Comparing short stories- lamb to the slaughter and the speckled band.

Comparing short stories- lamb to the slaughter and the speckled band

Lamb to the Slaughter’ was written by Roald Dahl in 1954 shortly after the Second World War. Roald Dahl is famous for writing children’s stories, like Charlie and the chocolate factory and James and the Giant Peach. Roald Dahl also writes stories for adults. Lamb to the slaughter is a fine example of an adult murder mystery story. Lamb to the slaughter is about a housewife waiting for her husband to come. When he does return home, he gives her bad news. Dazed by this news, she goes to the freezer to cook lamb for their supper but without warning strikes her husband over the head with it. She then goes to her local shop to create an Alibi. When the police come round to investigate she offers them the lamb which she killed her husband with. And without knowing it is the murder weapon the police eat the leg of lamb, destroying the evidence.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote ‘The Speckled Band’ in 1892. His stories are about the famous detective Sherlock Holmes set in late Victorian and early Edwardian England. The speckled band is about a man, Doctor Grimesby Roylott who tries to kill his stepdaughters using a poisonous snake to climb through a ventilator and down a bell rope so that he does not have to pay for their weddings with the inheritance that his late wife gave him. Sherlock Holmes and his companion Doctor Watson investigate this crime and prevent Doctor Roylott’s stepdaughter, Helen Stoner from being killed by staying in her bedroom and hitting the snake. But the snake went back into Doctor Roylott’s room, biting and killing him.

In lamb to the slaughter, Dahl makes the character Mary Maloney seem a calm person who loves her husband very much but is very cloy towards him. It is clear that she did not plan to murder her husband – she struck him with a moment of rage. We wouldn’t expect Mary Maloney to kill her husband, as it appears that she loves him and seems a calm person. Mary Maloney was successful with this murder. She got away with it clean and easily disposed of the evidence. Mary Maloney’s motives for killing her husband was that it appears her husband is going to leave her but Dahl does not make it clear what the bad news was. If this story was written in Conan Doyle’s time, and then the audience would be shocked, they would not have expected a woman to be a murderer. But as the story was written in 1954, it is more believable that Mary Maloney killed her husband because women had more rights in 1954 than in 1892 and were treated more equally. Mary Maloney didn’t seem the murderous type, but at the end of the story when she giggled, there seems to be a change in her character.

Password

Confirm Password

I agree to the terms of service and privacy policy

In the speckled band, Conan Doyle makes Doctor Roylott a stereotypical villain. He is described as a large, violent man with a short temper. ‘ A large face, seared with a thousand wrinkles, burned yellow with the sun, and marked with every evil passion.’ We would expect the villain in a murder mystery to be an evil, dark and sly person, which is what Doyle has done.

Dr Grimesby Roylott’s motive for killing Julia Stoner and attempting to kill Helen Stoner was so he would not have to give his late wife’s inheritance to the Stoner sisters for their ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Dr Grimesby Roylott’s motive for killing Julia Stoner and attempting to kill Helen Stoner was so he would not have to give his late wife’s inheritance to the Stoner sisters for their weddings. He wanted to keep the money for himself. Doctor Roylott succeeded with one murder but was not successful on his second attempt. Dr. Roylott had a complex method of murdering Julia Stoner in comparison to Mary Maloney. But that is due to the fact that his murder was planned and Mary Maloney’s was not.

In the speckled band, Sherlock Holmes treats the case as urgent and immediately suspects Dr. Grimesby Roylott as the murderer. ‘We have every reason to believe that the doctor has an interest in preventing his stepdaughter’s marriage.’ Sherlock Holmes appears to be a genius. He has almost superhuman thinking. Because the story is told from Dr. Watson’s point of view, we do not know what Holmes is thinking and when he does not spot the clues like the ventilator, the readers are oblivious to the clues too. So Sherlock Holmes seems very smart by spotting simple things that we do not. I think Conan Doyle’s intention was to make the readers admire Holmes but I think his character is quite pompous.

In lamb to the slaughter, Jack Noonan is not as smart as Sherlock Holmes is. He looks in the wrong direction in solving the case. He assumes that it was a man that killed Patrick Maloney. ‘Get the weapon, and you’ve got the man.’ It was highly unlikely that in the 1950’s a woman would murder her husband, but the detectives did consider it a possibility for a short while. ‘…Acted quite normal…very cheerful…wanted to give him a good supper…peas…cheesecake…impossible that she…’ Jack Noonan is very sympathetic towards Mary Maloney but I don’t think that Jack Noonan was as serious as Sherlock Holmes was on his case. Noonan took a drink of whiskey while trying to solve the case and let Mary Maloney convince him and his colleagues to eat the leg of lamb that she killed her husband with. I think Jack Noonan is not very professional.

I think Roald Dahl wanted the readers to think that Noonan was not very clever.

In the speckled band, the crime scene was set in Dr. Grimesby Roylott’s house in late Victorian or early Edwardian England. The house where the murder was committed is a typical convention. ‘ The building was of grey, lichen – blotched stone, with a high central portion and two curving wings. The windows were broken and blocked with wooden boards, while the roof was partly caved in. A picture of ruin.’ The house also had a Baboon and a Cheetah to add to the mysteriousness. This creates an eerie atmosphere where anything could happen to make the readers cautious and fear what may happen next.

In lamb to the slaughter, the story was set in the 1950’s, shortly after the Second World War. It is set in Patrick and Mary Maloney’s house, which was a calm and relaxed atmosphere – unusual for a murder scene. ‘The room was warm and clean, the curtains drawn, the two table lamps alight – hers and the one by the empty chair opposite. On the sideboard behind her, two tall glasses, soda water, whisky. Fresh ice cubes in the thermos bucket.’ The atmosphere is calm but I think this is purposely done to create tension. You can tell that this story is set later than the speckled band. We have evidence that cars are around. ‘Tyres on the gravel outside.’ This did not quite indicate that the story was set in the 1950’s but because Mary Maloney phoned the police station instead of dialling 999 that shows that the story was set between the 1950s and 1960s. ‘A few minutes later she got up and went to the phone. She knew the number of the police station.’

The speckled band is a traditional type of murder mystery story. We are given an idea to who the murderer is we have clues to how the murder happened but we never find out all the details of the murder until it is solved at the end. Lamb to the slaughter however, is unusual because we witness the murder happening from the beginning.

I think the clue to how the murder happened in lamb to the slaughter is the title, whereas in the speckled band the only clue we are given is that there might be a ventilator because Helen Stoner could smell doctor Roylott’s cigars. We are given a red herring though. We are led to believe that the gypsies have something to do with the murder because they are described as vicious and untrustworthy.

I think that the speckled band is quite gripping to read because we get little pieces of information at a time, like the flash backs and when Holmes claims he knows how the murder happened. We are anxious for him to explain the Doctor Watson how the murder happened which creates suspense and tension.

But in lamb to the slaughter, witnessing the murder happening makes the story more interesting because the readers are keen to know if Mary Maloney will get away with it or not.

The language in lamb to the slaughter is modern, not much different to today’s language. By the way Mary Maloney speaks, I assume that her and her husband are of a quite high class. Also the fact that they go out for dinner every Thursday means that they are quite wealthy. Mary Maloney is well spoken and polite. But she chooses her words carefully and the way she spoke, making the police officers do exactly what she wanted indicates that conversation is a way for her to manipulate.

‘“Why don’t you have one yourself, you must be awfully tired. Please do, you’ve been very good to me.” “It’s not strictly allowed, but I might take just a drop to keep me going”’

‘“Why don’t you eat up that lamb that’s in the oven. It’ll be cooked just right by now.” “Wouldn’t dream of it” “please eat it. 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. Then you can go on with your work again afterwards.”’

Holmes also appears to be of a high class. He also speaks formally but that is because in the Victorian times, people were very serious about good manners and language. Holmes also has a way with conversation; he manages to always say the right thing, never offends anyone and assures Helen Stoner that everything will be fine. ‘I assure you that I’m in your hands.’

The language in the speckled band is much different from the language in lamb to the slaughter because of the time it was set in. people tended to speak formally in the 1800s. Things like ‘said he’ indicates that the language is not modern.

The ending in the speckled band was quite unexpected. I personally assumed that Holmes would catch the murderer, and then report him to the police so that the villain goes to prison. It was quite unusual to see doctor Roylott murdered by his own murder weapon.

I think Sherlock Holmes’ conclusion at the end of the story makes him seem imperious, whereas in lamb to the slaughter, we witnessed Mary Maloney commit and get away with murder. But her giggling at the end of the story makes us realise that we didn’t really know what Mary Maloney was like and leaves us to rethink maybe feeling sorry for her.

I personally found Roald Dahl’s story more appealing. I enjoyed knowing who the murderer was and waiting to see what will happen rather than trying to solve the mystery myself.

These two stories are very different because they have two different types of authors; Roald Dahl is a children’s author and Conan Doyle is a murder mystery writer so the styles are different.

The time scenes are very different; Roald Dahl’s was set in the 1950’s and Conan Dahl’s story was set in the 1890’s.

The languages are very different because of this time scale.

Roald Dahl’s murder was unintended but Conan Doyle’s was planned.

There are different narratives; the speckled band has a second person narrative and lamb to the slaughter has a third person narrative.

We witness the murder in Roald Dahl’s story but in Conan Doyle’s story we do not find out what happened until the end of the story.

These stories are also similar because they both have victims Patrick Maloney being one and Helen Stoner being the other.

They both have murderers; Mary Maloney murdered her husband. Dr. Roylott did not directly murder Julia stoner but as he planned for a snake to kill her, he is still the murderer.

They both have detectives; Sherlock Holmes and Jack Noonan

Murder mysteries have changed a lot since Victorian times. Now there is technology that could pick things up for example the poison of the snake could not be detected in the speckled band but if it were in the time of lamb to the slaughter, scientists would probably have picked that up. Women would not be likely to be murders in Victorian times but now that is quite common.