The stories both aim to ‘scare’ and keep the reader in a state of nervous trepidation as he/she reads on.
Despite the plots being very different, they both use comparable techniques to draw the reader in. Bronte’s story ‘Napoleon and the Spectre’ begins with an introduction that is relatively short and Bronte’s voice opens the story with a short section of scene setting where you find out Napoleon is in his bed, ‘ Well, as I was saying the Emperor got into bed.’
But within the scene setting of the ghost story we get a hint of Napoleon’s forthcoming ghostly experience when Napoleon hears, ‘…..a short sharp laugh, and a dead silence followed’. The language used is short and sharp with many verbs and descriptive words with the adjectives words that will make for aggressive description and ones that bring over the thoughts of the unusual.
‘But some invisible being snatched it rudely from its grasp, and at the same instance the ominous shade vanished.’
You quickly become aware of Napoleon’s bravery, and his ‘no-holes-barred’ determination as well as a worrying lack of anxiety. What Bronte puts over, is a very frightening experience, as demonstrated when Napoleon shouted out,
“‘Who’s there?’ cried the Emperor, seizing his pistols. ‘Speak, or I’ll blow your brains out.’” You are also aware that Napoleon is not afraid to use force when you consult history and the rumours surrounding Pichegru’s death.
The introduction to Dickens’ story is on the other hand, a lot more effective because it utilises the effectiveness of a conversation right from the start, thereby getting the reader involved straight away, grabbing their attention and making them want to read on. When he says, ‘Halloa! Below there!’, the reader will want to know who he is talking to.
Within the introduction you have two main characters in the form of the signalman and a man, who is the narrator. This is where you begin to realise the signalman is a sort of recluse, and is not confident with other people, at first he ignores the man’s enquiries, as recounted by the narrator, ‘But instead of looking up at where I stood on the top of the steep cutting nearly over his head, he turned himself about, and looked at the line.’
The story is relayed as a first person narrative so the reader will understand the story from the point of view of the narrator, who in this case is the visitor. So being a first person narrative, the signalman’s portrayal is different from the start, where it is based upon first impressions, to the end where the both the narrator and the reader have got to know the character.
The language used contains a lot more description, with much longer and more detailed sentences than with Bronte’s story. These longer sentences have less alliteration but contain much more imagery, for example, ‘angry sunset’, which helps convey to the reader that the setting has an aggressive look to it and suggests an ominous feeling.
The setting of the scene is also aggressive and more detailed but less active, as demonstrated by the phrase, ‘the cutting was extremely deep, and unusually precipitate.’ This is very effective because it describes in great detail what the visitor is facing and what he must overcome if he wants to meet the signalman.
Bronte’s characters are effective at creating mystery because one character is naturally mysterious because he is an unknown supernatural creature who stalks and leads Napoleon around Paris, and Napoleon himself is mysterious because although known to be a valiant and courageous man seems to have fallen under the control of the supernatural creature.
“‘Was it?’ whispered a hollow voice, in deep mysterious tones, close to his ear. ‘Was it a delusion, Emperor of France…………….. Follow me Napoleon and thou shalt see more.’”
The ghost is described in a dark and eerie manner, he is never totally visible to Napoleon but always partly obscured from Napoleon’s sight, ‘A black opaque shadow obscured it.’ This keeps the reader in suspense as they wait with trepidation to find out what or indeed who the ‘creature’ is.
Napoleon is also portrayed in a somewhat mysterious way, with his many brave and valiant actions to begin with he gets progressively more cowardly. He showed an apparent disregard for his own welfare as he moved through the centre of Paris, overlooking many of the possible negative outcomes if he were to be spotted by anyone, who looking at him from the outside in would think he had gone mad, ‘Nap found himself in one of the principal streets of Paris.’ He moved through Paris in his dressing gown, uttering words to his ghostly companion, a person looking at him would just see someone talking to himself, and justifiably come up with the conclusion that the person had gone mad or was insane.
Napoleon seems to be compelled to continue on his tour of Paris even though he would rather return to get dressed,
“‘Worthy Spirit,’ said he, shivering in the chill night air, ‘permit me to return and put on some additional clothing. I will be with you again presently.’ ‘Forward,’ replied his companion sternly.”
The word ‘shivering’ suggests that Napoleon was taking it very seriously and was under the control of the ghost, he is asking permission of the ghost rather than dictating his wishes. The fact that the ghost replies in a ‘stern’ voice reflects the ghost’s authority and control and exaggerates the weakness of Napoleon,
‘He felt compelled, in spite of the rising indignation which almost choked him, to obey.’
Dickens’ characters are also effective at creating mystery because once again similar to Bronte’s story it has characters who are naturally mysterious. The signalman is reserved and undemonstrative in his manner and in the way he conducts himself,
“‘He looked up without replying,’
I repeated my inquiry, after a pause, during which he seemed to regard me with fixed attention he motioned with his rolled flag towards a point on my level, some two or three hundred yards distance.”
Also delving further inside the signalman’s character, moving away from his superficial character, he has a set of very strange experiences which all lead to very sad events. He sees visions into the future, in one instance he pictures someone waving violently whilst standing in the middle of the tracks and explains the event by saying: “‘I never saw the face. The left arm across his face, and the right arm is waved, - violently waved.’ Then ‘ One moonlit night I was sitting here when I heard a voice cry, ‘Halloa! Below there!’ a man was standing on the tracks by the red light ‘waving just as I showed you.’ The signalman then proceeded into the tunnel where after a thorough investigation he concluded that it must have been a ‘deception of his sense of sight.’ But no less than six hours after his unexplained experience there was an accident right on the spot where his ‘unexplained’ experience occurred.”
He then describes other events before finally saying, ‘the spectre came back a week ago’, which creates an expectation that something is going to happen.
These strange events can all be described as mysterious and the mystery increases dramatically as the supernatural experiences unravel. From the start where you have a very reluctant character who is very reserved and reclusive, to someone who ends up revealing all of these shocking revelations to what is almost a total stranger. It is almost inexplicable for that sort of thing to happen, and just ends up adding to the mystery of it all. This also demonstrates the anguish that these prophecies must have been causing the signalman. What is also strange is for someone who is ‘a student of natural philosophy’ and who is portrayed as being educated and clever to be in the job he is, this incongruity adds to the mystery.
The signalman could be said to be a victim of the changing state of society – a man left behind, and someone who would admit that in his opinion the Industrial Revolution is corrupting society. The narrator describes his responsibilities as ‘being at all times liable to be called by his electric bell, and at such times listening for it with redoubled anxiety.’
The visitor himself also creates mystery, in the way he manages to get the signalman to give up more and more of his shocking revelations, “ ‘You almost make me think I have met with a contented man.’ (I am afraid I must acknowledge that I said it just to lead him on.)”
Both stories create an atmosphere through the authors use of language, but both are done in completely different ways. Firstly, Bronte’s centres on creating an atmosphere filled with action and excitement with the use of short sentences, which instantly give the impression of continual action.
‘Who’s there?’
‘Speak now or I’ll blow your brains out.’
She also uses many verbs that have the effect of being quick and/or rapid movements/actions such as ‘seize’, ‘blow’ and ‘snatch’, which add to the atmosphere of action. These verbs are then often incorporated into alliterated sentences, which are once again used to create an exciting, action packed atmosphere, making the reader feel that what she is describing could actually be happening in front of them. The phrase, ‘short, sharp laugh,’ is a good example of this.
Over all, Bronte’s style is to present an atmosphere that centres around excitement and action. This is done by using verbs which give an active meaning, often incorporated into alliterated sentences, as well as adjectives which describe things in an active way.
Dickens on the other hand is completely different, he takes a completely different tack and uses long sentences with plenty of description to create a more detailed picture of the scene for the reader and creates an atmosphere of tension and anticipation. Within his long and detailed sentences he uses adjectives which tend to give a meaning to the scene rather than how and in what way someone did something,
‘the perspective one way only a crooked prolongation of this great dungeon’, this suggests that he was trapped, as if in a prison.
Dickens also uses a lot of similes, imagery and metaphors. As Dickens uses the technique of scene setting a great deal, the use of such techniques as similes is bound to be more prominent as to set the scene you would have to include many words such as ‘like’ and ‘make’,
‘and to the wild harp it makes of the telegraph wires.’
Both stories offer information about the time in which they were written. Bronte’s story reveals the attitudes of people towards the great French leader and Dickens reveals the attitude of the people towards the Industrial Revolution and the speed of which the world was changing in that period. In my opinion I believe that while Dickens’ story is interesting and compelling to read it doesn’t have what all short stories should have; that it fails in my opinion, to get the reader involved or particularly interested in what the eventual outcome of the story will be. I feel it doesn’t meet the necessary criteria to be a good short story, it is not entertaining nor exciting, but more a social/historical commentary of that time. Dickens saw it as his role to write about the plight of the poor and under privileged and wanted to encourage people to think about social inequalities. Where ‘Signalman’ has its short comings, Bronte’s ‘Napoleon and the Spectre’ meets the criteria perfectly, it is short, has the necessary excitement and action to have an impact on the reader, which is what the aim of a short story should be. Bronte sensationalises a public figure and portrays him as a ‘bad’ man, consequently it could be said that this story also carries a moral in that we should be accountable for our actions no matter what our position in life may be.
