Janae Roberts
Eng 251
Sister Holt
November 04, 2010
“The Cask of Amontillado” from a Reader Response Lens (Dobie 131-149).
In “The Cask of Amontillado,” a famous short story by Edgar Allen Poe, readers may find that
they are more affected by what Poe leaves out of the story than what is actually written. Merely typing
the story title into a database will bring up numerous articles, many of which are contradictory because
the reader has interpreted the missing elements in a different way. By leaving several elements
unexplained, Poe allows readers to draw their own conclusions about Montresor's motives, and whether
Montresor feels remorse for his actions.
The tale is a murder tale, but it is unique because it asks a different question. In the story,
Montresor writes “but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge” (Poe 411). This is the only
direct reference to the motive, and it is never elaborated. There is no mystery element in who the
murderer is, or who the victim will be. Instead, readers are left to puzzle over why the murder was
committed at all. What insult could stem such a violent reaction? It is left to the reader's imagination.
In“The Motive for Murder,” Elena V. Baraban, a PHD from the University of Victoria, cites Leila S.
May saying “The reader has no way of knowing what these 'thousand injuries' and the mysterious insult
are and thus can make no judgment whether Montresor's revenge is justifiable” (qtd in Baraban 50).
The stance the particular reader takes on this issue shapes the way the rest of the story effects them.
Those who believe the insult is trivial, and Montresor is insane, like Richard M. Fletcher, or Stephen
Peithman will receive a very different story than readers like Elena Baraban who maintain Montresor's
sanity (Baraban 50).
Poe furthermore does not explicitly stating the reader's role in the tale. Montresor addresses the
audience saying “You, who so well know the nature of my soul” but never gives a further explanation
(Poe 411). Some readers may be influenced to feel more empathy toward Montresor, and try harder to
understand his motive because this line could indicate they are supposed to fill the role of a friend or
relative reading this piece. Others, more unsure whether Montresor is remorseful, could see themselves
as an adversary, sitting at Montresor's deathbed, while he gleefully recounts the perfect crime. No
setting for the telling of the tale is specified, giving the reader yet another blank to fill in themselves,
and while there is evidence that Montresor is remorseful, there is also evidence that he is not.
Bill Delaney, in an article on the subject, argues that Montresor is a remorseful character. While
other critics of the story might interpret Montresor echoing “for the love of God!” (Poe 417) as
malicious, Delaney writes “....Montresor, now that his pent-up fury is dissipating, actually does feel
pity....It is Montresor's pity, as well as his grim satisfaction, that the reader shares” (39). He further
argues that Montresor's repeated reference to Fortunato as a friend could be construed as a sign of his
sincerity (40). If this was the only evidence, readers would all be inclined to think Montresor has
suffered some remorse, however, because the meaning is not spelled out, and most passages can be
interpreted in more ways than one, there are as many readers who take an opposite stance.
Baraban, who believes Montresor to be neither insane, nor remorseful cites Montresor's family
arm as major evidence. The readers who believe Montresor remorseful may argue that the fangs in the
foot could represent Montresor's guilt, however Baraban points out “[Montresor's coat of arms] is a
mise-en-abyme, for the protagonist destroys Fortunato, who metaphorically represents the serpent who
dared attack Montresor,” and the motto “Nemo me impune lacessit” could further infer that Montresor
feels justified in his actions (52). The tale ends saying “In pace requiescat!” which provides evidence
for both contrasting viewpoints (Poe 417). Baraban writes “Montresor maliciously subverts his role as
a repentant sinner....[this] highlights his conviction that he has merely avenged himself” (57) while
Delaney writes “Poe's final line....expresses, not sarcasm, but genuine pity” (39). Because Poe offers no
interpretation himself, readers are able to experience the story however they wish, and gain vastly
different insights and perspectives depending on the individual because of it.
Works Cited
Baraban, Elena V. “The Motive for Murder in 'The Cask of Amontillado' by Edgar Allen Poe.” Rocky
Mountain Modern Language Association. 1997-present. Web. 4 Nov. 2010.
Delaney, Bill. “Poe's The Cask of Amontillado.” Explicator 64.1 (2005): 39-41. Academic Search
Premier. EBSCO. Web. 4 Nov. 2010.
Dobie, Ann B. Theory Into Practice. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. 131-149. Print.
Poe, Edgar Allen. “The Cask of Amontillado.” The Seagull Reader: Stories. 2nd ed. Ed. Joseph Kelly.
New York: Norton, 2008. 411-417. Print.