The construction of these two stories is very different. The most obvious thing is the position of the murder in these stories. In Abbey Grange a murder has taken place before the story has even begun, it starts with Holmes being informed of it. As the story then develops we see Holmes investigating the crime scene and finding out who the murderer was by piecing together the clues. On the other hand Lamb to the Slaughter has the murder in the story and you play witness to it so you know who the murder is, why, and how it was committed. Then through the story, you are, in a sense, on the murderer’s side, as you see whether or not she is caught and how she gets away with it. In Abbey Grange you could say you are on Holmes’ side – trying to work out who the murderer is by using the clues.
Although the two stories were written 100 years apart the view of the police is quite similar. In both stories the police don’t find the murderer (although Holmes does, he is just a private investigator and doesn’t hand in Crocker to the police). In both instances the police seem incompetent – in Abbey Grange they can’t find the murderer and Hopkins (who is supposed to be an experienced inspector for Scotland Yard) is forced to bring in a private investigator. Lamb to the Slaughter also shows the police under this light. Not only are they unable to undercover the murderer they also end up eating the murder weapon! It is not surprising that the police act in similar ways because although they were written 100 years apart the crime is the same and the police seem to work in similar manners. However, when we study the times when these stories were written a different story emerges. At the time Lamb to the Slaughter was written advances such as fingerprinting and other technological advances had been made. The story does not seem to convey this though, the police act in very similar ways such as back to basics detective work. Perhaps Dahl does this to convey the police as foolish and make the murderer appear above them and able to easily fool them. Portraying the murderer as a victor also shows Dahl’s view of the police being incompetent and the almost comical fashion with which they work. An example of this is when the police are eating the leg of Lamb to the Slaughter used as the murder weapon the say, ‘probably right under our very noises…and in the other room Mary Maloney began to giggle.’ Conan Doyle also depicts how inept the police are by them not being able to capture them and Holmes finding the murderer, Captain Crocker, with ease and even ends up not handing him into the police and letting him go free; ‘if you choose to disappear in the next 24 hours…no one will hinder you’.
In both stories, for the crime of murder, the death penalty would have been enforced. Shortly after Mary Maloney kills Patrick in Lamb to the Slaughter she thinks about the death penalty; ‘She knew what the death penalty would be…that was fine. It made no difference to her.’ She goes on, however to think about whether pregnant women (like herself) are killed. This is unsurprising as the death penalty was only finally abolished in 1969, however the last person to be killed was only in the early 60’s so it was unlikely she would have been killed.
In both stories the personalities of the characters are stressed quite highly. Especially in Abbey Grange where a good deal of time is spent by Conan Doyle in getting the reader to know the characters. Out of the two stories I personally feel more sorry for Crocker rather than Mary Maloney. This is because when Crocker committed murder it was partly in self-defence. He went round to the Abbey Grange and when he saw Sir Eustace beating Lady Brakenstall and being generally violent. Crocker enters the room and feels very threatened by Sir Eustace and his initial reaction was to help Lady Brakenstall and ended up hitting Sir Eustace over the head with a poker. As well as this Crocker also seems to have more of a conscience about what he has done than Mary Maloney. This is typified by his admission to the murder; ‘I will tell you the whole story’. I feel less sorry for Mary Maloney in Lamb to the Slaughter because after she had committed the murder she does not seem greatly bothered and shows little remorse. She seems more occupied about the punishment and whether she will be killed for doing it rather than the crime and feeling upset for what she has done. She also immediately tries to get herself an alibi by going to the grocers and using him as a witness to her whereabouts and later in the story she simply laughs at the fact that she has got away with murder. However, this attitude may be explained by her pregnancy, it is possible that the whole plot to forge an alibi and dodge the police was to save her baby.
Abbey Grange stresses the attitude towards relationships and family life at the time the story was written, more than Lamb to the Slaughter. Crocker secretly loves Lady Brakenstall and knows that the feelings are, to some extent returned. Lady Brakenstall wanted to end her marriage anyway. Sir Eustace was often very violent to her and it was thought he could have a mental problem. It is then, after Sir Eustace is dead that Lady Brakenstall and Crocker realise they could be together and she has avoided a requirement to divorce. In the 1980’s divorce was very uncommon and any lady that was would have become an outcast. She would have lost all her friends be ridiculed by many. On the other hand in Lamb to the Slaughter, Mary Maloney could have divorced much easier and it would have not been so much of a shock. This is another reason why I don’t feel very sorry for her as she had the opportunity to end the marriage in a civilized way whereas Lady Brakenstall couldn’t but still managed to put up with her husband until someone else killed him.
One key factor that differentiates the two stories is the murderer and whether they are caught or not. As already mentioned neither is caught by the police, however Mary Maloney in Lamb to the Slaughter is able to not allow anyone to know about it, whereas Holmes, a private detective, finds out Crocker in Abbey Grange. This is why I feel that Conan Doyle finds murder more wrong and savage than Roald Dahl. Conan Doyle shows you that if you murder you will almost certainly be caught and although Holmes lets him go, he deals with him in a stern way. Although he tells him he can go Holmes later says, ‘Certainly it will come out’. Dahl on the other hand makes murder seem, almost acceptable and satisfying. Mary Maloney gets away with the murder of her husband and her provocation was much less that Crocker’s. We presume that Patrick was having an affair and seeming as it was set in the 60’s there were other solutions. Although divorce, especially when a child is involved, can be very distressing it could solve the problem. Crocker’s provocation was much higher, a women he loved was being beaten by her husband who she would find very difficult to divorce.
In conclusion I feel that both authors, one way or another excite the reader with sensational details. In Abbey Grange Conan Doyle focuses a lot on Holmes’ minute detection work, such as; ‘These glasses do puzzle me’ and ‘this end (of the rope), which we can examine, is frayed’. This is all a lot more to do with the excitement of the investigation rather than the murder itself – which you would expect to, but doesn’t, take paramount importance in the story. In Lamb to the Slaughter there is a much bigger emphasis on the build-up to, and the murder itself. However, the author still dwells upon the excitement of Mary Malone trying to get an alibi and her battle to not be caught by the police. So I feel that Abbey Grange dwells on sensational detail to a greater extent than Lamb to the Slaughter because almost the whole of Abbey Grange’s suspense is built up around the investigation and the murder itself doesn’t even take place in the story.
Personally I feel I prefer Abbey Grange as a murder story for a number of reasons. I enjoy the attempt at trying to work out who the murderer was yourself before you are told. I also find it enjoyable to see Holmes investigating and trying to get into his mind and think what he is thinking as he looks at the evidence and tries to piece it all together. Another reason I like Conan Doyle’s story more is because of the last couple of pages. As with most good murder mysteries it ends with a summing up where Holmes’ puts all the evidence together so that the reader can fully understand why it was the murderer who he then announces.
It is difficult to say whether 100 years has made a difference to the formula of a detective story. Although certainly these two stories are very different you cannot generalize. You would have to take a large selection of murder stories from the two time periods to get a true understanding of murder stories from the 1890’s compared to those of the 1960’s.
