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, climax, 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