this the case (O'Connor 408, 413). This is why he immediately shoots the grandmother just after she calls him one of her children: the grandmother can only treat him like a son, and he can react to a parental figure only the way he knows how. In this way, the story seems to suggest that the relationship between killer and victim is not entirely one-sided, because the victim will always, to some degree, be implicated in the larger social structure that created the killer in the first place. It is worth pointing out that this is not to suggest that O'Connor is "blaming the victim," but rather placing some of the killer's blame on society at large.
Taken together, these three stories reveal important details about the way the relationship between killers and their victims is considered in literature and society in general. Flannery O'Connor's "A Good Man is Hard to Find" presents the killer-victim relationship in the language of mother and son, subtly revealing how the killer is not an aberration in society but rather a product of it as much as any other person. Joyce Carol Oates' "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?" extends this notion by proposing that society does not just create killers but sometimes even glamorizes them, making them objects of fascination, inspection, and even sexual desire, which in turn empowers killers by imbuing them with a larger-than-life nature and almost superhuman powers of control and coercion. Finally, Edgar Allan Poe's "The Cask of Amontillado" demonstrates these features of the killer directly by having the killer narrate the story, such that the reader falls under his sway as easily as his victim. Taken together, these three stories help the reader understand how the image of the killer in society and culture works not only to produce killers, but to grant them the very means by which they carry out their murderous deeds.
You’re 44% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.