Amanda

Response Essay #3-Revision #3 Detective Fiction is a genre that always keeps readers on their toes, both classic and hardboiled detective fiction keep readers guessing and puzzled. Is there a difference between the two? I enjoyed reading the hardboiled stories better than the classic detective stories. They have certain strengths such as an easier storyline to follow and also the language and writing isn't as difficult to comprehend. I think that in classic detection the language is a weakness because it makes the story unenjoyable. Also another strength in hardboiled detective fiction is the development of the characters and the change in the usual victims and suspects.The two stories that can help prove this thesis are, "Murder at the Automat," and "Murders at the Rue Morgue." These qualities can lead the readers to see for themselves the likeness and differences between the types of detection.

A short story by Cornell Woolrich published in 1937, "Murder at the Automat," exemplifies hardboiled detective fiction. It has certain aspects about it that gives the story certain strengths and makes it more enjoyable. For instance, we can understand the story easier and follow it along better. The language is more modern and the reader isn't having any difficulty trying to understand what is happening. A big part of what made classic detection unenjoyable was that it was hard to understand what the author was trying to get across to the reader. I think that is the ultimate weakness in classic detection because other than the language I liked the classic detection stories. However, "Murders in the Rue Morgue," was so frustrating to follow that I couldn't understand what was happening while reading along. Another strength that hardboiled had was the change between the usual victims and suspects. In most classic detection any woman in the story is usually the victim. She has been either murdered or robbed, as in "Murders in the Rue Morgue," the victims of the crime are two murdered women. In, "Murder at the Automat," however, our main criminal is a woman. In fact, she's a serial killer. I think that portraying the woman as a victim in the classic detective story could also be considered a weakness because it becomes predictable when the reader always knows that something bad will be happening to the woman in the story. I like the idea of the woman being the criminal because I believe that men have a tendency to underestimate women and what they're capable of. Women can be just as vicious and dangerous as any man can be. The killer in this story is manipulative and uses men mostly to help her get what she wants, without having to actually get her own hands dirty. This is making her out to be some type of psychopath who can appear innocent and manipulate people at her will.

Hardboiled and classic detection both have similarities as well. In both types of stories we have a detective who has to solve a specific murder or crime. The detectives in the stories have keen observation skills that let them see things differently than most. In, "Murder at the Automat," our main character is Detective Nelson and in, "Murders in the Rue Morue," there is Detective Dupin. Both cases involve solving a difficult murder and both end up having a surprising ending. Although the cases are different the detectives both use the same skills to solve the crime and bring the murderer to justice. Nelson seems to have the same characteristics as Dupin does in his story. They are both men of arrogance who believe that they are smarter than any cop or criminal. After first arriving at the crime scene Nelson even says about the missing criminal, " 'Well, he's not as smart as he thinks he is,' said Nelson. 'We'll catch up with him, whether he got out or didn't.' " (249) Nelson has no doubt in his mind that he's going to find out who did it. Dupin is the same way in his story because he also beleives that he knows better than any other cop or criminal. Nelson assumes that he's going to catch the killer no problem and that there's no way come criminal could ever outsmart him.

Although both stories have their good points and their bad points I found myself in favor of hardboiled detective fiction. I thought it was more entertaining and it can open your mind up to bigger ideas. This genre also seems to open itself up to a wider rane of people. This way both men and women can enjoy it more and try to find a way to relate themselves to the characters in the story. Hopefully, it can even appeal to their own likes and dislikes about detective fiction.

Response Essay #3-Revision #2 Detective fiction is a genre that always keeps readers on their toes, whether is is classic or hardboiled detective fiction, it always keeps the readers guessing and puzzled. Is there a difference between the two? They have their own ways of making themselves unique and original. They each have certain positives and negatives which makes it easy to categorize them as either classic or hardboiled. The two stories that can help prove this thesis are, "Murder at the Automat," and "Murders in the Rue Morgue." Each of these stories seem to have equal strengths and weaknesses. The tales each have their own strengths like similarities between detectives and weaknesses such as the difference between victims and criminal choices. These qualities can lead the readers to see for themselves the likeness and differences between the types of detection.

A short story by Cornell Woolrich published in 1937, "Murder at the Automat," exemplifies hardboiled detective fiction. There are similarities between this type of story and classic detective fiction. In both types of stories we have a detective who has to solve a specific murder or crime. The detectives in the stories have keen observation skills that let them see things differently than most. In this story our main character is Detective Nelson and in "Murders" we have Detective Dupin. Both cases involve solving a difficult murder and both end up having a surprising ending. Although the cases are different they both use the same skills to solve the crime and bring the murderer to justice. Nelson seems to have the same characteristics as Dupin does in his story. They are both men of arrogance who believe that they are smarter than any other cop or criminal that surrounds them. After first arriving at the crime scene Nelson even says about the missing criminal, " 'Well, he's not as smart as he thinks he is,' said Nelson. 'We'll catch up with him, whether he got out or didn't.' " (249) Nelson has no doubt in his mind that he's going to find out who did it. Dupin was the same way in his story because he also believed that he knew better than any cop or criminal. Nelson assumes that he's going to catch the killer no problem and that there's no way some criminal could ever outsmart him.

There are some differences between the two stories as well. In most classic detective fiction any woman in the story is usually the victim. She has been either murdered or robbed, as in "Murders in the Rue Morgue," the victims of the crime are two murdered women. In "Murder at the Automat," however, our main criminal is a woman. In fact, she's a serial killer. I think that portraying the woman as a victim in the classic detective story should be considered a weakness on their part because it becomes predictable when you always know that something bad will be happening to the woman in the story. I like the idea of the woman being the criminal because I believe that men have a tendency to underestimate women and what they're capable of. Although it may not be common, women can be just as vicious and dangerous as any man can be. The killer in this story is manipulative and uses men mostly to help her get what she wants, without having to actually get her own hands dirty. This is making her out to be some type of psychopath who can appear innocent and manipulate people at her very will.

I enjoyed reading the hardboiled stories better than the classic detective stories. I like these stories because they have a storyline that's easier to follow and also the language and writing isn't as difficult to comprehend. The character's are also more fully developed and the reader has more options when trying to predict who the guilty party is. Although both stories have their good points and their bad points I found hardboiled detective fiction more entertaining. I think that it opens itself up to a wider range of people. This way both men and women can enjoy it more and try to find a way to relate it. Hopefully, it can even appeal to their own likes and dislikes about detective fiction.

Response Essay #3-Revision #1 Detective fiction is a genre that always keeps readers on their toes. Whether it is classic or hardboiled detective fiction it always keeps the readers guessing and puzzled. Is there a difference between the two? They have their own ways of making themselves unique and original. I believe that they each have certain positives and negatives which makes it easy to categorize them as either classic or hardboiled. I believe that two stories that can help prove my thesis are, "Murder at the Automat," and "Murders in the Rue Morgue." I believe that each of these stories are a good example of the strengths and weaknesses provided in both hardboiled and classic detective fiction. Ideas such as, similarities between detectives or the different choices for the victims and killers.

A short story by Cornell Woolrich published in 1937, "Murder at the Automat," exemplifies hardboiled detective fiction. There are some similarities between this type of story and classic detective fiction. In both types of stories we have a detective who has to solve a specific murder or crime. The detectives in the story have keen observation skills that let them see things differently than most. In this story our main character is Detective Nelson and in "Murders" we have Detective Dupin. Both cases involve solving a difficult murder that is a bit challenging and both end up having a surprising ending. Nelson seems to have the same characteristics as Dupin does in his story. They are both men of arrogance who believe that they are smarter than any other cop or criminal that surrounds them. After first arriving at the crime scene Nelson even says about the missing criminal, " 'Well, he's not as smart as he thinks he is,' said Nelson. 'We'll catch up with him, whether he got out or didn't.' " (249) Nelson has no doubt in his mind that he's going to find out who did it. He automatically assumes, like Dupin, that he's going to catch the killer no problem and that there's no way some criminal could ever outsmart him.

There are some differences between the two stories as well. In most classic detective fiction any woman in the story is usually the victim. She has been either murdered or robbed, as in "Murders in the Rue Morgue," the victims of the crime are two murdered women. In "Murder at the Automat," however, our main criminal is a woman. In fact, she's a serial killer as well. I like the idea of the woman being the criminal because I believe that men have a tendency to underestimate women and what they're capable of. Although it may not be common women can be just as vicious and dangerous as any man can be. The killer in this story is manipulative and uses men mostly to help her get what she wants, without having to actually get her own hands dirty. This is making her out to be some type of psychopath who can appear innocent and manipulate people at her very will.

If I had to choose which kind of detective fiction I prefer to read, I would have to choose hardboiled detective fiction. I like these stories better because they have a storyline that's easier to follow and also the language and writing isn't as difficult to comprehend. The character's are also more fully developed and the reader has more options when trying to predict who the guilty party is. Although both stories have their good points and their bad points I found hardboiled detective fiction more entertaining and appeals to more people. I believe that it opened itself up to a wider range of people. This way both men and women can enjoy it more and try to find a way to relate to it. Hopefully, it can even appeal to their own likes and dislikes about detective fiction.

Response Essay #3 Detective fiction is a genre of reading that always keeps the reader on their toes. Whether it is classic or hardboiled detective fiction it always keeps us guessing and puzzled. Is there a difference between the two. Both of these types of reading have their own similarities and differences. They have their own ways of making themselves unique and original. I believe that they each have certain positives and negatives which makes it easy to categorize them as either classic or harboiled. I believe that two stories that can help prove my thesis is, "Murder at the Automat," and "Murders in the Rue Morgue." I believe that each of these stories is a good example of the strengths and weaknesses provided in both hardboiled and classic detective fiction.

"Murder at the Automat" is a short story written by Cornell Woolrich in 1937. It is classified under the genre as a hardboiled detective fiction story. There are some similarities between this type of story and classic detective fiction. In both types of stories we have a detective who has to solve a specific murder or crime. They have keen observation skills that let them see things differently than most. In this story our main character is Detective Nelson and in "Murders" we have Detective Dupin. Both cases involve solving a difficult murder that is a bit challenging and both end up having a surprising ending. Nelson seems to have the same characteristics as Dupin does in his story. They are both men of arrogance who believe that they are smarter than any other cop or criminal that surrounds them. After first arriving to the crime scene Nelson even says about the missing criminal, " 'Well, he's not as smart as he thinks he is, ' said Nelson. 'We'll catch up with him, whether he got out or didn't. The rest of you clear out of here now. And don't give fake names and addresses to the cop at the door, or you'll be making trouble for yourselves.' " (249) Nelson automatically assumes like Dupin that he's going to catch the killer no problem and that there's no way some criminal could ever outsmart him.

In both stories, however, there some differences between them as well. In most classic detective fiction any woman in the story is usually the victim. She has been either murdered or robbed, just like in "Murders in the Rue Morgue," the victim of the crime is a murdered woman. In "Murder at the Automat," however, our main criminal is a woman. In fact she's even a serial killer. I like the idea of the woman being the criminal because I believe that men have a tendency to underestimate women and what they're capable of. Although, it may not be common women can be just as vicious and dangerous as any man could be. Also, the killer in this story uses a man to help her get what she wants. She uses other people to get what she wants, without having to actually get her own hands dirty. This is making her out to be some type of psychopath who can appear innocent and manipulate people at her very will.

If I had to choose which kind of detective fiction I would prefer to read, I would have to choose hardboiled detective fiction. I like these stories better because they have a storyline that's easier to follow and also the language and writing isn't as difficult. The character's are also expanded more and the reader has more options when trying to predict who the guilty party is. Although, both stories have their good points and their bad points I found that hardboiled detective fiction was more entertaining and could appeal to more people. I believe that it opened itself up to a range of more people so that both men and women could find it more relatable and hopefully appeal to their own likes and dislikes about detective fiction.

Response Essay #2-Revision #1 Men and women are completely different. Although we both need the same things to survive in the world, when it comes to our feelings, emotions, thought process, and the way we look at things, we are as different as night from day. It's the same situation with male and female detectives. In class we've been reading different stories that involve both male and female detectives. We've seen the different ways that they act, think, and solve crimes.They have their own ways of going about these cases and figuring out who the culprit is. I believe that two stories that support the different methods of male and female detection would be "A Scandal in Bohemia" and "A Jury of Her Peers." I believe that these two short stories can give us a good insight into the different ways that men and women's minds work when it comes to the compassion and understanding of solving mysteries.

In many detective stories I find that arrogance and brilliance seem to go hand in hand when the main character is a man. They are usually loners that either do private detection or assist the police when asked. They can be stubborn and eccentric when solving a mystery. I believe that Sherlock Holmes shows these qualities magnificently in the short story, "A Scandal in Bohemia," written by Sir Arthur Canon Doyle. Holmes believes that he knows much better than anyone else because of his keen intuition and ability to sense the importance of little things in a case. Holmes has good reason for this attitude, however, because he is usually right. Most men are stubborn when it comes to listening to other people's opinions. They believe that what they say is right and there couldn't possibly be another answer. They also believe that women are the easy ones to read and Holmes thinks that he can actually have the woman show him the picture without him even needing to ask. He even explains to Watson, "She showed me, as I told you she would" (16). Holmes is so arrogant and sure that his plan would work that he believes he didn't even need to tell Watson his plan before he put it into action. Ironically, in the end Holmes himself is tricked by the woman in question showing us that men shouldn't underestimate the cunning or mental capacity of a woman just because of her sex.

Women let their emotions play in effect when it comes to difficult situations. When solving a crime, a woman tries to understand the motive or reason behind why the guilty might have committed the criminal act. Men, on the other hand, don't try and go any deeper than they have to. All they seem to care about is the cold hard facts and not whether the person had a reason behind doing it. In "A Jury of Her Peers," I believe that we can see the type of understanding women have and also the coldness that men have during the investigation. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters both know that Mrs. Wright killed her husband and so do their husbands. But, while the men have already judged and sentenced her in their own minds without listening to the reasons behind why she might have done it, the women are busy trying to understand how Mrs. Wright could have done such a thing. Mrs. Hale believes if she had visited more often she could have prevented it and feels partially responsible. She is trying to see the situation from Mrs. wright's point of view. Mrs. Peters, on the other hand, relates to Mrs. Wriht because she too knows what it feels like to be alone. The two women band together to hide the evidence that could convict Mrs. Wright. Women look deeper into the soul and character of people believing that there is always a reason behind whatever act someone commits. They try to put themselves in the shoes of the other person wondering what they could do had they been in the same situation they were in. I believe that the main reason they hide the evidence is they think they could have been living the same life Mrs. Wriht was living and it could be them in jail instead of her. This is going to the idea of female solidarity and feminism. They are looking out for one another and protecting each other from the men who only want to convict and destroy them. The men are trying to retain the women's power while the women are busy taking it back.

Men and women see things differently in certain situations. They could have the same scenario placed in front of them but that does not mean they both have to agree on the outcome. Women take into account all the mitigating situations around them and consider the emotions and motives that may have been running throuh the convicts mind. Men, on the other hand, are more interested in the facts, evidence, and whether or not they fit the suspect. Both genders can come up with the same answer; however, they go about different means or arrangements. Although they may not agree on how they do it I believe the one thing they can agree on is that as long as the problem gets solved and the guilty are punished, then that's all that matters.

Response Essay #1-Revision #3 "The Murders in the Rue Morgue," by Edgar Allan Poe was a short story that definitely earned its title as "the first modern detective story." Poe gave the reader all the necessary elements to make his story both clear and comprehensible while at the same time creating a detective story that was number one in its field. The story involves a brilliant detective, a loyal assistant, a puzzling mystery, and a shocking conclusion. All of the above help to make the story interesting and suspensful for the reader. This story certainly contains all the necessary components to make it correspond to my idea of what a successful detective story should be.

Let me explain what I referred to in my opening statement as the necessary components of a detective or mystery story. First let us consider the role of the detective in the story. Detective Dupin, our main character, has keen observation skills unlike our own. He looks and sees things that we don't notice. The way Poe writes the character makes him appear to be so arrogant that Dupin believes he knows even more than the police do. He even mentions in the story about how it's the police's fault for the poor investigation of the murder. " 'we must not judge of the means.' said Dupin, 'by this shell of an examination. The Parisian police, so much extolled for acumen, are cunning, but no more.' " (14) Dupin believes that he is far superior to the police and everyone else.

Dupin doesn't work with the police directly but actually works on his own time, assissting the police when he is needed for cases that prove difficult. He is, however, in this specific case accompanied by an unknown man who narrates the story. He is the one who describes to the reader the way that Dupin is working and the methods he uses to solve the mystery. It seems that in most detective stories, there is always some type of loyal assistant to the brilliant detective. This is the average person that we readers can relate to. He is the mediator between the detective and us, making sure to explain what the detective is doing and explaining how he works. Without this person the story would be more difficult to follow and we might not understand how Dupin is able to solve the mystery and catch the killer.

The ending of the story itself is another part of detective and mystery stories that we have come to expect. These days when we read a mystery story or watch a crime show we learn that the first or most obvious suspect is never the real criminal. It's always the person that we are supposed to least suspect ot it's the person that appears to be the most innocent. In Poe's story we definitely do not get the expected type of ending. Poe definitely shocks us by revealing to us that the murderer is in fact an Ourang-Outang, an ape that escaped from a sailor and is the perpetrator behind the criminal act. In detective stories the conclusion is always supposed to shock and trick us. The creators of detective and mystery fiction want us to suspect the most obvious suspect and then completely turn the story around and make it the least likely character. This ending definitely lived up to that element of detective stories.

When I think of this story all together I didn't despise it but it wasn't my favorite piece of Poe's work. I thought that it was a clear storyline and Poe was very creative in coming up with the ending. I found the language a little hard to understand and thought that Poe could have tried to condense the beginning more. I don't believe that this story exceeded my notions of what detective fiction is. In my opinion it seemed to be a typical detective story that I found didn't really stand out in any special kind of way. It felt like it just met the rules of what detective fiction is and in my opinion it could have included an extra push to give the story that special quality that would have made it stand out in people's minds.

Response Essay #1-Revision #2 "The Murders in the Rue Morgue," by Edgar Allan Poe was a short story that definitely earned, //The Murder in the Rue Morgue,// what the critics referred to as "the first modern detective story." Poe gave us all the necessary elements to make his story both clear and comprehensible to the average reader while at the same time creating a detective story that was number one in its field. The story involves a brilliant detective, a loyal assistant, a puzzling mystery, and a shockin conclusion. All of the above help to make the story interesting and suspensful for the reader. In my opinion this story certainly contains all the necessary components to make it cprrespond to my idea of what a successful detective story should be.

Let me explain what I referred to in my opening statement as the necessary components of a detective or mystery story. First let us consider the role of the detective in the story. Detective Dupin, our main character, has keen observation skills unlike our own. He looks and sees things that we don't notice. The way Poe writes the character makes him appear to be so arrogant that Dupin believes he knows even more than the police do. He even mentions in the story about how it's the police's fault for the poor inestigation of the murder. He mentions to the narrator his feelings toward the Parisian police and their methods. "We must not judge of the means," said Dupin, "by this shell of an examination. The Parisian police, so much extolled for acumen, are cunning, but no more. There is no method in their proceedings, beyond the method of the moment." (14) Dupin believes that he is far superior then the rest of the police and outranks everyone.

Dupin doesn't work with the police directly but actually works on his own time assisting the ploice when he is needed for cases that prove difficult. He is however in this specific case accompanied by an unknown man who narrates the story. He is the one who describes to us the way that Dupin is working and the methods he uses to solve the mystery. It seems that in most detective stories, there is always some type of loyal assistant to the big important detective. This is the everyday average person that we readers can relate to. He is the translator between the detective and us making sure to explain what the detective is doing and simplifying his methods of work. Without this person the story would be mre difficult to follow and we might not understand how Dupin is able to solve the mystery and catch the killer.

The ending of the story itself is another part of detective and mystery stories that we as the reader have come to expect. These days when we read a mystery story or watch a crime show we learn that the first or most obvious suspect is never the real criminal. It's always the person that we are supposed to least suspect or it's the person that appears to be the most innocent. In Poe's story you definitely do not get the expected type of ending. Poe definitely shocks you by revealing to us that the murderer is in fact an Ourang-Outang, an ape that escaped from a sailor and is the perpetrator behind the criminal act. In detective stories the conclusion is always supposed to shock and trick the reader. The creators of detective and mystery fiction want you to suspect the most obvious suspect and then completely turn the story around and make it the least likely character. This ending definitely lived up to that element of detective stories.

When I think of this story all together I didn't despise it but it wasn't my favorite piece of Poe's work. I thought that it was a clever storyline and Poe was very creative in coming up with the ending. I found the language a little hard to understand and thought that Poe could have tried to condense the beginning more. I don't believe that this story was able to exceed my notions of what detective fiction is. In my opinion it seemed to be a typical detective story that I found didn't really stand out in any special kind of way. It felt like it just met the critiques of what detection fiction is and in my opinion it could have used an extra push to give the story that special quality that makes it stand out in people's minds.

Respnse Essay #2 Male vs Female Detectives Men and women are two cmpletely different individuals. Although we both need the same things to survive in the world when it comes to our feelings, emotions, thought process, and the way we look at things we as different as night from day. It's the same situation with male and female detectives. In class we've been reading different stories that involve both male and female detectives. We've seen the different ways that they act, think, and solve the crimes. They both have their own way of going about these cases and figuring out who the culprit is. I believe that two the two stories that each support the different ways of male and female detection would be "A Scandal in Bohemia" and "A Jury of Her Peers." I believe that these two short stories can give us a good insight into the different ways that men and women's minds work when it comes to solving mysteries. In many detective stories I find that arrogance and brilliance seem to go hand in hand with the story when the main character is a man. They are usually loners that either do private detection or assist the police when asked. They can be stubborn and outrageous when solving a mystery. I believe that Sherlock Holmes shows these qualities magnificently in the short story, "A Scandal in Bohemia," written by Sir Arthur Canon Doyle. Holmes is a big protagonist who believes that he knows much better than anyone else because of his keen intuition and ability to sense the importance of little things in a case. Holmes has good reason for these qualities though because he is usually right. Most men are stubborn when it comes to listening to other people's opinions, they believe that what they say is right and there couldn't possibly be another answer. They also believe that women are the easy one's to read and Holmes thinks that he can actually have the woman show him the picture without him even needing to ask. He even explains to Watson, "She showed me, as I told you she would." (16) Holmes was so arrogant and sure that his plan would work that he believed he didn't even need to tell Watson his plan before he put it into action. Ironically, in the end Holmes himself is tricked by the woman in question showing us that men truly shouldn't underestimate the sleuthness of a woman just because of her sex. Women see things differently then men when it comes to more emotional and sentimental ideas. When solving a crime we try to understand the motive the criminal may have had behind committing the act. We ask, "why and how come." When it comes to solving a murder we try and see the situation to why the person did it and also why this victim was chosen. Men on the other hand don't try and go any deeper then they have to all the seem to care about is the cold hard facts and not whether the person had a reason behind doing it. In "A Jury of Her Peers," I believe that we can see the type of understanding the women are trying to see and also the coldness the men have during the investigation. Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters both know that Mrs. Wright killed her husband and so do their husbands. But, while the men have already judged and sentenced her in their own minds without listening to the reasons behind why she might have done it, the women are busy trying to understand how Mrs. Wright could have done such a thing. Mrs. Hale believes if she had visited more she could have prevented it and feels partially responsible. She is trying to see the situation from Mrs. Wright's point of view. Mrs. Peters on the other hand relates to Mrs. Wright because she too knows what it feels like to be alone. The two women band together to hide the evidence that could convict Mrs. Wright. Women look deeper into the soul and character of people believing that there is always a reason behind what act someone commits. They try to see themselves in the shoes of the other person wondering what they would do had they been in the same situation they were in. I believe that the main reason they hide the evidence is because they think they could have been living the same life Mrs. Wright was living and it could be them in jail instead of her. This is going to the idea of female solidarity and feminism. They are looking out for one another and protecting each other from the men who only want to convict and destroy them. The men are trying to take their power while the women are busy taking it back. Men and women see things differently in certain situations. They could both have the same scenario placed in front of them but that doesn't mean they both have to agree on the same outcome. Women take into account all the mitigating situations around them and consider the emotions and motives that may have been running through the convicted's mind. Men on the other hand are more interested in the facts, evidence, and whether or not they fit the suspect. Both parties can come up with the same answer however, they might go about different ways of getting it. Although they may not agree on how they do it I believe the one thing they can agree on is that as long as the problem gets solved and the guilty are punished then that's all that matters.

"Murders in the Rue Morgue"-Response Essay #1 **Revised** "The Murders in the Rue Morgue," by Edgar Allan Poe was a short story that definately earned, for the author and his work, what the critics referred to as the "first modern detective story." Poe gave us all the necessary elements to make his story both clear and understanding to the average reader while at the same time creating a detective story that was number one in its field. The writing involved a brilliant detective, as loyal assistant, and a puzzling mystery with a shocking conclusion. All of the above helped to make the story interesting and suspensful for the reader. In my opinion this story certainly contained all the necessary components to make it correspond to my idea of what a successful detective story should be.

Let me explain what I referred to is my opening statement as the necessary components of a detective or mystery story. First let us consider the role of the detective in the story. Detective Dupin, our main character, has a keen observation skills unlike our own. He looks and sees things that we don't notice. The way Poe writes the character makes him appear to be so arrogant that Dupin believes he knows even more than the police due. He even mentions in the story about how it's the police's fault for the poor investifation and evidence collection of the murder. "Nothing farther of importance was elicited, although several other persons were examined. A murder so mysterious, and so perplexing in all its particulars, was never before committed in Paris-if indeed a murder has been committed at all. The police are entirely at fault-an unusual occurrence in affairs of this nature. There is not, however, the shadow of a clue apparent." (13) Poe has written Dupin to be a man that believes he is much better than everyone else, even his fellow crime solvers.

Dupin doesn't work with the police directly but actually works on his own time assisting the police when he is needed for cases that prove difficulty. He is however in this specific case followed alongside by an unknown man who narrates us through the story. He is the one who describes to us the way that Dupin is working and the methods he takes to solve the mystery. It seems that in most detective stories, there is always some type of loyal assistant to the big important detective. This is the everyday average person that us readers can relate to. He is the translator between the detective and us making sure to explain what the detective is doing and simplifying his methods of construction. Without this person the story may prove more difficult to follow and we may not understand how Dupin was able to solve the mystery and catch the killer.

The ending of the story itself is another part of detective and mystery stories that we as the reader should come to expect. These days when we read a mystery story or watch a crime show we learn that the first or most obvious suspect is never the real criminal. It's always the person that we are supposed to least suspect or it's the person that appears to be the most innocent. In Poe's story we definately do not get the expected type of ending. Poe definately shocks you by revealing to us that the murderer is in fact an Ourang-Outang. An ape that escaped from a sailor and was the mastermind behind the criminal act. In detective stories the conclusion is always supposed to shock you and even try trick you. They want you to suspect the most obvious suspect and then completely turn the story around and make it the least involved character. This ending definately lived up to that distinction of detective stories.

When I think of this story all together I didn't despise it but it wasn't my favorite piece of Poe's work. I thought that it was a clever storyline and Poe was very creative when coming up with the ending. I found the lanuage a little hard to understand and thought that in the beginning Poe could have tried to condense it more and maybe not have dragged on for a bit. However, when asking whether or not this story lived up to being known as the "first detective story" I think that it did but I don't believe that it exceeded my notions of it. It seemed to be a typical detective story that I found didn't really stand out in any special kind of way.

Response Essay #1 When reading "The Murders in the Rue Morgue," we are introduced for the first time to Detective C. Auguste Dupin. A detective living in Paris with an eye for crime solving. Throughout the story we are following the narration of an unnamed character who shares with us Dupin's method of detection and thought process. I believe that this story can be seen as the first modern detective story because it appears to have the things you need to write a proper detective story. We have our main character who is tryin to solve the case, a mystery to solve, we watch Dupin go throuh suspects, possible mostives, and we get a shocking ending when we find out who the killer really is. I liked the way it ended becauase it catches you by surprise. I believe that this story was cleverly written and does provide us as the first modern detective story. In the beginning Poe first writes about the mind of an analytical person diving into their thought process and the idea that they should be entertained by the studies of math and checkers. These are things that require intelligence, skill, and thought process. I believe that this part of the story was a little dragged out and could have been condensed a bit more. We then meet our narrator who tells us about the murder and watching Detective Dupin at work. Dupin is described to us as a man with great intelligence and a keen eye for detail of things that we might otherwise ignore. Dupin appears to be a typical arrogant detective who believes that he is smarter than the rest of the average public because of his career. He even tries to prove it by showing the narrator that he can use his detection to even find out what people are thinking. He has a way of paying attention to the little things that would seem unimportant to the rest of us. "We had been talking of horses, if I remember ariht, just before leavin the Rue C-. This was the last subject we discussed. As we crossed into this street, a fruiterer, with a large basket upon his head,brushing quickly past us, thrust you upon a pile of paving-stones collected at a spot where the causeway is undergoing repair. You stepped upon one of the loose fragments, slipped, slightly strained your ankle, appeared vexed or sulky, muttered a few words, turned to look at the pile, and then proceeded in silence. I was not particularly attentive to what you did; but observation has become with me, of late, a species of necessity." (Poe, 7) Here we have Dupin listing everything that he and the narrator did making sure to note all the little things that may seen insignificant to us. In the rest of the story we learn about the murder and Dupin decides to take it on himself and investigate. We watch him speak to the witnesses and suspects an see his method of reasoning. This story is really the beginning of the form and style for all detective stories to follow in the future. Sometimes when readin about mysteries they can become slow and predictable. This one however, keeps us guessing until the end. After, all the suspense of readin we find out that the killer is in fact an ape. This is a shocking way to end a tale, especially when you are expecting to find out that a person was the killer. I think it was a good twist. Together as a whole I believe that this story was a good pave for future detective stories along the way. It gave us the boundaries on which author's need to follow when writing. It was clever and entertaing and almost relieving when you find out who the killer truly is. At the same time it was disappointing after you get so worked up and excited thinking you were following a real killer. However, detective fiction is supposed to fool us and catch us in complete surprise. It also gave us an insight into the mind of a detective and the way that he thinks and solves crime,paving the way for future fictional detectives. That is why I believe this story is a good example of a modern detective story and that it really paved the road for the characters and storylines that we come to know and love in our time today.