As the murderer in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ is female, Mary Maloney easily controls the detectives around her as they don’t really suspect her of the murder because of her gender. Mary uses this to her advantage and makes the detectives feel sympathetic for her. She tempts them into having a drink and eventually eating the evidence away, ruining any chances of solving the case. Dahl also allows the reader into the private thoughts of the murderer before and after the murder. He may have done this to make the reader change their feelings about the villain after she carries out the murder and suddenly changes her attitude.
In ‘The Speckled Band’ Roylott is already a suspect even before the investigation is solved and his violent history gives even more evidence that he is the murderer;
“Last week he hurled the local blacksmith over a parapet into a stream”.
Dr Roylott plans his murder well in advance with great detail, whereas Mary’s murder was a spur of the moment. Roylott has murder in mind weeks before it actually took place, getting everything ready, making repairs to the room so that the murder weapon, the swamp adder could easily get in and make its attack, and making sure no-one would find out. He has a motive of greed and money for murdering his step-daughter Julia Stoner as £250 of his income would be lost if she got married. Mary however never planned to carry out the murder; it was completely based on emotion and betrayal at the time of the incident which her husband has caused her. She didn’t even think of murder before she pulled a frozen leg of lamb out of the freezer. When she saw the murder weapon an instinct of anger, frustration and hurt all come to her senses and she simply hurls the lamb over her husband, Patrick’s head;
“Mary Maloney simply walked up behind him and without any pause she swung the big frozen leg of lam high in the air and brought it down as hard as she could on the back of his head”.
Mary seems to be the more complex murderer as we see much more than what first meets the eye. We first see an innocent young woman in her sixth month with child, quietly sewing and waiting for her husband, and then we see a cold blooded murderer doing all she can to try and get away with killing her own husband. Her personality changes from good to evil in a short space of time and we see the true complexity of her character.
The two main detectives, Sherlock Holmes from ‘The Speckled Band’ and Jack Noonan from ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ contrast very greatly in the way they investigate and how they try to solve the case. Holmes is a very intelligent man and tries to think his way around the case by logic with the very little clues he has. When we first meet him we find he is very observant as the text states;
“No but I observe the second half of a return ticket in the palm of your
left glove”.
This shows that Holmes is very attentive and quick to spot things.
Jack Noonan however is a little foolish in the way he investigates and lets the case slip away by being too sympathetic towards Mary Maloney. He is easily manipulated by Mary, and throws the case away after foolishly being unfocused on his professional duty and eating meals on the job, more importantly eating the case away.
Noonan has many co-detectives who do as much as the investigating as he does and make just as many mistakes and false assumptions, whereas Holmes has a single sidekick who doesn’t play a major role in cracking the case, although Holmes says his presence may be “Invaluable”.
Another factor why Noonan couldn’t solve the case was because he believed the murderer was a man;
“Get the weapon and you’ve got the man”.
Even though Noonan checks Mary Maloney’s alibi, he never really suspects her, and makes too many false assumptions, whereas Holmes looks at everything for every aspect before jumping to conclusions.
Doyle uses his detective, Sherlock Holmes to convey the attitudes at the time in which he wrote ‘The Speckled Band’. Life in Victorian times was full of murder, drugs and prostitution. Public hangings were frequent and people feared crime greatly. When Holmes arrived on the scene, the public fell in love with how he always cracked every case and defeated evil. Holmes reassured the people that he would always solve the case, even though he was a fictional character. Doyle uses his detective superbly to show the attitudes at the time of writing.
The settings between the two stories also contrast one another. In ‘The Speckled Band’ the crime and action is set at the Roylotts’ manor house at Stoke Moran. Stoke Moran is described as a stereotypical murder house, high on a hill top, desolated from all other settlements, broken windows and “heavy iron gates” with “iron bars”. The reader immediately feels that the manor is somewhat eerie and suspicious. The manor’s two curving wings are described as “claws of a crab”. The intended effect of this is to make the reader feel that the manor house is very dangerous and anyone entering its claws will find it difficult to escape. This is an example of pathetic fallacy used by Doyle to give the setting a sense of emotion, as in the angry and vicious claws of a crab, to the manor house. The pathetic fallacy used in the setting reflects the emotions and personality of Dr Roylott. This gothic setting adds to the suspense created and adds to the fact that evil looms, making Dr Grimesby Roylott even more guilty of the murder.
‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ is set in a modern cosy home with a small garden and garage. The setting clearly reflects the modern age in which ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ was written in. Examples of it being more modern are the fact that Patrick Maloney owns a car and they have a driveway: “the tyres on the gravel outside”. These are examples that the story in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ is much more modern than ‘The Speckled Band’ and the whole domestic and neighbourly environment is greatly distinct from the traditional dark gothic mansion in ‘The Speckled Band’.
The setting of ‘Lamb to the Slaughter is a very unexpected place for the scene of a murder mystery as reader’s don’t associate it with the stereotypical setting of ‘The Speckled Band’ for example. The homely setting of ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ makes Mary Maloney seem less innocent, but can also lead reader’s into a false sense of security.
The narratives of ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ and ‘The Speckled Band’ are both written in different forms. ‘The Speckled Band’ is written in first person narrative through Dr Watson’s point of view. In this story we only unravel clues and information as Dr Watson and Sherlock Holmes discover them and we only see through the detectives’ point of view. For a brief amount of time the narration changes from Dr Watson to Helen Stoner and then back to Dr Watson. This makes a major difference in the story as Helen Stoner tells of the murder that took place and gives major clues such as the “low clear whistle” Julia Stoner heard in the days leading up to her murder. It also gives a major clue which the audience could try to guess from as to what struck Julia;
“O, my God! Helen! It was the band! The Speckled Band”
The reader could make many assumptions from this quote and from the narration from Helen Stoner. Doyle also changes the narration to let the reader see the personality and history of the murderer and feed the detectives with clues and information that Roylott is the villain.
‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ is written in third person narrative, following Mary’s reactions and movements. The narrative is written as if there is a ghost hovering in the air between the characters, writing everything down. Even though it is written in third person narrative, the narrator concentrates on Mary Maloney’s actions and feelings. As it follows Mary’s reactions and movements, the reader feels more sympathetic towards Mary and understands her motives and feelings better. The narrator in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ knows everything that is going on in the story as opposed to ‘The Speckled Band’ where the narrator is a detective and only sees through his own point of view. The reader in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ sees through the murderer’s point of view and so both stories concentrate on different sides: ‘The Speckled Band’ concentrates on the good side whereas ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ concentrates through the eyes of the bad side. As the narration concentrates on different people in both stories, we are forced to feel differently towards the murderer and the detectives.
‘The Speckled Band’ follows a very complex plot and is put together as a stereotypical murder mystery structure where the reader goes through the story and unravels twists and turns as they happen, and clues and information are given to the audience for them to try and guess what will happen, and everything is unravelled about the murderer, murder weapon, how the murder was carried out, etc, at the end. ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ however is structured through the murderer’s aspect and everything is revealed as the story progresses, not at the end as in a stereotypical murder mystery. Therefore the audience doesn’t have opportunities to find clues and guess from them as they happen as they read about it as it happens. This lures people away from the typical murder mystery, and the word ‘mystery’ does not really apply to the story as the reader’s mind is not plagued by the mystery of the murder as they read about the murder as it happens and they know about how and why it was done.
In ‘The Speckled Band’ Doyle uses flashbacks to create a more complex plot as it uses the past to help create a biography of the murderer, to help the reader to try and guess from what the flashbacks show about the murderer and how he might have carried out his attack. An example of a flashback is used near the middle of the story;
“When Dr Roylott was in India he married my mother, Mrs Stoner, the young widow of Major General Stoner, Of the Bengal Artillery.”
‘The Speckled Band’ uses a chronological structure, as the story progresses as the detectives investigate. The clues are presented in a chronological way with each clue making more sense and closer to guessing from than the previous clue.
‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ also uses a chronological structure but in a completely opposite way from ‘The Speckled Band’. In this case the actual murder comes first, and the detectives arriving on the scene near the end.
As far as the plot and structure are managed, I think ‘The Speckled Band’ is more gripping to read as it follows a sequence of suspense all the way through the story, whereas in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ we already know about the crime and the murderer and there are few unexpected turns other than the ending where it doesn’t finish as we expect with good not defeating evil. There is no ‘mystery’ to try and guess from in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ as far as how, why and where the murder took place.
‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ focuses on the actual crime itself whereas ‘The Speckled Band’ deals more with the investigation.
I think Dahl focuses more on the crime because he wanted to show readers a different aspect of the murder mystery genre and flip it over and change the sequence of the murder instead and show how the murderess attempted to outwit the police. ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ doesn’t end with the villain being caught and the investigation solved, but ends with the villain manipulating the detectives and leaving them with the investigation ruined. I think Dahl wanted to show a murder mystery through a different perspective and show how the story through the murderer’s point of view and how she succeeds in her crime.
Doyle focuses mainly on the investigation as he wanted to create a stereotypical murder mystery for his Victorian audience in which the story follows the detective’s point of view. The Victorian audience enjoyed these types of murder mysteries in which a detective cracks the case and good always defeated evil. The time and age of ‘The Speckled Band’ suited this type of murder mystery, whereas today we enjoy seeing the actual murder and crime with more violence and less logic. The styles of writing between the two stories also convey the age and time of the stories and how they are adapted to their own particular audiences.
The styles of writing between the two stories compare and contrast in many ways. The main reason for the difference in language is because of the time the two stories were written in.
‘The Speckled Band’ was written in Victorian times, 1892, and the English language used in those times was different in style to the English of today. This is clearly reflected in the text. For example the word “Fantastic” is used with completely different meaning. In ‘The Speckled Band’ it is used to mean ‘unusual’ or ‘weird’ whereas we would use “Fantastic” to mean ‘brilliant’ or ‘great’, etc.
There are also many other words in the text which either do not exist in today’s language or are scarcely or never used, such as “reverie”, “defray”, etc….
‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ was written in the modern age, 1954, and the language used is not greatly distinct from today’s language, but differs greatly from the style of language in ‘The Speckled Band’.
Other differences and similarities between the styles of writing in both stories are the use of description, detail and sentence structures. In ‘The Speckled Band’ Doyle describes objects and characters in great detail with long, complex sentence structures. For example when we first meet the villain, Dr Grimesby Roylott, Doyle describes his appearance with great detail from head to toe, using dense sentences with metaphors and similes;
“His deep-set, bile-shot eyes and the thin fleshless nose gave him somewhat the resemblance to a fierce old bird of prey.”
In Victorian times people enjoyed literate pieces with intellectual use of language, especially that of Sherlock Holmes.
‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ also uses good use of descriptive writing, although not in as much detail as ‘The Speckled Band’. Dahl also uses similes in his story, using examples of modern references which give evidence of the age difference between the two stories. An example of this sort of simile is found near the beginning;
“She loved to luxuriate in the presence of this man, and to feel – almost as a sunbather feels the sun.”
The lengths of the sentences in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter are on average shorter than the sentences of ‘The Speckled Band’ and they are detailed with less density, with a lot of quick, short sentences between the characters , especially near the beginning in the conversation between Patrick and Mary Maloney.
‘The Speckled Band’ is a serious affair all the way through the story whereas Dahl’s story uses faint humour in places although it is not intended to be a comedy. An example of humour in the story is when Mary hits the lamb of leg over Patrick’s head;
“She stepped back a pace, waiting, and the funny thing was that he remained
standing there for at least four or five seconds, gently swaying. Then he
crashed to the carpet.”
This is something you would expect in a ‘Tom and Jerry’ cartoon, not a murder mystery. Quotes like this throughout ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ show the audience that the story is not meant to be taken very seriously and the tone of the general text also reflects this. These comic references don’t reflect the tones of stereotypical murder mysteries like ‘The Speckled Band’ which takes a very serious approach to the investigation. The murder in ‘The Speckled Band’ is taken as a very serious affair from the very beginning as it begins with quotes such as;
“A promise of secrecy was made at the time” and “To make the matter even
more terrible than the truth.”
These quotes introduce the case as a serious and rather frightening matter, unlike ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’.
The language and tone of the characters also shows the comparisons between the styles of writing of the two stories.
The characters in the two stories use their speech and language in different ways to impose different effects on the reader.
In ‘The Speckled Band’ Sherlock Holmes uses very intellectual language and is very polite and gentleman-like to his client Helen Stoner. He is always reassuring to her and always seems to say the right things in the situation;
“’You must not fear,’ said he soothingly, bending forward and patting her
forearm. ‘We shall soon set your matters right, I have no doubt.’”
Holmes was the ideal icon of a gallant gentleman to the Victorian public, and they immediately fell in love with Doyle’s fictional character and his polite manners and intelligent use of language.
In ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ however Mary Maloney uses speech and conversation as a tool to her advantage to manipulate the detectives;
“Personally I couldn’t touch a thing, certainly not what’s been in the house
when he was here. But it’s all right for you. It’d be a favour to me if you’d
eat it up.”
Mary’s use of language is not in an intellectual way as Sherlock Holmes in the way of complex and complicated grammar, but is intelligent and cunning in the way of manipulative language and disguising her real character by the use of speech and trying to force other people to be sympathetic towards her.
The endings of the stories are linked with how the characters provide their language and how they are concluded.
‘The Speckled Band’ ends with all the clues and hints preceding it all brought to a conclusion and everything is revealed. It ends with Sherlock Holmes cracking the case and revealing the cause of the death of Julia Stoner by discovering the murder weapon and how it came about killing Julia Stoner.
Holmes reveals that Roylott used an Indian Swamp Adder to carry out his murder and was planning another murder of Julia’s twin sister Helen Stoner, before Holmes comes to the rescue and causes his plan to backfire, and reverses the snake’s attack to kill Dr Roylott instead.
‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ ends with Mary Maloney fooling all the detectives and gets away with her murder by feeding the detectives the murder weapon: the leg of lamb. She does this by first tempting them into having a drink, then forcing, through clever use of speech and manipulation to eat away the evidence.
‘The Speckled Band’ is filled with twists and turns in the tale with unexpected things occurring, especially the murder weapon which would be a very difficult task to find out with the clues given. The story ends as you would expect with most murder mysteries involving Sherlock Holmes with the case being solved and the murderer being brought to justice. This compares differently to ’Lamb to the Slaughter’ in which the story doesn’t end the way you expect it to, with the murderer getting away with her murder and then giggling about it. The reader is surprised with this sort of ending as it isn’t a stereotypical murder mystery ending in which the case is solved and good defeats evil. However the reader won’t be very shocked as the story didn’t adapt hardly any features of a murder mystery other than the main three: the murderer, victim and a detective, and so the ending was no exception to all the other features not included from the stereotypical murder mystery genre.
The meanings of both titles are discovered and understood clearly at the end. ‘The Speckled Band’ is meant by the murder weapon, the Indian swap adder;
“He had a peculiar yellow band with brownish speckles.”
The meaning of ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ is meant as the frozen leg of lamb which was used to slaughter Patrick Maloney.
After these meanings are revealed to the reader, they understand more clearly the concept of the story and how each of the murders were committed, as each of the titles refer to the murder weapon used to carry out the murders.
The final comments in each of the stories reflect how the stories concluded and how each ended in completely different scenarios.
Sherlock Holmes concludes ‘The Speckled Band’ by saying that he was indirectly responsible for the murder of Dr Grimesby Roylott, even though he doesn’t feel much affected by it;
“In this way I am no doubt indirectly responsible for Dr Grimesby Roylott’s
death, and I cannot say that it is likely to weigh very heavily upon my
conscience.”
This final statement by Holmes shows the defiance of good defeating evil and Holmes’ superior actions to make the case a success.
‘Lamb to the Slaughter’, though, ends in a completely different way with the giggling of Mary Maloney after getting away with the murder of her husband. Compared with Sherlock Holmes’s successful investigation, Mary’s giggling shows how detectives can fail with intelligent manipulation and disguise.
Attitudes have changes greatly towards murder and crime over time. The main difference is the fact that how Dahl changed the attitude towards female murderers. Today we wouldn’t be much surprised to find a female killer whereas in Victorian times and even until 50 years ago, people would be very shocked to find a female murderer.
I find ‘The Speckled Band’ to be more appealing as I enjoy discovering clues and information and try to guess the outcome of the story rather than already knowing who, how and why the murder was carried out , even though I enjoyed how Mary Maloney attempted to outwit the detectives in Dahl’s story. I find ‘The Speckled Band’ to be more compelling in the way it is structured and presented in a stereotypical murder mystery genre format opposed to Dahl’s attempts to re-establish the view’s on a typical murder mystery structure and flip the genre on its tail.
The essential differences in the way murder mysteries have changed from Victorian to Modern times is the way in which the stereotypes of murder mysteries don’t apply as strongly today, and Dahl’s story shows that the gender of the murderer doesn’t necessarily have to be male and the settings aren’t always the stereotypical gothic mansions. Another difference in today’s murder mysteries are the fact that in today’s murder mysteries good doesn’t always defeat evil, as opposed to Doyle’s age where his audience always enjoyed the fact that Sherlock Holmes cracked every case.