“Killings”, Revenge or not?
In many instances an individual may be faced with the dilemma of using revenge.
Revenge is something some individuals may consider if they feel that they were
physically or morally done wrong. This is also considered “an eye for an eye, tooth for a
tooth” type of situation. In many different instances this may occur when a mother
chooses to murder the man that raped her daughter, or a father killing someone for
driving drunk and killing his wife and children. In “Killings” by Andre Dubus, revenge is
in question. Did Matt kill Strout for revenge or out of the pure love he had for his son
and his wife? In this situation Matt clearly killed Strout for the love he has for his wife
and deceased son.
No one could ever imagine the pain that a parent endures after losing a child
unless they themselves have been put through that pain. In this story Matt, who is the
father of Frank, hardly shows any emotion. In situations like this were something was
done to hurt or kill the one’s that you love, people may say that they wish that the person
who portrayed the crime were dead. In this case Matt does say “’ Where he did
something to me, where I could get away with it’”(Killings 85) but, Matt says this as a
way to release his emotions. Matt really had no emotion and found that this was the only
way he could express his feeling. Matt was clearly a calm, warm hearted man who had
showed nothing but love for his family.
Ruth, Matt’s wife found that losing a child in the cold hearted way she had was
emotionally stressful.
“I don’t see him. I’m in the store all the time. Ruth sees him too
much. She was at the Sunnyhurst today getting cigarettes and
aspirin, and there he was. She can’t even go out for cigarettes and
aspirin. It’s killing her.” (Killings 84)
After the events of her son’s death, Ruth feels helpless and like justice isn’t being served.
Seeing the man that murdered her son walk around free causes her a lot of emotional
trauma and Matt can see this. Matt chooses to do something about this not out of revenge
but, out of the love he has for Ruth and his deceased son Frank.
In the events leading up to the death of Strout, Matt showed little motive when it
came to the killing of Strout. Although Matt took the life of Strout it was not a revenge
situation. In most murders involving revenge the person committing the act shows little
or no remorse and they do not care how they kill the person as long as they are dead. In
this situation Matt clearly shows that he is not doing this as revenge. He carefully
planned out the death of Strout yes, but he did this in a manner that was still respectful to
Strout. He shot Strout after Strout attempted to run away as stated “as Strout cleared the
front of his car he dropped his suitcase and, ducking, took one step that was the beginning
of a sprint to his right.”(Killings 94) Matt shot him after this as a quick response to what
was occurring. Matt did respectfully burry Strout which, shows that he isn’t a cold
hearted murderer.
Matt loved his son Frank dearly and after his murder he bottled up his emotions.
He had seen how much the death of his son hurt his wife. After Ruth had seen Strout
repeatedly and no justice was being done he found that taking Strout out of the picture
would solve his family’s problems and the healing process could now begin. Although
Matt killed Strout it was not out of revenge it was out of the love he had for his wife.
Matt showed signs of remorse after he killed Strout; he didn’t want to do it but knew it
was the only way to end his family’s suffering. He wanted to be sure that Ruth wouldn’t
have to keep feeling the pain of their son’s death because his murderer was walking
around free. He showed that he was not cold blooded when he buried Strout after he
killed him. Some people would have just left him their. As you can see this was an
instance in which the love for his wife and child drove this man to commit the act that he
had portrayed. Was this for the love he had for his family? Yes! For revenge? No.