In this essay I will be comparing two of Rohal Dahl's short stories which will include different language techniques to how he shocks, entertains and intrigues the reader.

When young Billy arrived at the bed and breakfast he said to the Land lady I saw your sign in the window. She replied to this by saying “yes I know” This implies that she was either expecting him or watching him. The Landlady followed Billy to his room and asked him to come down and sign the guest book when his ready. When Billy went down to put his name in the guest book he noticed there were only 2 other names who had stayed at the bed and breakfast in the last 2 years. He said aloud “Christopher Mullholland” Gregory Temple” he heard the names before but couldn’t think where. Then he realised they were in the paper but couldn’t think what for. Billy said “the last entry is over 2 years old” it is very strange that nobody else has stayed here before there must be a reason behind it.

Billy said to the Land lady “I suppose they left fairly recently”. “left”? But my dear boy they never left.  He is still here. Mr Temple is also here. This makes the reader think what an earth is she going on about it’s like she's going mad. “They are on the third floor, both of them together” the Land lady said. The Land lady said “there wasn’t a blemish on his body” how would she of known that unless she had seen his body before. When Billy looks around the room he comes across 2 pets, a parrot and a dachshund (dog) to which he discovers that they are stuffed. The Landlady said to him “I stuff all my little pets myself when they pass away”. This seems rather strange and if I was Billy I would be rather shocked and wonder if the Land lady stuffed the unlucky two boys.

Billy asks the Land lady if there have been any other guests in the last 2 or 3 years. To which she replied “no, my dear, she said only you” at this stage it doesn’t look to good for Billy as his tea tasted like “bitter almonds” bitter almonds was once known as poison, Dahl is implying to the reader that the Landlady has spiked Billy's drink.  

Mary was waiting for Patrick to arrive home, looking out of the window for him. When he arrives he doesn’t seem to be so excited to see her as she does. He replies to her with words such as “hullo” yes” sit down”. As a reader it indicates that something is on his mind. Patrick then tells Mary “this is going to be a bit of a shock to you, I’m afraid and I know it’s kind of a bad time to tell you but their simply was no other way, of course I’ll give you money and see that you are looked after. Although we don't actually get to find out the actually reason for why Mary killed Patrick, Dahl is implying that he has done something bad that is unforgivable. In my opinion I think that Patrick told Mary that he was having an affair with another woman and that he was going to leave her for this unknown person. This is why he states “of course I will see you’re looked after”

In the Landlady there is no murder, Dahl has left it to the imagination of the reader, but he is implying that the Landlady has done the same to him as to the pets and the other two young boys. Whereas in Lamb to Slaughter there is a murder but again Dahl has left it to the reader as to why Mrs Maloney hit Patrick with a leg of Lamb.
Also in both of the stories especially in Lamb to slaughter it seems that Mrs Maloney gets away with the murder as she gave the murder weapon for the police officers to eat. However it also seems that whatever the Land lady has done shed also got away with it.  

To form a conclusion of the stories I would say that Dahl has aimed at entertaining the reader more in Lamb to Slaughter than the Landlady, where as in the Land lady he has focused more on intriguing the reader.