In order to
determine the pieces of the story line for any story, you must be able to identify the main
conflict. In this story, the conflict is between the lawyer and
the banker. It is, the bet they make concerning the more humane choice: capital punishment or
life imprisonment. In order to settle the bet, the lawyer agrees to voluntary imprisonment for
15 years. The questions the reader should be asking are: "Who will win? Will the lawyer
last the full 15 years? What will happen as a result?" These questions lead to the
understanding of the rising action, , falling action, and resolution.
The
rising action of a story is the events and complications that lead
to the climax. In this story, it is the details of the lawyers imprisonment. Notice how things
start off relatively easy (and in fact, seem positive). As the story progresses however, the
lawyer gets mentally and physically weaker. This story actually has an
anti-climax, which is when the banker (who has lost all of his
money in the 15 years) decides he will kill his prisoner in order to avoid serious debt. The
actual climax, however, is when the banker finds the lawyer in his cell with a note before him,
announcing his intentions to leave just before his imprisonment is scheduled to end, therefore
forfeiting his winning of the bet.
The falling
action includes the banker hiding the note in a safe, his hatred of himself, and
the empty prison cell the next morning. The resolution to the
actual conflict in this story is somewhat left to the reader. Who actually won? It turns out
the lawyer lasted the full fifteen years (save 5 minutes), but in the end
decides it would have been better to die than to endure it. The banker is released from the
debt he should owe the lawyer, but is left with a sense of guilt, defeat,
and self-hatred. So who really won?
No comments:
Post a Comment