Roald Dahl wrote Lamb to the slaughter in 1954, which would make the stories slightly different to each other because they were written in two different centuries.
Roald Dahl was born in 1916 and died in 1990, Roald Dahl was most famous for writing children stories but he did also write some books for adults like the tales of the unexpected which lamb to the slaughter featured in. The characters in Roald Dahl’s books only ever appeared once. When reading the two short stories I noticed that in the Lamb to the slaughter the story was being told by a narrator and we were following the story though Mary Maloney’s eyes and how she feels, the story and also is more interesting as we try to work out who is the murderer and how they killed the person, but in Lamb to the Slaughter we knew that Mary killed her husband and the only suspense was if the detectives will work out that Mary killed him. The stories both have different layouts and are written differently, In Lamb to the Slaughter all of the action takes place in one night and in one house, in Lamb to the Slaughter Mary (the murderer) calls the police.
I think the murderers were cleverly described in the story, in the lamb to the slaughter Roald Dahl described Mary Maloney as a loving women, who cared and loved her husband a lot,
“Now and again she would glance up at the clock, but without anxiety, merely to please herself with the thought that each minute gone by made it nearer to the time when he would come.” Mary and her husband seem to have a good life together and their life seems to be on a routine.
“When the clock said ten minutes to five, she began to listen, and a few minutes later, punctually as always, she heard the tyres on the gravel outside.” The way they are described is as if the same thing happens each week and every day at the same time. I think Roald Dahl does this to make it seem out of the ordinary when Patrick Maloney did not want to go out to supper on a Thursday. This would make us think something is about to happen what does not usually happen, Roald Dahl is very clever by the way he doesn’t tell us what Mr Maloney told Mrs Maloney this adds a little suspense to the story by making the readers wonder what Patrick could have done so bad that would make her want to kill her husband, Mary tries to carry on as normal after finding out the news. I don’t think Mary would have thought about getting an alibi if it wasn’t for the unborn baby she was carrying. Mary done the murder though anger and being hurt by someone she truly loved, and still loved
“When she saw him lying there on the floor with his legs doubled up and one arm twisted back underneath his body, it really was rather a shock. All the old love and longing for him welled up inside her, and she ran over to him and began to cry her heart out.”
In lamb to the slaughter the detectives seem to be unprofessional by drinking the whisky and not suspecting Mary Maloney because they knew who she was, when every thing was pointing at her, there was no sign of a break in or a struggle. It seems Roald Dahl was making fun of the police by not making them do there job properly by letting Mary stay in the room where the murder took place without any one watching her where she could have done anything in there, and eating the meat which was the weapon.
Roald Dahl mostly wrote for children and that perhaps it is very light hearted the way that he has pops at the detectives, Roald Dahl wrote about a women killing her husband and that may have been less light hearted.
Dickens’ story ‘The Signalman’ has many examples of different ways of building tension.
The opening line ‘Halloa! Below there!’ plunges us immediately into the story, telling us that we must be attentive in order to follow the story. It also makes our imagination start to ask questions, for example; who is saying this? Who are they speaking to?
The ghosts repetitive behaviour makes us feel anxious. The ghost always shouts, ‘Halloa! Below there!’ He waves his arm and covers his eyes.
Dickens’ portrayal of the tunnel and the cutting is very detailed, and is expressed through use of onomatopoeic words. For instance; ‘zigzag’ and ‘gloomy’ these words get an apparent image of the cutting and this tunnel, resulting in us feeling we are involved in the story.
The signalman’s appearance is quite peculiar as is his behaviour. He looks at the bell when it does not ring and talks of a ghost. His eyebrows are thick and his skin tone is odd. Painting a picture of a mysterious looking man.
We too feel, the desperation and distraction of his ordeal. He ‘wiped the drops from his forehead’ showing his nerves, and so making us feel nervous.
When we hear the signalman’s’ story, it is one with such a horrific plot that we become drawn in. When the author continuously interrupts it, we become more anxious and become desperate to hear the rest of the story. Dickens’ use of painful personification, like ‘angry sunset’ and ‘violent pulsation’ contributes greatly to the stories impact. Short sentences and repetition also make us feel tense.
There is such a conflict in personalities between the author, calm and collected, and the agitated and stressed signalman. We end up having to choose sides between the author believing the signalman is crazy and the signalman behaving crazy.
The irony leaves us shaken. The one time the signalman chooses to ignore the voice was the one time he should have. The calm scientific reasoning of the author was wrong whilst the hysterical ramblings of the signalman were surprisingly correct.
The unexplained ending leaves us in a very tense and unsettled state. Our many questions are left unanswered.
