After the incident the narrator asks the train driver what he had said. The narrator realises that what the signalman has told him is true.
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.
Charles Dickens uses a lot of sentences containing old English like “One would have thought”, or “Is there any path by which I can come down and speak to you?”
I think Charles Dickens uses old English so it makes them sound more polite and educated.
In the early 19th century people would find this kind of story an average story to read because of the many old English words that are used, for example ‘thus’, ‘yonder’ and ‘utmost’.
The T.V. version of this story is made for the 20th century viewer as the story has more detail as in the book it hardly goes into any real depth. The differences are in the key parts of the story, for example when the narrator first stumbles across the signal man the T.V. version puts more detail into the appearance of the signal box. Also when the narrator leaves it is shown that he has nightmares. Plus the detail of the woman’s death and the train collision is only mentioned in the book however on the T.V. the woman is shown being taken into the signal box and dies before the signalman. The modern reader might find this a bit of a boring story to read or watch. Today people want to see horror and to be made to jump or have a spooky atmosphere. Films such as Sixth Sense which have a big twist at the end and gives off a very frightening feeling, which is in every kind of horror movie now a days unlike in the older films where most of the action and tension is at the end and is not particularly scary.
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?
‘The signalman’ shows how imagination plays a big part in lives. Charles Dickens has given the story a cliff hanger and so we are left to our own conclusions.