When the narrator says that he does not like the red light and that he would not like to sleep beneath it, he is trying to explain that the red light to him is a sense of danger and that to live around it all the time like the signalman does would be very weary.
There are only two main characters in the story of the signalman, the signalman himself and the narrator. The story being told in 1st person narrative is more direct to us as readers. It gives us the impression that the story is true and believable which adds more tension if the story is true and also a lot more plausibility to the story.
The signalman and the narrator both fear, but in different ways. The signalman fears because of the dreadful crash on the line he worked on and maybe because of the figure that he sees when danger is about to happen. I expect the narrator would fear because of the way the signalman acts towards him. “a dreadful crash at the mouth of the tunnel” implies the signalman’s fear.
The narrator makes an orientation to supernatural forces, he declared, “that this was a spirit, not a man” this implies that the narrator is still very weary about the signalman. The narrator soon notices that the signalman is also afraid of him. We find out this information when the narrator writes, “ I detected in his eyes some latent fear of me” What reason does the signalman have to be afraid or the narrator? This builds up suspense because both men are unaware of each other’s actions and they don’t really know how to react to each other
As said, the signalman mistakes the narrator as someone else and is startled when he lays eyes upon him. What has he mistaken him for? Maybe he’d seen a ghost.
The narrator is also startled when the signalman accuses him of seeing him before. The narrator gives certainty to the signalman that he’d never met or seen the signalman in his life. “I assure you, sir, I have never been here in my life”. The signalman seems to agree and nothing else is said of what he’d mistaken him for. This adds a lot more confusion and anticipation to the story.
The story gives a lot of expressions and you start imagine that the signalman is a bit, supposing, barmy and very unsteady. We know this since the narrator calmly asks the signalman whether the red light was a part of his duty and the signalman replies in a very rough, uneasy way as he says, “Don’t you know it is?” This also makes the signalman seem even tenser and also adds a lot more confusion to the story because the signalman defiantly senses something about the narrator but us readers are not sure what.
The justification for the signalman being a tedious person is commissioned when the signalman tells the narrator that, at a younger age, he used to be a “student of natural philosophy” but he had “ gone down and never risen again”. What is trying to be said in this speech is that the signalman lived a very pleasant life and it has somehow dropped and now he spends his time in the murky, humid place. This builds up suspense as we now know that the signalman has lived his life in this situation The signalman is very dedicated to his work, and the narrator watches him do this work when he is invited in for a cup of tea and a conversation. “Several times interrupted by the little bell”, is how the narrator explains the movement of the signalman. The bell notifies the signalman that there is a signal coming from across the line. While the signalman does his duty, the narrator observes the signalman who operates at a at a snail's pace, making sure everything is done precisely. The narrator describes it as, “so little to do, yet so much depending on it”. This builds up suspense that the narrator does have respect for the signalman.
Several times the signalman’s awareness was engrossed towards the bell but the bell hadn’t rung. Immediately the colour of the face of the signalman turns colourless. A lot of confusion is happening at this point and the narrator still watches him. His sits up and walks towards the door fearfully and opens the door and looks towards the tunnel. I notice that he doesn’t open the door wide open. What is there? He does this several times and a sense of fear is built up in the room and the readers mind. The thing I noticed is that the narrator doesn’t mention a word about what was he looking for but in a way he minds his own business. You start to think whether the signalman is mentally insane or if something is playing with his mind.
The narrator leaves the cabin to set on a journey home. He implies that he comes the next night to keep the signalman company. Maybe the signalman isn’t insane, as the narrator must feel contented with meeting him again. The signalman tells the narrator that he shall share with him what troubles him when he meets him again (the next night) and the narrator agrees. At this point the reader will be very intrigued to read on to see what troubles the signalman and it will be a solution why the signalman had been acting so bizarre that day.
As the signalman shows the narrator the pathway out with his torch the signalman says in a feeblish way not to call out when he is at the top of the hill and that when he is at the top “don’t call out”. The signalman makes it certain to the narrator not to call out. This builds suspense because there’s a big reason why the signalman doesn’t want the narrator to call out. The end of this seen leaves the reader mystified.
The narrator advises the signalman that he didn’t call out in a supernatural way, as the signalman accuses him of it. The narrator agrees that it wasn’t said in a supernatural way and the narrator leaves to go back to his inn, which is a “while walk”. This builds suspense because although the signalman may still be weary of the narrator, the narrator seems calm around the signalman.
The next night when the narrator arrives at around 11 o’clock, he does not call out. He arrives and is greeted by the signalman who said to him, “goodnight, and here’s my hand sir”. The signalman no longer feels fearful of the narrator. This decreases the suspense because the signalman doesn’t call out so we now know that the signalman is afraid of something that calls out to him.
They enter the hut. We are pretty sure now that the signalman is about to enlighten the narrator and the readers why he is so troubled. He begins to inform the narrator that he is troubled because of strange things he has been seeing. He puts in the picture that he had “mistaken him for someone else that yesterday evening” but I notice that when he is explaining this that he is talking in literally in a whisper. The signalman seems to become more afraid and uneasy as he goes further on into the story that, he is telling the narrator. Maybe this is from a kind of fear ness of thoughts about the supernatural running through his mind at this point.
The narrator then describes the figure that appears at the red light as ominous, which means threatening or ill-omened. The figure is described as “the left arm is across the face, and the right arm is waved, -violently…”
The figure is in a way calling for help and warning but also confusing the signalman, as he does not tell the signalman what or where the danger is, or where it is going to happen. Yet again more confusion is added but still urges reader to read on because on occasions we are left dumbfounded at the point the signalman getting to.
The signalman is slightly convinced that this figure the narrator is an apparent ghost, but thinks it’s also part of the signalman’s imagination. We know this as the signalman tries to explain to the signalman that it was a “remarkable coincidence” that the crash had happened only six hours after the signalman saw the appearance of the figure. This decreases the suspense as we now know what the narrator thinks.
The narrator himself does not in actual fact believe his own explanations as when he mentions, “denied” it means that he would believe only if he saw. This builds suspense as maybe the signalman is going to show the narrator this figure to prove he is telling the truth.
The signalman goes onto another incident, the second incident. Before he tells the narrator what else happened seven months on he “glances over his shoulder with hollow eyes” which is the signalman highlighting his fears of what he is about to tell the narrator. This adds suspense to the story, as the signalman would have looked evil and insane when looking like this.
He carries on with the incident and elucidates that this time the figure was silent and literally lifeless. He goes on, saying that it only “had its two hands covering his face, like this” and he shows the movement of the figure. The narrator explains that “once more I followed his actions with my eyes” indicating that he is really intrigued about the signalman’s stories. “It was an action of mourning. I have seen such an attitude in stone figures on tombs”, indicates a sense of death in the room, which yet again adds to suspense in the story.
He goes on saying the figure vanished when he “sat down to gather his thoughts” and also explains “nothing came of this”.
Further on he enlightens to the narrator that a train did come out of the tunnel that day, and as is passed it seemed to the signalman as a lot of confusion, as he saw lots of hands and faces moving around, when instantly after he shouted for the driver to stop, “a beautiful young lady had died instantaneously in one of the carriages and fell out and was laid right in the middle of the floor between where we are standing now”. Shock was one of the main parts to this bit and defiantly some explanations. This builds suspense as we think that this could be another part of the signalman’s imagination as there is no proof of this.
The narrator is probably defiantly shocked because of the fact a woman’s dead body that laid just in front of him but more still that he is starting to believe that the figure had something to do with this and the other incident. I would expect silence would be in the room at this point.
The climax to the signalman’s tale is that the signalman says “true sir. True. Precisely as it happened”. He uses alliteration when he says this using the word ‘true’ twice which indicates the signalman is 100% sure that what he saw was true.
Once again the narrator brings up another reason for what could have happened, trying to say that it could be his mind again. He asks, “Did the spectre seem to be there, when you looked out?” the signalman answers “it WAS there” and repeated firmly “both times”, emphasising that there’s no question whether he’s not seem it because he did for definite. He was once again 100% sure. This increases the suspense as we now start to believe the signalman, as he is so certain.
As the signalman seems so sure there’s is a chance the narrator does believe. The narrator starts to say “Danger-light”, where before he said “light” and the signalman corrected him. Maybe the readers now believe because the narrator is believing as he repeats what the signalman said.
We are made aware of the signalman torture as in the 1st paragraph of page 144 the signalman starts to get a bit desperate and could be going slightly insane again. He starts to give himself questions with no answers like, “why not tell me where the accident was to happen?” he is now starting to confuse himself. This adds to apprehension in the story.
the narrator returns the next morning and finds the signalman is found face first down on the railway track as a train knocked him down. The narrator is extremely shocked by this by many reasons, one of which is a ‘real man’ standing in the exact place of the figure and showing the actions of which he used to try and get attention of the signalman.
They were the exact actions of the figure that the signalman was talking about. I am pretty sure the signalman does believe now.
Before the narrator finds out this, he notices a group of people on a railway line, which adds a lot of confusion to the narrator himself and the readers.
As the narrator goes up to the men, the style of writing changes straight away. A lot more speech is used and a sense of panic is used. The death of the signalman is so shocking for the signalman he wants to know exactly what happens and factually demands what happened to him. “How did this happen!” implies this.
The death is really chilling as if you think about it, the signalman was lured to his death by the figure, but maybe it was for his own good, maybe the figure was trying to save him from something. We don’t really know. This increase the suspense rapidly as we are left in shock and wondering weather the signalman was a man tortured by a figure at the mouth of the tunnel.
