The Narrator spoke to the signalman about the great works of railways, but the signalman cast a look towards the Narrator as if he had some sort of fear towards him. The signalman thought he had seen him before by the gloomy red light but admits he was mistaken. This again, is suspense. It seems to be the main way in which this story is built up, and I think it’s a very effective method to make the reader continue reading in either a modern or Victorian ghost story.
The signalman admits he is troubled, yet he felt reticent to speak of it on that day. Therefore, the two made arrangements to meet again the next day at midnight. As the horror of the story progresses, so does the time they arrange to meet. The night seems to be the more traditional setting for a ghost story and I think the Victorian and modern reader engulf more fear in darkness. Another point in the story that I believe targets the modern readers' fear especially, is the spookiness in the signalman’s voice and language when he instructs the Narrator what to do when he plans to meet with him the following night, “...he said in his peculiar low voice ‘til you have found the way up. When you have found it, don't call out! And when you are at the top, don't call out!" And when you come down tomorrow night, don't call out!".
The Narrator goes to see the signalman the following night and almost instantly the Signalman explains that he had mistaken him for a spectre that he had seen “one moonlit night” - at the red danger light (at the mouth of the tunnel). It disappeared into thin air - this ghost was warning him, repeating " Helloa! Below there! Look out!" The ironic point is that the Narrator echoed these exact three words on their first meeting, giving the reader the thought that the two may be linked in some way. It also explains why the signalman didn't look at the Narrator when he called. This would make Victorians extremely scared, as they were very superstitious. Together with the fact that this railway setting would have been a modern setting for Victorian times, it was a bit like stepping into the unknown.
After the Narrator tried to talk to the signalman out of his beliefs, the signalman said "Within six hours after the appearance, the memorable accident happened, and within ten hours the dead and wounded were brought along the tunnel over the spot where the figure had stood". This would most probably provoke more fear into a modern reader, the Victorians were superstitious and so afraid of haunting but were most probably used to death. Nowadays, people have improved technology and so less train crashes; it makes a modern reader scared when a remarkable coincidence involves death.
The spectre returned again several months later but did not speak. It was in the position of someone mourning with its hands on its face. That very day, a train came out of the tunnel and the signalman spotted a 'confusion of hands and heads, and something waved'. He ordered the train to stop.’ A beautiful young lady died instantaneously in one of the compartments - she was laid on the floor in the signalman’s box. It seems that each haunting the death victims are getting closer to the signalman. It came to him also a week before in an agonizing voice, repeating, " For Gods sake, clear the way!". This time, the Narrator agreed with him that it must be his imagination, due to the fact that the bell ringing from the spectre can only be heard by the signalman; and, the spectre did not appear that night when, by coincidence, the Narrator was with him. This time, a death has not occurred so the signalman does not know what to do. If he telegraphs danger, he will get into trouble. Then, he starts questioning why the spectre didn't give him more information about how to prevent the deaths from occurring and also why the spectre chose him and not someone with more power? These hopeless, worrying feelings will be transferred to any reader, Victorian or modern. There is always the question "Who could die next?". It is at this exiting point in the story where the reader wants to know how or if the signalman can prevent death from happening - and, if not, who dies? The story is also very emotional. The Victorian reader would probably think the signalman is mad but the modern reader would feel sorry for him and his 'dead end' situation as modern readers are overall more open to other people’s beliefs.
The Narrator has an epiphany where he constantly asks questions about what to do about the signalman; he asks " I had proved the man to be intelligent, vigilant, painstaking and exact; but for how long might he remain so, in his state of mind?", "...would I (for instance) like to stake my own life on the chances of his continuing to execute it with precision?", "I ultimately resolved to offer to accompany him to the wisest medical practitioner we could hear of in those parts...". There is no recognizable horror in this part of the story, but the reader will feel for the Narrator, the two didn't choose for themselves to be in this situation. In a way, the situation chose them, so why did they have to do it?
The next evening was a 'lovely evening' and so the Narrator decides to take a walk. He 'mechanically looked down' from the point where he had first seen the signalman. " I cannot describe the thrill that seized me, when, close to the mouth of the tunnel, I saw the appearance of a man, with his sleeve across his eyes, passionately waving his right arm". This is obviously the same gesture the signalman had forwarded to the Narrator and also why the Narrator is thrilled, he thinks he has seen the spectre. Victorians would have wondered why the Narrator was thrilled to see a spectre. My view is that if the Narrator saw a spectre he could share the feelings that would occur with the signalman and understand further what the signalman would be going through. The Narrator then, in a moment of horror, saw that this figure was a man and not a spectre. He also notices a new low hut had been built, no bigger than a bed. A reader must think it was a death of someone as a result of the spectre haunting the signalman, but whom? And, the new hut must be a coffin.
The Narrator runs down the path as fast as he could and asks the group of men what had happened and one man speaking for all said that the signalman was killed and also showed the face by opening the coffin. The Narrator asks "Oh, how did this happen? How did this happen?”
"He was cut down by an engine, Sir. No man in England knew his work better, but somehow he was not clear of the outer rail. It was just broad day. He had struck the light and had the lamp in his hand. As the engine came out of the tunnel, his back was towards her, and she cut him down. That man drove her and was showing how it happened. Show the gentleman, Tom". Tom explained to the Narrator that there was no time to check speeds and the signalman ignored the whistle so he called out to him loudly. "What did you say?" asked the Narrator. Tom replied, "I said, below there! Look out! Look out! For Gods sake clear the way!” He also showed the Narrator the same violent arm waving gesture the signalman had shown him but it was no use. The signalman has another epiphany where he is baffled that Tom repeats the words from the signalman himself and the same gesture he had imitated.
This end part of the story is where it all comes together and makes more sense. The reader now knows that they were wrong to think that someone else would be killed; the signalman was being warned to save himself! The other railway workers were saddened to lose such a good signalman. The engine 'cut' him down. Cut is a very powerful word and very intense. Tom called out and made the same actions as the spectre, the signalman and the Narrator. This is ironic and makes it clear that the three are linked. Both Victorian and modern readers would be overwhelmed by the outcome of the situation and would be scared (especially Victorians) by the fact it was daytime, making it believable that it could happen to anyone.
On the whole, I think this story is first-class because of the way it is written. We learn things as the Narrator learns them (first hand). The reader may think that the story is all explained, but somewhere, in the back of their minds, they will be asking, "Why did the signalman not move out of the way of the train?"
