In reference to Poe’s “Cask of Amontillado”, can Montressor’s revenge be justified? Why or why not ?

Question

From the story "The Cask of Amontillado" by Edagar Allen Poe. Can Montressor's revenge be justified ? Why or why not? What quote from the story can explain your answer ?

Answer 1

I agree with Marie. We first must consider not only when would murder ever be considered justified, but also the well known phrase, "Let the punishment fit the crime." Montressor notes that he endured "the thousand injuries of Fortunato...but when he ventured upon insult", he had enough. Poe never fully explains what those injuries or insults are; does the punishment of murder fit the crime of insulting someone?

Also, Montressor himself wants us to feel as if he is justified in his action. He says that we, the reader, "so well know the nature of [his] soul." If we see things from his point of view from the beginning of the story and take his side, as it were, we may feel that Fortunato got what he deserved. Montressor's own family motto states, "Nemo me impune lacessit"; no one will attack him without punishment. From his perspective, he was following the family view that when offended, you seek revenge. His family crest also shows "a huge human foot d'or, in a field azure; the foot crushes a serpent rampant whose fangs are imbedded in the heel." Again, Poe does not explain if the serpent's bite is enough to kill the human; the serpent, however, is killed by the crushing blow delivered by the foot. For Montressor, he is only living up to his family's standards.

We, however, get to decide if we agree with those standards or not.

Answer 2

In Poe's famous short story "The Cask of Amontillado", written in 1847, an aggrieved Montressor seeks revenge upon his "friend" Fortunado, who has committed a "thousand injuries" against him- - injuries that Montressor feels he must "not only punish but punish with impunity." Poe delights in twisting his audience along, deeper and deeper into the macabre murder scene... but ultimately, although Fortunado's fate is sealed, the author never reveals the final "insult" that tips Montressor into this barbaric "revenge."

Was Montressor's revenge justified? To answer this question, one must contemplate whether or not murder is ever justified. In Western society, we are usually willing to justify the taking of a life in a clear case of self-defense. If Montressor is judged by this standard, "The Cask of Amontillado" presents no such defense. Instead, we know that Montressor has experienced a significant decline in his socioeconomic status: "You are rich, respected, admired, beloved; you are happy, as once I was. You are a man to be missed. For me it is no matter", he complains bitterly. When Montressor and Fortunado discuss the freemasons, a secret society to which Fortunado belongs but from which Montressor has been excluded, we are also given to understand that the "thousand injuries" the murderer feels have been to his wallet and his pride, not his physical person.

That said, a precarious case might be made that Montressor is avenging the deaths of his loved ones. As Fortunado and Montressor descend into darkness, Montressor reflects upon his family, in the past tense, as being "great and numerous." In this context one might argue, albeit weakly, that Fortunado not only caused a decline in the family's social standing but also directly contributed to them being less "numerous" (i.e., their deaths). In this case, some might justify Montressor's actions as retribution for the murder of his relatives- - but this interpretation presents not only a strain upon the text, but also upon Western societal and judicial mores.