Lamb to the Slaughter and Vendetta

Wide Reading Assignment.

In this assignment I am going to compare and contrast two different stories, which are Lamb to the Slaughter and Vendetta. Vendetta was written in the late 19th century and Lamb to the Slaughter was written around the 1940’s. The author of Vendetta is Guy De Maupassant and the author of Lamb to the Slaughter is Roald Dahl.

Lamb to the Slaughter takes place in America. In the story it doesn’t actually say where the story is set but in my opinion I think it was set in America because the word precinct is used a number of times and the word precinct is an America word which isn’t used in this country. The word precinct means Police Station and it is used a lot in New York so I also think that the story is set in the city of New York.

In my opinion I think that the story is also set in the evening I get this impression because at the start of the story these word are used “The room was warm and clean, the curtains drawn, the two table lamps alight” this little sentence is what gives me the impression of a warm evening. Also when I read this sentence I picture in my mind a room and in that room a log fire which is alight and at either side of the fire two little tables with lamps on them which are also alight and to the side a window which you can only see out of slightly because the curtains are drawn. Through this little gap in the curtains I also picture snow falling. I get this impression through that one sentence:

“The room was warm and clean, the curtains drawn, the two table lamps alight”

Vendetta is set in Sardinia at a little village on a mountain which overhangs by the sea. This little village is known as Bonifacio.

Main Similarities that occurred in both stories are:

Both stories have a narrative voice of 3rd person
Both have a narrative viewpoint on the main female character i.e. we see all events through the point of view of either Mary Maloney or Widow Saverini
Both of the stories are murder stories
Both stories deal with revenge but in different ways
Both the murders in the stories are women
Both the murders in each story get away with the murder
Both the women have an effective alibi
Both the women manage to fool those around them
Both the women in the stories use animals as a weapon but in different ways
Both of the stories show determined the women are
Both of the women are content by the end of the story

Main Differences that occurred in both stories are:

The stories were written in different times are they feature different places
In Vendetta the revenge is long and carefully planned and considered and in Lamb to the Slaughter the murder is swift and brutal.
In Both stories the reasons for murder are different and the women can be excused to different extents
In both stories the revenge takes place in different places

Here is a brief description for all the similarities between the two stories:

Both Stories are written in 3rd person.

By this I mean that the author has written the story in what the person did e.g. “Paolo Saverini’s widow dwelt alone with her son in a small mean house.”

- Both Stories have a narrative viewpoint on the main female character.

By this I mean that in the story we see all events through the women’s eyes e.g. in the story it describes everything that the women are doing e.g. “Now and again she would glance up at the clock” This phrase is out of Lamb to the Slaughter. An example of this in Vendetta could be “All day long She sat alone at her window gazing at the opposite coast and thinking of her revenge” This part of the story really goes into detail about what the women is doing and that is how I no that both the stories ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Both of the stories are murder stories

It’s obvious why this is a similarity between both stories because in both stories a murder occurs

Both of the stories deal with revenge but in different way

In both stories the murders are on act of revenge. I know this because in Vendetta the revenge occurred because the women lost some one she loved and in Lamb to the Slaughter the revenge was purely because the women was annoyed at her husband because of his shear aggressiveness towards her. The revenges were mainly different because in Vendetta the women studied long and hard to plan her revenge however in Lamb to the Slaughter the women’s revenge occurred within a matter of minutes because of the way her husband was treating her.

Both the murderers in the stories are women

We know this because in the stories it describes to you exactly what the women are doing.

Both the murderers in each story get away with the murder.

We know this because in Lamb to the Slaughter the lady has an alibi off the man in the shop and in Vendetta Nicholas Ravolati’s neighbours said that they remembered seeing an old beggar man with a dog leaving Nicholas’s house chewing some brown substance. With the neighbours saying this widow Saverini gets away with the murder and with Mary Maloney’s alibi in Lamb to the Slaughter she also gets away with the murder. Also in this story at the end the police eat the meat of which Mary used to hit her husband with therefore they would have had no evidence against her in the end if she have not of had an alibi.

Both women have an effective alibi.

In Vendetta the women’s alibi was the neighbours of Nicholas Ravolati because they said that they could remember an old beggar man with a dog emerge from the house so that cleared widow Saverini of any involvement. In Lamb to the Slaughter Mary Maloney was also cleared from any involvement with the murder because she went to the shop this created an alibi for her and got her out of the suspects.

Both women manage to fool those around them.

In Vendetta the women fools Nicholas Ravolati himself and his neighbours because after Nicholas murdered Antoine Saverini he disappeared to Sardinia and he probably thought that he had got away with the murder and that widow Saverini wasn’t going to act on him for what he did. However by her taking her time in planning the revenge and in training the dog to kill she allowed time for Nicholas to get comfortable and forget all about it. Also when she got to his house with the dog she seemed to be all jolly and happy when she was shouting on him. This is how she fooled him. She fooled the neighbours by actually doing nothing really because they thought that the murder must have been the old beggar man but they didn’t know that it was in fact widow Saverini. In Lamb to the Slaughter Mary Maloney fools the police, the shop worker and in fact herself. She fools the police because she puts on an act as if she really loved her husband and she cant understand how and why some one would kill him. She seems very upset at this point which leads the police to believing her. She fools the shop worker by appearing very happy and normal. From the point when she goes into the shop we know that she seems cheerful because it says in the story “Hullo Sam, she said brightly smiling at the man behind the counter” This shows that she happy. She also goes on to tell the worker that her husband doesn’t want to eat out that night so she proceeds to ask him for various items of food. She also goes on to start a conversation with him about food and cooking and her husband. When she leaves the shop it says in the story that she “put on her brightest smile and said “thank you Sam Good night” This will also of fooled the shop worker in thinking that everything is alright with her and her husband. She also manages to fool he self into thinking nothing has happened because she tidied up her face and practised smiling and she kept thinking to her self that nothing had happened.

Both the women in the stories used animals as weapons but in different ways.

In Lamb to the Slaughter Mary used a dead lambs leg to hit her husband with and in Vendetta the widow used and trained her dog to kill and she used it to kill Nicholas Ravolati.

Both of the stories show how determined the women are.

In Vendetta it shows that the widow is determined by the way she spends time in planning the murder and in training her dog to kill. In Lamb to the Slaughter it’s a different kind of determinacy because in this story Mary is determined not to kill but to tell her self that everything is fine and to show every one how much she loved her husband and she is determined to seem happy to her friends before the police are actually contacted (her friends being the worker in the shop – Sam).

Both of the women are content by the end of the story.

By this I mean that the women are happy with the outcome of the situation. They didn’t get caught of arrested so they are happy with the outcome.

These are the main difference that occurred in the stories:

The stories were written in different times and the feature different places

Vendetta was written in late 19th century and Lamb to the Slaughter was written in the 1940’s. Vendetta is set in Sardinia and Lamb to the Slaughter is set in America

In Vendetta the revenge is long and carefully planned and considered and in Lamb to the Slaughter the murder is swift and brutal.

What I mean by this is that in Vendetta the widow spends a lot of time to carefully plan the revenge and she spends a lot of time learning and training the dog to kill. Whereas in Lamb to the Slaughter the revenge wasn’t planned at all it was quick and it was a brutal attack

In both stories the reasons for murder are different and the women can be excused to different extents.

In Vendetta the reason for murder was the fact that the widow had lost someone that she really loved and someone that was really close to her. In Lamb to the Slaughter however the revenge was purely because of the aggression show by the man towards his wife (Mary). The women were excused by: In Lamb to the Slaughter the police because she knew them really well and they didn’t think that she would do some thing as bad as that so she was excused and in Vendetta the women was excused by the fact that no body seen her tell the dog to kill or go to the mans house.

In both stories the revenge takes place in different places.

In Vendetta the murder takes place in Sardinia in Nicholas Ravolati’s house and in Lamb to the Slaughter the murder takes place in America in Mary Maloney’s house in the evening.

In Vendetta a lot of very descriptive phrases are used. The main one that I can point out is approximately 14 lines long. The phrase reads:

“Build on a spur of the mountain and in places actually overhanging the sea, the town looks across the rock-strewn straits to the low lying coast of Sardinia. On the other side girdling it almost completely, there is a fissure in the cliff, like an immense corridor, which serves as a port, and down this long channel, as far as the first houses, sail the small Italian and Sardinian fishing boats, and once a fort-night the broke-winded old steamer from Ajaccio. Clustered together on the white-hill side, the houses form a patch of even more dazzling whiteness. Clinging to the rock gazing down upon those deadly straits where scarcely a ship ventures, they look like the nests of birds prey. The sea and the barren coast stripped of all but a scanty covering of grass are for ever harassed by a restless wind.”

Below I have broke down this phrase to explain it in detail:

“Built on a spur of the mountain and in places actually overhanging the sea, the town looks across the rock-strewn straits to the low lying coast of Sardinia. On the other side girdling it almost completely, there is a fissure in the cliff, like an immense corridor, which serves as a port, and down this long channel, as far as the first houses, sail the small Italian and Sardinian fishing boats, and once a fort-night the broke-winded old steamer from Ajaccio. Clustered together on the white-hill side, the houses form a patch of even more dazzling whiteness. Clinging to the rock gazing down upon those deadly straits where scarcely a ship ventures, they look like the nests of birds prey. The sea and the barren coast stripped of all but a scanty covering of grass are for ever harassed by a restless wind.”

When reading this description you get a full feel of what the place is like. The subject of the description is frequently changed to help with the understanding of the area of which the story is set.

A lot of descriptive writing is also used in Lamb to the Slaughter. The main bit of description that I firstly noticed was at the start of the story. The description is approximately 15 lines long and it reads:

“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.

Mary Maloney was waiting for her husband to come home from work.

Now and again she would glance up at the clock, but without anxiety, merely to please her self with the thought that each minute gone by made it nearer the time when he would come. There was a slow smiling air about her, and about everything she did. The drop of the head as she bent over her sewing was curiously tranquil. Her skin – for this was her sixth month with child – had acquired a wonderful translucent quality, the mouth was soft, and the eyes, with their new placid look, seemed larger, darker then before.”

I will now analyse this description as I have with the Vendetta one:

Mary Maloney was waiting for her husband to come home from work.

This description is in a way similar to the one from Vendetta but on the other hand it is very much different. My reasons for me thinking this are:

For the descriptions being the same:

A change in subject occurs throughout the description

For the descriptions being different

The vendetta description changes it topic very quickly it gives a good description of on thing then it changes and describes another so you really get a good picture in your mind of the place of which the story is set. This kind of description doesn’t occur in the description above that is from Lamb to the Slaughter.

Out of these two stories Vendetta and Lamb to the Slaughter I Believe that the best story/most-interesting story out of them both is Vendetta. I think this because the way in which you can easily fully understand the story by the very good detailed description given and the way that the murder was carried out. By this I mean that the widow handled and planned everything very well, the way she took time in training the dog and in planning when to act give the story that little extra buzz I was always wondering throughout this story what was going to happen next. In my opinion I was that impressed with the murder and how it was planned etc if the widow was to be real then if I knew her I would certainly make sure not to get on the wrong side of her or her dog. If I was to recommend this story to someone I would say that it is an excellent short story to read and it keeps you in suspense all the way through by the training of the dog and the planning of the murder. I would recommend for this story to be read by people/teenagers of no younger than the age of 14 as the act at the end of the story may be disturbing to some people.