Characters of The Imp of The Perverse:
The Imp of the Perverse is a gothic horror story whose protagonist is an unnamed narrator who follows the first-person unreliable narrative style to tell the story. He begins the story as a rational essay discussing and describing the impulse or urge that is common in all men to do or act wrongfully just because they know that it can be done. He begins his confessional story as a formal academic essay trying to describe his psychology and motives behind what and why he did. He argues that we all have a guiding force in our consciousness which he terms ‘the imp of the perverse’ that is responsible for irrational decisions that stand in direct opposition to one’s own self-interest. He says the same impulse made him confess his personal account of a long-planned and perfectly executed murder.
The victim is a close relative of the narrator as he gets all the property of the deceased as an inheritance, after his death. The narrator once read an account of the mysterious near-fatal experience of Madame Pilau who barely survived the accidental poisoning of a candle. The narrator got the idea of how to carry out a perfect murder through the experience of Madame Pilau. Since he was close to the victim and knew all his habits, including the fact that the victim was an avid reader who used to read in bed before going to sleep. He poisoned the candle that the victim used to light for reading before sleep.
Summary of The Imp of The Perverse:
The story begins as the unnamed narrator offers a detailed and highly erudite analysis of the flaws of Phrenology, a pseudoscience that was popular during the era of Poe. The narrator complains that the science of Phrenology fails to explore and explain the universal existence of perversity in the human species. He then says that it is not just about this urge or impulse of perversity, rather, Phrenology, or the “science” of predicting mental traits based on skull shape ignores any such universal impulse. He says that Phrenology fails to account for these impulses because of an inherent flaw in its philosophy which suggests that all impulses are attributed to God and the Phrenologists assume that they know what God’s intentions are. Thus, the practitioners of Phrenology try to describe humanity’s instincts using reason alone, rather than observing them scientifically via lively experience. The narrator then offers an example and says that Phrenology suggests that we eat because God has made us that way. He accuses practitioners of Phrenology of never trying to explore why humans eat or examine the objective data that could suggest a scientific cause for eating. They simply attribute to God the impulse to eat. Similarly, Phrenologists often attribute other impulses like the urge to procreate as an attribute to God without trying to explore why humans are inclined to procreate. The narrator then claims that if all impulses are attributed to God, then it means that there is no free will, and if everything is designed by God, then there cannot be any evil. It would mean “deducing and establishing everything from the preconceived destiny of man, and upon the ground of the objects of his Creator.” The narrator doesn’t agree with it though. He says that it is impossible to understand God and thus, it is also impossible to understand God’s intentions. Thus, we should examine our actions in and of themselves rather than attributing them to God.
The narrator then discusses the specific impulse he strongly felt by himself and that is the impulse of ‘perverseness.’ He says that this impulse forces people to do what they “should not.” The victim knows that it would be harmful to act in a certain way, yet he is impelled to act in exactly the same way because it appears instinctual and “irresistible.” The narrator then asks the reader to examine themselves and they will find this impulse in them too. He then names this impulse the Imp of The Perverse.
The narrator claims that he is himself one of the “many uncounted victims of the Imp of the Perverse.” The narrator then offers a detailed confession of how he planned a murder for months before committing it. A thousand different plans were considered and rejected before settling upon inspiration discovered in an account of a woman who had nearly been killed by accidental candle poisoning. He mentions that he read about Madam Pilau who suffered an accidental death-like experience because of a poisoned candle. This information allowed the narrator to think of a perfect plan to kill a man he knew very well. The narrator was fully aware of the habit of his intended victim to read in bed inside his narrow and badly ventilated apartment. He thought that if a poisoned candle is used by the intended victim for reading before sleeping, the poisoned smoke will kill him and then gradually will vanish, leaving no evidence of the murder. The narrator then executed his plan and replaced the candle used by the intended victim with a poisoned candle. As expected, the intended victim died and after a thorough examination, nobody could explain his death. Thus, the coroner declared the victim dead “by the visitation of God.”
After the victim’s death, the narrator got all his estate as inheritance and he enjoyed the wealth for many years. However, more than wealth, he enjoyed the sheer thrill of triumph as he realized how easily he got away with the murder without even a fear of being caught anyhow. He says “It is inconceivable how rich a sentiment of satisfaction” he gains whenever he thinks about getting away with it.
As time continued to pass, the narrator too continued to feel safer. Yet, he kept conceptualizing every day if there is any possibility of him being caught for the murder he committed. He often thought, “I am safe.” But why continue to tell yourself that you are safe if you really believe you are safe? One day, while thinking all over it again, the narrator convinced himself that he is safe and, of course, he will remain safe unless he confesses his own crime because there is no other evidence for his crime except his own self. Thus, he will remain safe because to confess without suspicion would be foolish. As this thought comes to the narrator’s mind, he gets frightened as he knows how the Imp of the Perversion overpowers him and compels him to do what he should not. He promises himself never to repeat the thought of the crime while asserting that he is safe. However, the Imp of the Perversion has already taken his move. The narrator continues to mutter that he is safe and starts walking faster and faster and eventually begins running, fighting “a maddening desire to shriek aloud.” His actions draw a crowd, which begins to pursue him, and he “felt then the consummation of my fate.” His desperation to avoid confessing leads him to wish he could tear out his own tongue. He faced the quagmire as he didn’t wish to confess but the Imp of the Perversion was forcing him to confess. As he tried to cut his own tongue through his teeth, a force, which the narrator termed ‘an invisible fiend’, strikes him on the back of his neck. He felt as if he got unconscious right then as he remembers nothing of what happened next. Yet, the other people, who are the witnesses of his confession, say that he spoke clearly and emphatically as he made a passionate confession, speaking so breathlessly that it appeared as though he feared the impact of having been interrupted. He gave all accounts of his crime in detail and then, they say, he fainted dead away and eventually wound up sitting in the prison cell, fettered in chains for one last day until he is marched to his execution tomorrow.
So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of American English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards!
No comments:
Post a Comment