Much like some actors want to experience the real pain of their characters to get into their role, the protagonist author sets up a scenario similar to that of the one in his newest murder mystery. The man asks his wife about how the perpetrator in his book would go about the perfect murder. Together they brainstorm how the murderer would entice the victim to the location, kill the victim, and how he could get off “scot-free.” They figure out the perfect crime. However, this was not just for inspiration; he actually wants to commit the crime that they have been discussing.
His wife; however, knew about his intents all along, and outmanoeuvred, outsmarted, and outgunned her husband. She used his story against him to get away with the murder that he had planned. In the end, his wife retaliated and followed his steps to a perfect crime to escape her marriage and change her life.
Questions:
1.
From the beginning, there were several key allusions to the conclusion. In the third paragraph, the word choice suggested a visceral, bloody image, simply from the use of the word claw. The remote, isolated mine is reminiscent of “The Blair Witch Project” and other such horror films, where something always goes wrong.
When she is questioning him on the method in which the villain would lure his victim out there, and the career path of the villain, his nonchalant responses set an alarm in my mind. Alarm bells rang because it was a little sketchy. It seems as if he is saying “I want to make sure I can kill you before I try to write about it.” when he says ““I want to make sure this works, then I can flesh it out.”” (Wright, 213).
There was one part I remember vividly; it said that they usually went to nice places, Palm Springs is something that I pictured as an example, as a base for the story he was writing at the time. The husband likes to “walk the plot” to ensure that it is believable and realistic, and she usually accompanies her to these nice places to offer advice. But when he suggests an out-of-place, unexpected trip to Sudbury, she was willing to travel there. She agreed to go up to cold, damp, dreary, Sudbury in the middle of October to offer a few pieces of advice on the story, which suggested she either really loved him, or more likely, made it seem like a few gears were turning. By this I mean, she was trying to get into his head and figure out why he was “off.”
3.
“In medias res” applies to the start of this story because the story starts in the middle. It does not start with “boy-meets-girl, they fall in love, they get married, he gets a mistress, he wants to kill his wife.” It just starts with the killing part. It starts right near the conflict. This is effective because it engages the reader much faster, placing them right in the situation and during the drama. The adrenaline of the situation seems to course through the story into the reader to entice me to read more, want more. The intrigue right off the bat caught my attention and captivated me. Starting in the middle, as Wright did, engaged me in a way that made me question the history of this couple and try to get more involved and invested in this story.
4
The story seems to change over on page 216, right after the husband pulls the trigger and shoots his wife. Until that point, the narrative style is specifically omnipotent in the way that the narrative is from a third person perspective that knows all, regarding this specific couple. After the gunshots, it switches to a more impartial view concerned strictly with the cold hard facts of what is happening. It doesn't go into as much detail and it doesn't elaborate on any of the ideas, the way the first half did. The first half felt more personal, revealing some thoughts of the characters while the second half was more detached and distant. The second half almost seems like a court transcription, or an excerpt from a detective's file on the case while the first half could be the actual account of what happened, from an omnipotent perspective.
I believe the author chose the contrasting styles to reinforce the law theme and to compare the before and after. The second half was all facts with little opinion and filler while the first half was more personal. These two separate parts really emphasized the death and crime that was committed to a very high degree of effectiveness.
No comments:
Post a Comment