“Although the ghost story has been around since the earliest times it came into it’s own in the latter half of the 19th century when new events were occurring such as breakthroughs in science and the disintegration of religion. Charles Darwin’s theory on evolution was changing the way in which people saw their religion; they were starting to question it more. People were afraid of the far-reaching scientists who may go too far. A writer named Mary Shelley played on this particular fear, she created “Dr. Frankenstein” in which a scientist collects body parts and injects life into the dead limbs, so the creature lives. This links to the gothic novel in ways such as the setting, being dark and foreboding. Uncertainty was all around, people feared what they did not understand. They did not want the change that would come with these new findings. So the writers of the time played on these fears and concerns. They explored the depths of the human psyche, which was inspired by Sigmund Freud who was just beginning to explore the mind in the late 19th century. His work prepared the ground for the breakthroughs in psychology that would contribute towards modernism. The writers were trying to get a story that would affect many people.
The small hut, which has a fire, is much more welcoming than the environment around it.
The final day occurs during sunlight, this conveys to the reader that nothing will happen, giving the reader a false sense of security.
They each use the daylight to deceive the reader into thinking nothing will happen, then the writers surprise them with their twists in the ending. If the writers had ended their stories at night then the readers would have anticipated the ending, giving no surprise or shock to the reader.
The story opens to dialogue, putting the reader straight into the story. The reticence of the signalman to tell the rambler how to get down is suspicious and adds suspense. There is a tension between the two men when they first meet, this will also add to the suspense. After they have finished talking and the rambler is about to leave the signalman says “I am troubled…it is very difficult to impart…if you make me another visit, I will try to tell you” this adds tension by making the reader wonder what is troubling the signalman. There is a ‘trough’ in the tension when the rambler leaves the signalman, but the next night there is jump in tension because the signalman is waiting for the rambler when he returns the following night. The thing that was troubling the signalman is disclosed to the rambler, the tension would rise quickly. But the narrator is doubtful and leaves some hours later, the tension would fall again. The following evening when the rambler is walking he sees a man by the red light, thinking that it is the spectre he experiences a moment of “Nameless horror” this would relate back to the reader, increasing the tension radically. The tension would then fall, because the narrator sees it is only a man, but then sees the tarpaulin. The tension would ‘go through the roof’ when the rambler finds that the signalman is dead and what the signalman had said to him the night before came true.
Dickens uses more literal language to craft his narrative. Although he does make use of figurative language, it is far less apparent than his application of literal language. His descriptions of the environment and character’s are very controlled and precise. He relies heavily upon the choice of noun, verb, adverb and adjective to construct his vivid imagery. The narrative shows that Dickens is a Realist writer since it is precise and exact. The description of the cutting has adjectival imagery littered throughout, such adjectives as “angry…deep…violent…deadly”. These are negative adjectives implying darkness and evil. They get a clear message across that the cutting has a malicious air. The tension of the story is done almost completely on the use of adjectives. Adjectives set the tone for the story; they also add tension and darker tones to it. Dickens uses adjectival images throughout the story, some include “daunted…damp…barbarous…monstrous” these continue to keep the story sombre and morose.
The use of figurative language is limited to just a few instances, one being an “angry sunset” personification is used to give the atmosphere an even more menacing air.
This story was written in 1866, the writing is very cynical maybe the rambler thoughts were the writer’s own. This was a time when people were starting not to believe ghosts and the supernatural. The verbs and adjectives used are also an indicator to what time the story was written, “as I perused the fixed eyes and saturnine face”, “perused” and “saturnine” would not appear often in modern popular writing, but would have been common language among the literary elite. Who would have been the main readers in Dickens’s day.
Dickens hardly uses any figurative language, his writing uses verbal and adjectival imagery to build tension. In result his writing is more direct, the tension more exact and immediate.
Suspense is created through supernatural, horror and ambiguity.
This could be the final climax to the building pressure, but it ends up as being a train this; creates a lot of tension which is then lost after you are enlighten
The cutting would be pretty dark; this darkness creates the suspended mood. It is also described as being “Extremely deep and unusually precipitous” and “Solitary and dismal”. It seems like the place is very isolated and cut off from the real world, the perfect place for supernatural happenings “Great dungeon”. The tunnel also creates suspension, why did he look down there in this first place and what could it be down there is described as “Barbarous, depressing and forbidding”. The smells and surroundings make him a little bit reluctant to descend “Air of reluctance”.
The story is only spread over a couple of days, but that is all it takes for him to get involved, also the story only ever takes place within the cutting. Is this so none of the tension is lost? “But I expressly intend to make you another visit”. The two men meet both times at the bottom of the cutting at night “I will come at eleven”. This keeps the tension due to the darkness, It would probably be lost if they were to meet on a sunny midday.
Also the darkness impairs the narrator’s vision so he can’t be sure what’s out there.
In the first conversation he tells the man that he is “troubled”. This makes you ask the question what is he troubled about and does it have anything to do with his weird actions previously? Could he be or knows the ghost? These questions make you think about what’s coming round the corner. This also builds suspense.
On the man’s return visit he is told about the mysterious figure and how it disappeared. “It was gone”. This long passage describing the ghost’s actions adds tension and expectancy that it will come again. He also clears up his odd actions (when he looked down the tunnel). The ghost says those very same words. We now know that he is not the ghost so some tension is lost but it is now a matter of if the man will see the ghost and what it will say. He also tells the man of the lady who died in the carriage just after he had seen the figure “Within six hours after this appearance, the memorable accident happen”. You begin to associate the spectre with death and who’s death will it contribute to next.
The story is written in first person so it feels like it is actually happening at the same time you read it. This is evident when he talks with and about the signalman “You look at me as if you had a dread of me”. Neither you nor he knows what the response is going to be. His manner is described as “seemed to make the place strike colder to me, but I said no more”. He describes it as it happens which adds suspense. This a weird description to give someone, could he be the ghost?
As you here about the ghost, the gentleman’s actions are very dismissive. This is true as it would be the natural response, but as they are in a deep cutting which hasn’t much human contact you begin to believe him. The man has the same reactions when he hears about the second ghost. “Deception of his sense of sight”. You have the same time to make a decision as he does, but you already know there will be a ghost.
The man seems brave and dismissive of things which could potentially harm him. Maybe too dismissive and this could get him into trouble, but he doesn’t seem like he is a victim. The signalman has this role. In the end it is the gentleman’s fault that the signalman dies because if he hadn’t called down to him in the first place, the signalman would have looked up as the train came down the tunnel. “Below there, look out”. The first words of the story are the most decisive words of the story. Could it have been fate? And no matter what had happened between the start of the story and his death, it couldn’t have been prevented. “The words which I myself - not he – had attached”. He obviously feels responsible for his death and you feel that if he hadn’t associated himself with the man none of this would have happened. This is quite a mysterious and even scary thought.
The story stars off with the narrator walking through fields, he then hears a train and so he walks towards where the sound is coming from. The narrator comes to a viaduct where he shouts, “halloa down there”, waving his arm in front of his face at a man standing below. The narrator finds a path down into the viaduct and goes over to the signalman. The signalman asks the narrator if he has ever stood in the mouth of the tunnel because he saw a figure there sometime before waving his hands in front of his face just as the narrator had done.
Throughout the story the narrator has doubts about the signalman seeing a ghost on each day before the accidents occur. The signalman told the narrator told the narrator that the electric bell went off each time the ghost appeared in the mouth of the tunnel. When both men were in the signal box the bell went off but the narrator did not hear any sound or see any movement from the bell. The narrator tells the signalman that because of the two accidents he has witnessed it could have caused his mind to flip and to go mad. So he only thinks he sees a figure and hears the electric bell off.
Could there be some supernatural truth to the story? Did the signalman really see the figure and hear the electric bell before each accident? At the end of the story when the signalman dies the train driver tells the train driver tells the narrator the words the signal man said the ghost had said whilst waving his hand. He then realises that there could really be a ghost or some kind of vision that made the signalman see into the future.
Most of this story is set in the daytime, which does not create a spooky atmosphere. Charles Dickens still manages to create tension even though the story is quiet and has little action. The story does have a lot of mystery to it, for example why was the narrator walking through the fields in the first place and how did the signalman knows the statement said by the train driver? Did he really see a ghost in the tunnel or was it just a coincidence that they said the same thing?
There is a bit of suspense at the end of the story when the signalman sees the figure ‘ghost’ and stands in the middle of the track, the train driver is whistling at him to move but he doesn’t. At the same time the narrator is running toward the viaduct. So does the narrator fall into the train or does the signalman get killed?
To represent the major themes of life, death,and purity, Poe uses the colors red, black, and white. The pendulum and the heartbeat show the passing of time and life, while the pit represents the inevitable descent into the abyss that we must all experience when we die.
