Example of a Short Essay 2:

A Remorseless Conscience:
Montresor in Poe's "The Cask of Amontillado"

Farewell remorse; all good to me is lost. Evil, be thou my good.
-John Milton, Paradise Lost, Book IV, Line 108.

Revenge is a strong force that is sometimes used to rationalize a murder. Thus was the case for the character Montresor in Edgar Alan Poe's short story "The Cask of Amontillado." Montresor thought long and hard on how he would kill his victim, ironically named Fortunato. Contrasting the views of Dr. John Gruesser of Kean University (LOCATE statement), my evidence suggests that Poe intended Montresor to shed no tear, neither as he bade farewell to Fortunato, nor when he retold the story fifty years later. His conscience would not convict him, and he would not show remorse (CLAIM about the literary element: CHARACTER). We see this in three ways: the intense hatred Montresor had for Fortunato, well disguised in pleasantries; the conditions he set for his crime; and his actions as he constructs the wall. (Good example of a FORECAST statement.)

Poe sets the plot in motion by having Montresor create an elaborate scheme, using pleasantries and a false concern for Fortunato’s health to trap him: "Come […] we will go back; your health is precious" (Poe 218). (You mentioned two texts in paragraph above, so need to say which this is. Also, it is the first citation from Poe and needs his name.)  In fact, Fortunato had several opportunities to turn back, but his hope for the Amontillado was strong. Likewise, Montresor had plenty of time to reconsider his actions, but "[a]t length, [he] would be avenged […]" (217). This phrase alone represents his commitment to kill. The murder of Fortunato was pre-meditated. The chains were elaborately set up in the Montresor family catacombs and during the festival of Carnival, a celebration in Europe similar to Mardi Gras, Montresor executed his plan. Carnival would leave many people in drunkenness, especially Fortunato, himself a lover of wine. Montresor put forth a façade of cheerfulness and good will toward Fortunato as he envisioned his plan. He would even smile "at the thought of [Fortunato’s] immolation" (217). Montresor, after setting the trap, sought his drunken victim, and lured him with a cask of some fine wine. The victim, unaware of his impending doom, descended into the catacombs with his "friend." He would never again see the light of day, but that thought didn’t bother the murderer, who continued with his elaborate plan.

And Poe makes Montresor also seek to "not only punish but punish with impunity" (217). Montresor set this condition along with one other: he must also reveal his intention to be avenged to Fortunato. In order to be successful, he must not get caught, and he must not follow through with the murder without letting Fortunato know of his "grave" situation. So Montresor made sure to tell his attendants "not to stir from the house" (218), and thus the two men were alone; there were no witnesses left to tell about the murder. It seemed Montresor’s first condition would be proven true. As the story nears its end, we see Montresor and Fortunato at a narrow opening to a small room. Fortunato proceeded and Montresor quickly chained him to the wall. Having his victim bound in front of him, Montresor began to invite his victim to feel the wall: "[…] you cannot help feeling the nitre" (220). Then he mockingly implored the bound Fortunato to leave. His second condition was fulfilled: "But I must first render you all the little attentions in my power" (220). Having done this, Montresor again showed no signs of remorse. His will was firmly set against Fortunato. So he continued with his plan.

The way in which Montresor built his wall also supports the idea that Poe intended his hatred of Fortunato to consume him—it’s clear that Montresor would show no remorse. As he constructed the stone wall, he noticed that Fortunato was becoming sober, struggling to free himself of the fetters. Montresor took pleasure in hearing the violent thrashing:

            The noise lasted for several minutes, during which, that I might hearken to it
            with the more satisfaction, I ceased my labors and sat down upon the bones.
            When at last the clanking subsided, I resumed the trowel[…] (221)

Poe elaborately constructs Montresor’s masochistic intent and his evil pleasure in Fortunato’s misfortune. Montresor actually took the time to relish the thrashing of the chains and cries. A final sudden scream from Fortunato, which, if put to film, would make any devout Stephen King fan jump, made Montresor reach for his rapier—perhaps indicating his backup plan to kill Fortunato. Before placing the final layer of stone, Fortunato pleaded for Montresor to let him go "[f]or the love of God" (221). John Gruesser, in an article in The Explicator, (academic journal titles in italics) supports the contention that Montresor showed remorse; he builds on the argument that "the narrator suffers from a guilty conscience" (37). At this point, I think it is clear, however, that Montresor’s detailed account, fifty years post-mortem, reveals a conscience with no conviction and a soul with no remorse: "My heart grew sick[…]", but he quickly adds, "[…] it was the dampness of the catacombs that made it so" (221).

In showing Montresor’s hatred toward Fortunato, it’s clear that Poe intended a character showing no remorse for his crime. The intense hatred Montresor had for his foe allowed Poe to build up a clever scheme for his vengeance. Also, Poe set conditions for Montresor's crime: he must "punish with impunity" and reveal his true colors to Fortunato (217). Finally, the actions of Montresor as he constructs the final wall of the tomb—as well as his telling of all the gruesome details of the story—leads one to believe that he shows no remorse for his past crime.

Conclusion suggestions:  You should wrap up by explaining why readers should care about this, all the work you have done.

• Retstate your claim with title and writer's last name. Comment on why you have backed claim.
• Why is this claim stronger than one other critic's claim?   (Named here.)
• How does the analysis of your textual element enhance understanding? The claim to significance is important.

Works Cited

Note this example of MLA format in Works Cited.

Gruesser, John. "Poe’s ‘The Cask of Amontillado’" The Explicator 56.3 (1998):129.