Vincent

= REVISION**  =

Vincent Ramkissoon Professor Gruesser

English 3221

6/17/2010

Justifying the Unjustifiable The stark contrast between the methods used by Sam Spade and the team of Martha Hale and Mrs. Peters highlight the differences that exist amid female and male detectives.Emotion, sympathy and the importance of a personal code are evident in both genders.Yet, they ways in which each sex uses these characteristics are completely different.Spade uses his attributes to make sure justice is served, while Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters use theirs to cover up a horrible crime.

The women in “A Jury of Her Peers” are sympathetic to a fault.They let a killer go free because they allow their emotions to get the best of them when Sheriff Peters and the other men make sexist jokes. Mrs. Hale, in particular, allows herself to get whipped up into an irrational frenzy because she takes the insult of Minnie’s kitchen way too personally. The leniency that both women display prove County Attorney Henderson’s assertion of “knowing juries when it comes to women” (Glaspell 173) to be correct.A jury of Mrs. Wright’s peers lets her off the hook for murder just because she is a member of “the fairer sex.”

Conversely, Spade is usually in control of his emotions in __The Maltese Falcon__.For example, even though it pains him to get punched without hitting back, he lets Lieutenant Dundy sock him in the jaw so that he can save Brigid O’Shaughnessy, Joel Cairo and himself from having to be brought in to the police station for questioning.He is able to control his anger until the cops leave.

The biggest distinction between the sleuths can be seen in their respective personal codes. The women feel that they have to stick together, protecting a fellow female from a murder charge.Their code allows them to rationalize the despicable act of hiding the evidence that they find so that they can let a killer go free.Spade bends and breaks the rules, but in the end he ultimately sticks up for what is right.He never would have let a murderer of a lawful person escape justice over a trifling matter like a dead bird.This is evident when Spade calls the cops to take away O’Shaughnessy because she killed an innocent man.He did not like Miles Archer, but Spade still brings O’Shaughnessy to justice because his code could not allow him to sit idly while the murderer of his partner goes unpunished.He would have honored his code even if his partner were a woman.Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are blinded by their code of gender loyalty.It’s highly unlikely they would have withheld evidence from the police if it were Mr. Wright who had killed Minnie just because she was, supposedly, “like a raw wind that gets to the bone” (Glaspell 170).They really are just “loyal to (their) sex” (Glaspell 163).Spade’s code is respectable, while the women’s mode is reprehensible.

The portrayal of male detectives and female detectives in these stories paint men in a more positive light.The women, contrary to the intentions of Susan Glaspell, come off as unreasonable, too emotional and sympathetic to a fault.Sam Spade, on the other hand, is everything a detective ought to be.Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters did not use their attributes of intuition, sympathy and emotion in a lawful way, while Spade used his skills to ensure that justice was served in the case of his partner’s death.

Vincent Ramkissoon

Professor Gruesser

English 3221

6/9/2010

Justifying the Unjustifiable

The stark contrast of methods used by Sam Spade and the team of Martha Hale and Mrs. Peters highlight the differences between female and male detectives.Emotion, sympathy and the importance of a personal code are evident in both genders.Yet how each sex use these characteristics are completely different.

The women in “A Jury of Her Peers” are sympathetic to a fault.They let a killer go free because they allow their emotions get the best of them when the sheriff and his buddies made sexist jokes.In doing so, they prove the men right when they said that a jury would go much easier on a woman.

Conversely, Spade is usually in control of his emotions in __The Maltese Falcon__.For example, even though it pains him to get punched without hitting back, he lets the officer sock him in the jaw so that he can save O’Shaughnessy, Cairo and himself from having to be brought in to the police station for questioning.He is able to control his anger until the cops leave.

The biggest distinction between the sleuths can be seen in their respective personal codes. The women feel that they have to stick together, protecting a fellow female from a murder charge.Their code allows them to rationalize the reprehensible act of hiding the evidence that they find so that they can let a killer go free.Spade bends and breaks the rules, but in the end he ultimately sticks up for what was right.He never would have let a killer escape justice over a trifling matter like a dead bird, even if the lawful, deceased victim was, supposedly, “like a raw wind that gets to the bone” (Glaspell 170).Spade even turns his love interest over to the cops because she killed an innocent man.

The portrayal of male detectives and female detectives in these stories paint men in a more positive light.The women, contrary to the intentions of Susan Glaspell, come off as unreasonable, too emotional and sympathetic to a fault.Sam Spade on the other hand is everything a detective ought to be.Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters did not use their attributes of intuition, sympathy and emotion in a lawful way, while Spade used his skills to ensure that justice was served in his partner’s death.

Vincent Ramkissoon

Professor Gruesser

English 3221

6/1/2010

The First, But Not the Best Edgar Allan Poe’s ”The Murders in the Rue Morgue” fell short of my expectations of what a piece of detective fiction should be.The “mind-reading” episode, as well as the fact that there really wasn’t a murderer in the story since an animal was responsible for the dead bodies left a lot to be desired.Still, considering that this was the first modern detective story, I would still recommend the story to others since it marked the birth of an entire literary genre.

The “mind-reading” portion of the tale went on way too long.I understand that back in the 1800s, there were no TVs, organized sports leagues, web sites or any of the various things that keep people’s attention nowadays.Chances are, people enjoyed reading detailed descriptions in novels as a form of leisure.But, for a north-easterner living in 2010, I want to get to the point instead of sifting through endlessly detailed sentences like “you kept your eyes upon the ground glancing, with a petulant expression, at the holes and ruts in the pavement (so that I saw you were still thinking of the stones), until we reached the little ally called Lamartine, which has been paved, by way of experiment, with the overlapping and riveted blocks (p. 7).”The entire part of the story could have been paired down considerably, while still preserving it’s purpose, which was to show that Dupin is really perceptive.

The conclusion of the story only added to my frustration.How on earth was the reader supposed to even fathom that an orangutan could possibly be the killer?It seems like the entire incident was used to show just how much smarter Poe was than the readers.If this story were to be made into a movie today, it would have to be a comedy.The only ending that would seem more improbable would be if Dupin concluded that an alien teleported himself into the room and killed the women.

Overall, I still feel that anyone that enjoys fiction should read “The Murders in the Rue Morgue.”Major detective story characteristics like the importance of paying attention to minute details and deductive reasoning are first seen in this tale.It should be read much in the same way that anyone looking to get into comedy should study both Bill Cosby and Richard Pryor.A comedian in training may prefer Pryor’s vulgarity over the relatively mild style of Cosby, yet he can still learn from both of them.