Essay Theme Analysis of Killings by Andre Dubus

Richard’s character is automatically negative after this moment. The murder description is also important because it is another justification that could be used for Matt’s

Both men tend to work late nights; Trottier was a bartender, so Fowler meeting with him after hours was an easy alibi. The hardest part was getting Strout to a secluded place, which they were able to do by conning him at first, saying they had bought him a plane ticket and wanted him out of their lives so that everyone could move on. After leaving Strout's car at an apartment building in Boston, they lead Strout to a pre-dug hole in a wooded area where Fowler kills him. “The gun kicked in Matt’s hand, and the explosion of the shot surrounded him…Richard Strout, squirming on his belly pushed himself towards the woods. Then Matt went to him and shot him once in the back of the head (106).”

By analyzing the conflicts of stories help readers understand why the specific characters act certain ways. We better comprehend the characters’ personality and why the flaws of other character affect the main character. Are main characters’ problems the result of other characters’ personality flaws? Characters endure arduous situations and it is because of another character’s flaw. Being possessiveness, overly critical, and controlling of others are the reason for main characters problems.

The way the plot of Killings by Andre Dubus is arranged changes how the reader sees the characters in the story. This plot starts out in the present, then goes into the past, then back to the present. There are two main characters, and three secondary characters in this story. The way the reader views all of these characters is affected by the plot arrangement. The two primary characters who are most important to the plot, and also most affected by the plot arrangement, are Matt Fowler and Richard Strout. Because the first thing the reader reads in the exposition of the story is “On the August morning when Matt Fowler buried his youngest son, Frank, who had lived for twenty-one years, eight months, and four days…” pg 93, and not Richard Strout’s backstory and reasoning for his actions, they are immediately persuaded by the author to feel sympathy towards Matt. The author needs the reader to feel this sympathy so that when Matt kills Strout at the climax of the plot, Matt is not viewed as the antagonist of the story, but rather as the protagonist. The author needs the reader to view Strout as the antagonist so that the reader does not dislike Matt, and so that the story is one of justified revenge and not just another murder. If the reader had been presented with the plot in chronological order, with Strout’s backstory and reasoning for killing Frank first, then the reader might almost feel bad for Strout. If seen like this, one might conclude that, while he did not take

After leaving Strout's car at an apartment building in Boston, they lead Strout to a pre-dug hole in a wooded area where Fowler kills him. “The gun kicked in Matt’s hand, and the explosion of the shot surrounded him…Richard Strout, squirming on his belly pushed himself towards the woods. Then Matt went to him and shot him once in the back of the head (106).”

With the name “Killings” Dubus has already started his statement about these specific murders. If he were to use a phrase such as murders for the title, there would be an instant empathy towards the victim. Although he wants you to feel a little empathy towards Frank, I believe Dubus’s main point was to show the futility of enacting revenge. Throughout the whole story there is a motif of revenge that is masked behind the word justice. Since the earliest days of written record, there has been a philosophy, which has no become just a proverb, which stated, “An eye for an eye.” The whole idea behind this philosophy was that whenever a crime was enacted, the exact same crime was to be enacted upon the guilty party. As in the title exampled, if person A poked out person B’s eye, person A would have his eye removed. That idea of revenge is prevalent in this story. Rather than let what society has deemed justice, take it’s course, Matt decided that he could not wait any longer. Together with his friend Willis Trottier, Matt thought out a well calculated plan for murder.

Andre Dubus is a published author who proudly spent five years in the Marines before becoming a full time author. In his short story “Killings” he talks about a father who’s son is murdered and what he goes through to get revenge on the murderer. Matt Fowler, is the father in this story, he loses his son to a murder one night while his son is still young. The father and mother have to bury their only son and with him they bury their love, compassion, and care. After the murder of their son the family grows distant and apart from each other.

Mattie does not beat around the bush when it comes to justice. She has a fixed view on how law should be carried out against Tom Chaney and stops at nothing to achieve this. Put simply, Mattie wants him dead, and she wants him to know that he is dying as a result of him killing her father. This view and interpretation of justice closely resembles the “eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth” philosophy of the Code of Hammurabi where the life of Tom Chaney must be payed for

Matt’s unique intelligence has created a universal theme of choices which is proven with his outstanding achievements in his life are a choice he made that differed from El Patron’s life choices, his inherent kindness and mortality was a choice that blocked him from seeing the choices El Patron made, and how his lust for power was a choice he made when he made Maria kiss him at the birthday party which later made his lust grow. In conclusion, Matt’s unique intelligence is proven throughout the story to establish him as a main character in the story, creates conflict over the course of the text, and develops a theme of: his supernatural intelligence and

Plot is defined as, "the authors arrangement of incidents in a story it is the organizing principle that controls the controls the order of events (Meyer,64)." The element of plot is heavily relied on in the short story, "The Killings" by Andre Dubus. The plot which is completely made inside the imagination of an author (Meyer,64), gives the audience important insight to people, places, and events in the story (Meyer,64) . "The Killings" provides a somewhat conventional plot pattern, where the character is confronted with a problem and is then led into a climax, which late leads to the resolution of the story (Meyer,65). The conventional plot is easy to follow and serves as a basis for movies and other

Matt is a middle class man who becomes obsessed with the need to get revenge on his son’s death. His son Frank is killed by a man named Richard. He is the husband and dads father of the women his son is in love with. This is what leads Matt into killing someone he wants pay back for his son death. Matt kills because he loves.

Even though Carl feels responsible for the death of skips son, he strives to prove to himself and everyone else that he is not like the Matts through his words and his actions as the text recalls “Skip knew men well enough... saw what he hadn’t thought to see in a matt ‘tomorrow then Carl’” Skip is surprised by carls actions especially because he is a matt and he thinks all the matts act in the same stereotypical way as the text says “saw what he hadn’t expected to see in a matt” and skip now refers to carl as ‘carl’ now instead of ‘matt’ showing that he has gained respect for carl and he is being successful at changing his ways. Through Carl’s actions and words he and everyone else learns that Carl can mould his personality into anything he wants and can break the “curse of the matts” if he

Soon after being deserted on the road, grandfather comes down with a summer grippe and becomes helpless. Mattie then needs to take care of them both by finding food and water. This shows responsibility because she not only had to take care of herself, but of her grandfather too with no help from anyone, and no one to tell her what to do.

‘Stop that.’” When the reader is reading the quote they feel sympathy for Matt and a bit upset with Celia for being so strict for not taking him and being so harsh. Finally, when Matt is being hunted down, his friend María is helping him, they say, “‘What am I supposed to do?’ Matt said. He felt drained of willpower.

While in neither the film nor short story does Ruth outwardly express her desire for the death of Richard, within the film, one is able to glimpse into the inner workings of Matt’s mind, understanding the emotional manipulation, brought on by his wife, he endures. Matt describes how Ruth has “concrete objections which he trie[s] to overcome” and “in his intent to do this[,] he neglect[s] his own objects” (1127); here, Dubus is indirectly telling readers this is the foundation Ruth has previously built in her marriage, allowing her to manipulate Matt into carrying out tasks, or specifically “it” (1136). Furthermore, several times in the short story, Matt convinces himself that “he [is] certain that [Ruth knows and] she [is] waiting for him” for “she knows” (Dubus 1125, 1134). In Field’s adaptation, one can see the change in behavior and demeanor both Matt and Ruth undergo, driving Matt to commit a seemingly inevitable killing. Several times in the film, the camera focuses on Matt and then quickly switches to a smash cut, implying disruption and cacophony follow Matt; however,