1 DURÁN

LITERATURE: SHORT STORIES

THE THING AROUND YOUR NECK — C. N. ADICHIE (1977-)
AUTHOR
Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, (born September 15, 1977, Enugu, Nigeria), Nigerian author whose work
drew extensively on the Biafran War in Nigeria during the late 1960s.

Early in life Adichie, the fifth of six children, moved with her parents to Nsukka, Nigeria. Her father
worked as a professor of statistics in the university town of Nsukka. A voracious reader from a young
age, she found Things Fall Apart by novelist and fellow Igbo Chinua Achebe transformative. After
studying medicine for a time in Nsukka, in 1997 she left for the United States, where she studied
communication and political science at Eastern Connecticut State University (B.A., 2001). Splitting her
time between Nigeria and the United States, she received a master’s degree in creative writing from
Johns Hopkins University and studied African history at Yale University.

After initially writing poetry and one play, For Love of Biafra (1998), she had several short stories
published in literary journals, winning various competition prizes. Her novels are set before and during
the political turmoil of 1960s Nigeria (Biafran War).

Adichie’s third book, The Thing Around Your Neck (2009), is a collection of 12 stories that explore the
relationships between men, women, parents and children, Africa and the United States.

Adichie’s TED talk The Danger of a Single Story discusses how stereotypes exist all around the world. We
read books and see movies that naturalize certain stereotypes around race and gender. Literature
depicts white and black people in particular ways, Americans and Africans, men and women, eventually
normalizing certain characteristics. As a result, we become victims to the “single story”. The short story
The Thing Around Your Neck explores these stereotypes and misconceptions and the negative effects
they have on Akunna’s experience in America. Her expectations for this country are very high, however
she realizes that is not at all like she was told and taught back home, affecting her ability to adapt to
America. “The single story” also affects how others see Akunna, further marginalizing her and making it
difficult for her to adapt.

SUMMARY
1: The narrator, Akunna, says she thought that everyone in America had a car and a gun. She wins the
visa “lottery,” and her family members tell her that she’ll soon have a big car and a house, but not to
buy a gun. They gather to say goodbye and ask her to send them purses and perfumes.

Akunna’s uncle picks her up from the airport. He buys her a hot dog and takes her to his house in Maine.
He enrols her in community college and helps her apply for a cashier job, and says that his wife has to
drive an hour to find a salon that does black hair. When the girls at the community college ask Akunna
about her hair and how she speaks English so well, her uncle says to expect treatment like that. America
is give-and-take; it provides opportunities but you give up a lot to get them.

One day, Akunna’s uncle comes into the basement, grabs her buttocks, and sits on her bed. He says that
all the smart girls let men like him “help” them. Akunna locks herself in the bathroom until he leaves and
gets on a Greyhound bus the next morning.

The last bus stop is a small town in Connecticut. Akunna enters a restaurant and asks the manager for
work, saying she’ll work for less than the other waitresses. He hires her, under the table, for a dollar
less, because “all immigrants work hard.” Akunna tries to continue studying at the library since she can’t
afford to attend classes. She thinks of home and her friends’ envy that Akunna won the American visa
lottery, and sends money home to her family every month without an accompanying letter.
2 DURÁN

After a few months, Akunna wants to write to her family and friends about the openness of the
Americans and how the poor Americans are fat while the rich are thin. She can’t afford to send the
requested purses and perfumes, though, so she doesn’t send letters. At night, Akunna feels invisible and
tries to walk through her walls, and when she’s about to fall asleep she feels like something wraps itself
around her neck and almost chokes her.

At the restaurant, customers ask Akunna if she’s from Jamaica. One day, a boy asks what African country
she’s from, and then asks if she’s Yoruba or Igbo. Akunna thinks he must be a professor, but he says he’s
travelled in Africa and enjoys studying sub-Saharan Africa. Akunna tries to show disdain to the boy
because she believes white people are all condescending.

The boy shows up at the restaurant for the next few days and tries to talk to Akunna about Lagos. He
tells her about his travels to Bombay and how he likes to visit the “real people” in the shantytowns
rather than doing tourist activities. That night, he’s waiting outside for Akunna after her shift, and he
asks her out. He tells her he’s a senior at the university and gives his age. When Akunna asks why he
hasn’t graduated yet at his age, he says he left school to travel and find himself. Akunna thinks she
didn’t know that people could choose to not attend school. She tells him no for four days. On the fifth
day, he’s not waiting for Akunna after work. When he finally shows up, she says she’d love to go out
with him. He takes her to Chang’s and her fortune cookie fortune is blank.

Akunna feels that she and the boy are becoming close when she tells him that she never roots for white
men on Jeopardy. She tells him about the time her father hit a Big Man’s car in rainy Lagos traffic and
laid out in the road in shame. The Big Man’s driver eventually let her father go, and Akunna told her
father that he looked like shit. The boy grabs Akunna’s hand and says he understands, but Akunna feels
annoyed and says there’s nothing to understand.

The boy finds an African store and drives Akunna there. The storeowner asks the boy if he’s African, and
the boy says he is, and then is pleased he fooled the owner. Akunna cooks onugbu soup and the boy
vomits later. Akunna doesn’t mind, because the boy is vegetarian, and now she can put meat in the
soup. She doesn’t tell the boy that her mother cooks with cubes that are pure MSG, because the boy
believes MSG causes cancer.

At Chang’s one night, the boy tells the waiter he speaks some Mandarin. The waiter asks the boy if he
has a girlfriend in Shanghai, and Akunna loses her appetite when the boy says nothing. She doesn’t
enjoy sex later and finally tells the boy that she’s hurt that he didn’t correct the waiter at Chang’s. He
apologizes, but Akunna realizes he doesn’t understand.

The boy buys Akunna gifts, and Akunna finally tells him to stop buying her things that aren’t useful.
Akunna keeps the gifts of clothes and shoes to give to her family. The boy offers to fly both of them to
Nigeria, but Akunna doesn’t want him to be able to check Nigeria off his list of countries he’s visited.
Akunna confronts him about his belief that the poor people of a country are the “real” people of a
country, and asks if he’s a real American since he’s not poor. They make up later, and the thing around
Akunna’s neck starts to loosen.

Akunna knows that her relationship with the boy seems abnormal to many people, but the boy’s
parents make everything seem normal when they go to dinner one night. Akunna doesn’t understand
why the boy is so stiff, and feels thankful that they don’t treat her like she’s exotic. The boy tells her
later that his parents ration their love, and they’d love him better if he agreed to go to law school.
Akunna is angry and thinks of two weeks ago when he’d refused to take Akunna on a trip to Canada with
his parents. Akunna cries in the shower and doesn’t know why.

Akunna writes home and receives a letter that her father died five months ago. Her family had used the
money from Akunna to give him a good funeral. Akunna curls up in bed and thinks of her father. The boy
holds her and offers to fly them both to Nigeria. Akunna insists on going alone, and the boy asks if she’ll
“come back.” Akunna mentions that she has to return in a year to maintain her green card. The boy
drops her off at the airport and Akunna hugs him tightly before letting go.
3 DURÁN

2: The Thing Around Your Neck is a short story within the namesake short-story collection in which a
young woman named Akunna wins the “American visa lottery” and goes to live with her uncle in Maine;
but he molests her and she ends up working as a waitress in Connecticut with a poorly paid job. She
doesn’t write to her family back in Nigeria because she doesn’t know how to explain the lack of gifts she
had promised her relatives. Later, when she starts dating a rich young white man, she still has a hard
time believing in the sincerity of her man’s love. Her own insecurities and the racial and class differences
between them threaten to drive them apart. When news come from home that her father died five
months earlier, she has to return to Nigeria.

PLOT
SITUATION/DATUM (EXPOSITION)  Akunna wins the American visa lottery so she moves from Lagos
to the United States and goes to live with her uncle in Maine. She feels at home at first, as they cook
traditional Nigerian food and talk in their native language.

COMPLICATION (RISING ACTION)  One night, Akunna’s uncle goes to the basement where she is
sleeping and tries to force himself on her. The morning after, she leaves the house and ends up in
Connecticut, where she has to manage by herself. She finds a poorly paid job as a waitress and, while
working there, meets a guy who eventually becomes her boyfriend. They experience difficulties due to
their racial/cultural and background/socio-economic differences.

CLIMAX  After a fight with her boyfriend and filled with distress, Akunna finally decides to send a
letter home. Her mother replies immediately, informing her about her father’s demise 5 months before.

OUTCOME (FALLING ACTION)  Akunna decides to return to Nigeria. Her boyfriend offers to go with
her, but she refuses. He asks her if she’s coming back to him, and she replies that her green card would
expire if she doesn’t come back in a year. Her boyfriend drives her to the airport, they hug and then she
lets go. There is an open ending since we don’t know if Akunna will return to the US or not (it could be
inferred that, although she is not sure at the moment, she might eventually come back but might not
continue her relationship with her boyfriend).

CHARACTERS
AKUNNA (ROUND CHARACTER)  Young woman from a struggling family in Lagos who immigrates to
America after “winning the visa lottery.” She’s very independent and refuses her uncle’s sexual
advances, instead taking a job in a restaurant to support herself. She finds that most Americans are
condescending and know nothing about Africa, and she similarly becomes disillusioned with her
American boyfriend. Akunna sends money to her parents monthly, though she doesn’t write letters to
tell them about how strange America is. She is the only fully developed character throughout the story
while the rest act as an excuse to show how she is and everything that happens to her.

THE BOYFRIEND (FLAT CHARACTER)  Akunna’s boyfriend, we don’t know his name. He is well-off and
likes to travel. Akunna wants to feel disdain towards him at first but freaks out when one day he is not
there and agrees to date him. He appears knowledgeable about the world and about Africa but
ultimately doesn’t fully understand Akunna’s internal struggles due to their starkly different
backgrounds and life experiences.

JUAN, THE MANAGER (FLAT CHARACTER)  Manager of the restaurant in Connecticut that hires
Akunna for a dollar less since “all immigrants worked hard.”

AKUNNA’S UNCLE (FLAT CHARACTER)  Near-distant relative by marriage, and not blood related to
Akunna. He works for a company “desperately trying to look diverse” which “included a photo of him in
every brochure.” He is abusive and tries to force himself on Akunna.

AKUNNA’S BOYFRIEND PARENTS (FLAT CHARACTERS)  They seem nice and don’t treat Akunna like
she is exotic. Akunna is instead surprised by her boyfriend’s coldness towards them, which he justifies
4 DURÁN

by explaining that they only dole out affection when he complies with their wishes. This angers Akunna,
who doesn’t understand his disdain for the things he already possesses.

PLACE OR SETTING
The story starts in Lagos, Nigeria, where the main character lives with her family. She then immigrates to
the US and starts living with her uncle in his 30-year-old house, located by a lake in a small town in
Maine. Later, she moves to another little town in Connecticut where she rents a tiny room. At the end,
she flies back to Lagos.

Although there’s no direct reference to the specific period in which the story takes place, it’s safe to
assume it’s probably around the late 1990’s or early 2000’s. This time frame can be inferred by small
details in the story, such as the reference to the fight against AIDS in Botswana, started in the late
1980’s and to the movie The Lion King, released in 1994. We can also deduce that the story happens
before the second half of the 2000’s since Akunna communicates with her family through letters, which
indicates that the internet is probably not a common tool during the time the narrative is set.

MOOD AND ATMOSPHERE

The mood/atmosphere is tense and uncertain. From the very beginning, we can feel a discomfort
coming from Akunna and, throughout the story, it’s evident that she is not fully comfortable living in the
US. Akunna struggles with many things, so the mood is bitter, pessimistic and gloomy. There’s also an
atmosphere of overwhelming loneliness and depression. Akunna has some people around her that offer
their help but ultimately, she feels alone.

SYMBOLS

THE THING AROUND YOUR NECK  The title of the story creates an expectation of unpleasantness
from the very beginning. Although it’s never completely revealed what this “thing” is, we can see it as a
metaphor for the anxiety and isolation which Akunna has to deal with in America, mostly because of her
difficulty in connecting with her new environment. Akunna is gripped by fear, she feels lonely and is
constantly thinking about how different she is. The first appearance of “the thing” happens at the top of
the character’s depersonalization. She is a shadow of a being in the US, with no one close to her or
caring about her. After becoming somewhat comfortable with her situation, she starts to regain her
personality and “the thing” starts to loosen, showing it’s not so harmful or paralyzing anymore.

THE FORTUNE COOKIE  Akunna gets two blank strips of paper when she opens her fortune cookie at
Chang’s, which symbolizes her life at that point.

THE BROWN ENVELOPES  They represent secrecy and shame. Parents used them to bribe their kids’
teachers back in Lagos and Akunna ends up using the same type of envelopes to send money to her
family.

USELESS PRESENTS  The cultural gap between Africa and the US.

BIG CARS, BIG HOUSES AND GUNS  How Africans see life in the US.

THEMES
THE AMERICAN DREAM  Akunna’s family members in Nigeria are absolutely thrilled that she won the
“visa lottery” and gets to go to America. Upon her departure they celebrate that she’ll soon have a big
house and a big car. Once in America, however, she finds these dreams to be unrealistic and
unattainable. Disillusionment at the realities of life in America touches most of the characters in the
book as they grapple with being immigrants and navigate the difficulties that the American government,
as well as their American neighbours, put them through.

IMMIGRATION  As said in the story, life as an immigrant is give-and-take. The author depicts the
struggle of Nigerian immigrants in the heart of America and their strife for identity and selfhood.
5 DURÁN

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES  The cultural differences between Nigeria and America make Akunna
experience culture shock, both in her interactions with her customers, as well as in her interactions with
her boyfriend. She finds it difficult to understand and adjust to her new environment, where so many
things are different.

SELF-DISCRIMINATION  Akunna is suspicious and untrusting all the time. Because of her background,
she doesn’t believe that her boyfriend can love her and thinks that something is wrong. She doesn’t let
herself enjoy life and see the beautiful things it can offer.

CLOSE-MINDEDNESS  The story depicts the issue of close-mindedness as a two-way street, as the
author not only shows how Africans/Black people feel about the stereotypes and preconceptions
against them but also how they see and stereotype others.

STYLE
The story is written in a neutral style. The narrative uses contractions, and the tone is casual and
conversational, creating the impression of a dialogue or a confession. For instance, “You didn’t mind,
though, because now you would be able to cook onugbu soup with meat.” The use of the second-person
point of view and the conversational style of language contribute to immerse the reader in the story.

The dialogue is mostly conveyed through indirect speech, for instance: “They asked where you learned
to speak English and if you had real houses back in Africa.” Occasionally direct speech is used, mostly to
illustrate a point. For instance: “Does it stand up or fall down when you take out the braids? They
wanted to know. All of it stands up? How? Why? Do you use a comb?” The direct speech, in this case, is
used to highlight the large number of intrusive questions and how much they annoy Akunna.

The narrative also contains several words in Igbo, which give local colour to the story. For instance,
“onugbu soup” and “garri”, which describe African dishes.

The story also mentions a lot of details and events about Akunna’s previous and current life. The author
tries to cover many things and topics, which is not usual and sort of goes against one of the main
principles of the theory of short stories since they are not supposed to contain too much detail.

POINT OF VIEW
SECOND PERSON (LIMITED)  Uncommon/atypical narrator. The second-person point of view uses the
pronoun “you” to make the audience a character in the story. This increases the reader’s immersion and
empathy with the main character, Akunna. The story is, in fact, told from Akunna’s perspective, so the
narrator is limited. In order to give readers a more accurate perception of Akunna’s experience, her
thoughts and feelings are often expressed directly in the narrative.

THE BOOGEYMAN — STEPHEN KING (1947-)

AUTHOR
Stephen Edwin King (born September 21, 1947) is an American author of horror, supernatural fiction,
suspense, crime, science-fiction, and fantasy novels. His books have sold more than 350 million copies,
and many have been adapted into films, television series, miniseries, and comic books. King has
published 63 novels, including seven under the pen name Richard Bachman, and five non-fiction books.
He has also written approximately 200 short stories, most of which have been published in book
collections. He has been described as the “King of Horror”, a play on his surname and a reference to his
high standing in pop culture.
6 DURÁN

Stephen Edwin King was born in Portland, Maine, on September 21, 1947. His father, Donald Edwin King,
was a merchant seaman who was born with the surname Pollock but changed it to King as an adult.
King’s mother was Nellie Ruth King (née Pillsbury). His parents were married in Scarborough, Maine, on
July 23, 1939. Shortly afterwards, they lived with Donald’s family in Chicago before moving to Croton-
on-Hudson, New York. King’s parents returned to Maine towards the end of World War II, living in a
modest house in Scarborough. When King was two years old, his father left the family. His mother raised
him and his older brother David by herself, sometimes under great financial strain.

As a child, King apparently witnessed one of his friends being struck and killed by a train, though he has
no memory of the event. His family told him that after leaving home to play with the boy, King returned
speechlessly and seemingly in shock. Only later did the family learn of the friend’s death. Some
commentators have suggested that this event may have psychologically inspired some of King’s darker
works, but King makes no mention of it in his memoir On Writing (2000).

He related in detail his primary inspiration for writing horror fiction in his non-fiction Danse Macabre
(1981). That inspiration occurred while browsing through an attic with his elder brother, when King
uncovered a paperback version of an H. P. Lovecraft collection of short stories he remembers as The
Lurker in the Shadows, that had belonged to his father. King told Barnes & Noble Studios during a 2009
interview, “I knew that I'd found home when I read that book.”

King attended Durham Elementary School and graduated from Lisbon Falls High School in Lisbon Falls,
Maine, in 1966.He displayed an early interest in horror as an avid reader of EC horror comics, including
Tales from the Crypt, and he later paid tribute to the comics in his screenplay for Creepshow. He began
writing for fun while still in school, contributing articles to Dave’s Rag, the newspaper his brother
published with a mimeograph machine, and later began selling stories to his friends based on movies he
had seen (he was forced to return the profits when discovered by teachers.) The first of his stories to be
independently published was I Was a Teenage Grave Robber, which was serialized over four issues
(three published and one unpublished) of a fanzine, Comics Review, in 1965. That story was published
the following year in a revised form as In a Half-World of Terror in another fanzine, Stories of Suspense,
edited by Marv Wolfman. As a teen, King also won a Scholastic Art and Writing Award.

King sold his first professional short story, The Glass Floor, to Startling Mystery Stories in 1967.

After graduating from the University of Maine, King earned a certificate to teach high school but, unable
to find a teaching post immediately, he initially supplemented his labouring wage by selling short stories
to men’s magazines such as Cavalier. Many of these early stories have been republished in the collection
Night Shift, Stephen King’s first collection of short stories, first published in 1978. The Boogeyman is one
of those short stories, first published in the March 1973 issue of the magazine Cavalier, and later
collected in Night Shift.

He is also author of very popular horror novels and stories like Carrie (1974), The Shining (1977) and IT
(1986).

SUMMARY
The short story The Boogeyman by Stephen King opens with the main character, Lester Billings, telling a
psychiatrist, Dr. Harper, that he is responsible for the deaths of his three children. Before beginning the
story, Lester is unsettled by the presence of a closet in the room. He asks Dr. Harper to open it. He is
relieved to see it contains nothing except clothes and shoes.

Lester’s story begins with the marriage between his wife Rita and himself. They married in 1965 when
he was 21 and she was 18. She was pregnant with their first child, Denny, so Lester had to leave college
and get a job. He describes their marriage as happy, although there are many examples indicating the
contrary. A little while after Denny was born, Rita got pregnant again with their second child, Shirl.
7 DURÁN

Lester goes on to tell the story of how his first child died suddenly one night, after crying about the
Boogeyman while Lester was putting him to bed. Rita found him at 3 in the morning dead on his back
and white as flour, with his eyes open and glassy. He was 3 years old and the cause of death was
determined to be crib death, but Lester does not believe that. He also mentions that the closet door in
the boy’s room was open a crack, even though he had left it closed. A similar thing happened to the
second child, a daughter. She was moved into her deceased brother’s room one month after the
funeral. Her mother was against it but Lester had the last word under the excuse of not being
overprotective so as to not cripple the kid. A year goes by and, one night, the child starts screaming
about the Boogeyman. Nonetheless, Lester doesn’t want to prove his wife right and take Shirl into their
bedroom, so she is left alone. A month later, she is found dead by Lester, but this time she looks all black
and has swallowed her tongue. The closet door, again, is ajar. Lester mentions that, before that, he had
heard a noise one night and entered the room quickly to find his daughter sitting up in the crib crying.
He also noticed something moving in the shadows by the closet.

For the first 4 or 5 months after, Rita looks colourless and depressed. Lester thinks she will get over it.
Rita wants another baby but Lester thinks it’s a bad idea at the time. Still, approximately a year after
their second child’s death, Lester’s wife Rita becomes pregnant again with their son Andy and regains
her energy. Lester doesn’t want anything to do with the kid at first since he thinks Rita screwed up with
birth control, but he ends up warming up to him as the kid is his spitting image. They subsequently move
to a different neighbourhood far from the old one. A year passes without incident with Andy sleeping in
the master bedroom with Lester and Rita. At some point, Lester surrenders to paranoia and starts
believing that the monster eventually tracked his family down, intruding the house and slithering
around at night. Not long after, Rita leaves to take care of her ill mother, leaving Lester and Andy alone.

Rita is out for a while so Lester hires a woman to stay with Andy during the day. During this time, Lester
keeps finding closet doors open. Andy, unlike his siblings, sleeps in his parents’ room for fear of what
happened before. But, one day, feeling the malevolent presence growing bolder in his wife’s absence,
Lester begins to panic and decides to move Andy to a separate bedroom, knowing that it would go for
him. That night, Andy cries “Boogeyman!” while being put to bed and, an hour later, is attacked and
killed by the Boogeyman. Lester, upon seeing the creature throttling Andy, flees to a local 24-hour diner.
He returns home at dawn, calls the police before going upstairs, and discovers Andy’s corpse on the
floor with the closet door ajar. Lester convinces the police that Andy had attempted to climb out of his
crib during the night and broke his neck.

As Lester finishes his story and starts to leave, Dr. Harper recommends making future appointments
with the nurse. Lester goes to meet the nurse but she is gone. He returns to Harper’s office, finding it
empty as well, with the closet door ajar. The Boogeyman emerges from the closet, casting off its
disguise of Dr. Harper.

PLOT
SITUATION/DATUM (EXPOSITION)  Lester Billings is in the psychiatrist’s office of Dr. Harper, as he
starts talking about the death of his 3 children on the Dr.’s couch. This marks an early tension point, as
Lester confesses that all of his 3 children were murdered, and that he is responsible.

COMPLICATION (RISING ACTION)  Lester begins to tell his story in an extended flashback, occasionally
interrupted by questions and remarks from Dr. Harper. Lester comes across as paranoid and possibly
insane as he describes the circumstances which have been surrounding him and the mysterious ways in
which his children died. The tension rises as Lester tells Dr. Harper the story of how the Boogeyman
came out of the closet and killed his children.

CLIMAX  Lester discovers that his suspicions are true and finally encounters the Boogeyman. He has
found them again and, as he is about to kill Andy, Lester runs away.

OUTCOME (FALLING ACTION)  The tension appears to fall as Lester finishes his account, and Dr.
Harper reassures him that they will work together to remove some of the guilt he has been carrying.
8 DURÁN

After trying to make an appointment with the nurse and returning back to the psychiatrist’s office, the
Boogeyman emerges from the closet, with Dr. Harper’s mask in its hand. There is an open ending, since
we can choose to believe the creature is real and that it killed the children and maybe Lester, or we can
choose to believe that Lester is crazy and made everything up in his mind. Another possible
interpretation is that the Boogeyman is actually Lester all along, which could be the actual plot-twist
that horror stories usually have, given that the creature being real could be seen as something expected.

CHARACTERS
LESTER BILLINGS (ROUND CHARACTER)  The main character of the story, he is developed and goes
through many different stages and emotions throughout the story. He is described as a 28-year-old man
from Waterbury, Connecticut. He works for an industrial firm in New York, but we never learn his exact
occupation. He is divorced and the father of 3 children, all of whom are dead. As seen from the point of
view of Dr. Harper, he looks old and pale, with thinning hair. He is also an alcoholic, as suggested by the
sentence: “his eyes held all the miserable secrets of whisky.” At first glance, this description seems
indicative of someone who has suffered a great trauma. Lester’s “rubbery, frightening grin” that is gone
as soon as it appears is mentioned 3 times in the story. This tendency to grin in moments of extreme
tension and inner conflict may point to Lester’s mental instability. This is further highlighted by the way
his voice switches from his normal range to “a high treble, like a child’s” and then “clicked back into an
adult range.” Throughout his own recount of the events, he also comes off as violent, misogynist, racist
and homophobic, as well as not very warm or kind towards his family.

DR. HARPER (ROUND CHARACTER)  He is a psychologist whom Lester chooses to share his story with
and the only other character physically present in the plot. Harper appears professional throughout,
playing a passive role and responding to Lester’s version of events with comments or questions
designed to keep him talking. But then, we find out he is actually the Boogeyman in disguise.

THE BOOGEYMAN  Known as a type of mythical creature used by adults to frighten children into good
behaviour. He has claws, a deep voice, hides in closets and kills little children.

THE NURSE (FLAT CHARACTER)  Referred to as Nurse Vickers at the beginning and only mentioned
again at the end, she works with Dr. Harper but doesn’t actually play any part in the story.

RITA (FLAT CHARACTER)  She was married to Lester. She is known as a caring mother throughout the
story. She suffers from depression after her first 2 children are killed but is given a new lease of life
when she gets pregnant with her 3rd child.

DENNY, SHIRL AND ANDY (FLAT CHARACTERS)  Lester and Rita’s children. Denny was the first child
and died of alleged crib death but was actually killed by the Boogeyman. Shirl was the second child, born
the same summer Denny died. She passed away of alleged convulsion but was in fact killed by the
Boogeyman. Andy was the third child, born after his siblings had passed away. He was killed by the
Boogeyman and left to die by Lester. His father told the police that he broke his neck attempting to get
out of his crib.

PLACE OR SETTING
The story takes place in the psychiatrist’s office, located somewhere in the US. Also, through flashbacks,
in the 2 houses where Lester and his family lived. The first one in Waterbury, Connecticut, and the
second one in New York.

The events described span a period of 7 years: from 1965, when Lester marries Rita, to 1972, when
Lester goes to see the psychiatrist.

MOOD AND ATMOSPHERE

The mood is somber, anxious, fearful and sad. The atmosphere is that of horror, tension, gripping fear
and darkness. In horror stories, the mood and the atmosphere are key. Although there is no real
9 DURÁN

surprise in regard of the fate of the children, which is exposed to the reader at the very beginning, there
is something about the way in which the story is told that also creates this feeling of discomfort and
uneasiness without it being full-blown horror.

SYMBOLS

THE BOOGEYMAN  The term Boogeyman can be interpreted in 2 ways. Literally, it refers to a creature
that typically haunts children if they misbehave. This creature doesn’t have a specific appearance, so
Lester probably pictured it according to his own fears. Metaphorically, this term can be used to denote a
person or thing that somebody has an irrational fear for. It could also represent Lester’s dark or evil side,
an ordinary person with monstrous tendencies.

THE CLOSET  It represents fear. Lester is a man who wants to be strong and not scared of anything,
but finds himself in a situation where he is nothing but scared. He knew that something from the closet
was the cause of his children’s deaths, but never did anything about it. Lester is a very fearful man, not
only because he is scared of the monster that haunts them, but also because he fears his children not
growing up the way he wanted them to.

CHILDREN  Innocence and weakness.

THEMES
FEAR / THE UNKNOWN  The theme of fear is central to this story. The narrative is focused on the fear
of Lester and that of his children. It also aims to induce a feeling of fear, or at least unease, in the
reader. The Boogeyman is a monster used to scare children into being well-behaved. In the story, it can
kill simply by striking fear in its victims, as in the case of Denny and Shirl. There are no signs of violence
on Denny’s body, which leads to the official diagnosis of crib death. He is found dead on his back and
“white as flour” which suggests that he might have died of fright. In this case, Lester refuses to
acknowledge what he knows is true. However, with the 2nd child’s death, Lester is certain he is dealing
with something otherworldly and that the children are not dying by natural means. Lester remarks when
mentioning Shirl’s death that “You can scare a kid into convulsions,” suggesting that it was also the fear
that killed her. Lester’s own fear of the monster is so great that it proves to be more powerful than his
parental instinct to protect his children. His fear mounts as his children are killed one by one, and he
ends up sacrificing his 3rd child’s life, even though he admits he is his favourite, to save his own life.

GUILT AND REMORSE  Lester could have tried to save the kids, but he chose not to.

TRAUMA AND SUFFERING  Lester mentions some of his childhood traumas, which could be reflected
in the way he raised his children. He feels his mother overprotected him when he was a child so he
thinks doing the same with his children will turn them into cripples.

IMAGINATION VS REALITY  We don’t really know how much of the story is real and how much is
invented or happened inside the character’s head.

STYLE
The 3rd person narrator uses a formal language. There are no slang words or abbreviations, and the
vocabulary is fairly advanced, for instance: “non-commitally,” or “sardonic brilliance.” This style of
language used in this context suggests a high education and a scientific detachment consistent with a
narrator who has access to Dr. Harper’s thoughts.

The style of language used by Lester in his 1st person account of the events is informal, using
contractions and a lot of slang words. It’s also heavily descriptive, but with a high degree of emotional
involvement. Another purpose served by the highly descriptive language is to create an emotional
response in the readers. The vivid descriptions of the dead children, as well as that of the Boogeyman,
and the monster from the comic book from Lester’s childhood are all meant to provoke fear.
10 DURÁN

POINT OF VIEW
THIRD PERSON (OMNISCIENT) + FIRST PERSON (LIMITED)  The narrator appears to have access to the
thoughts and feelings of both Dr. Harper and Lester Billings. The point of view switches to a limited 1st
person when Lester recounts the past events in his extensive dialogue with Dr. Harper (which might not
be entirely reliable).

THE CASE FOR THE DEFENCE — GRAHAM GREENE (1904-1991)

AUTHOR
Henry Graham Greene, (2 October 1904 – 3 April 1991) was an English writer, playwright and literary
critic. His works explore the ambivalent moral and political issues of the modern world. Greene was
noted for his ability to combine serious literary acclaim with widespread popularity. He was also one of
the more “cinematic” of 20th-century writers; having a lot of his work adapted for film or television.

He was born in a boarding school, where his father was house master. His family was wealthy, influential
and intellectual. They were bankers, statesmen and owned the Greene King Brewery. His background
might have influenced his writing, which often deals with political and moral issues.

Although Greene objected strongly to being described as a Roman Catholic novelist rather than as a
novelist who happened to be Catholic, Catholic religious themes are at the root of much of his writing.
In his literary criticism he attacked the modernist writers Virginia Woolf and E. M. Forster for having lost
the religious sense which, he argued, resulted in dull, superficial characters, who “wandered about like
cardboard symbols through a world that is paper-thin.” Only in recovering the religious element could
the novel recover its dramatic power. Suffering and unhappiness are omnipresent in the world Greene
depicts; and Catholicism is presented against a background of unvarying human evil, sin, and doubt.

When he was a teen, Greene was frequently bullied, which led to a profound depression and suicide
attempts. At age 16, Greene was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and sent for psychoanalysis for six
months in London, which had a profound effect on his writing and personal life. In a letter to his wife
Vivien, he told her that he had “a character profoundly antagonistic to ordinary domestic life,” and that
“unfortunately, the disease is also one’s material.” William Golding described Greene as “the ultimate
chronicler of twentieth-century man’s consciousness and anxiety.” Greene never received the Nobel
Prize in Literature, though he finished runner-up to Ivo Andrić in 1961.

Greene originally divided his fiction into 2 genres: thrillers (mystery and suspense books), which he
described as entertainments, often with notable philosophic edges; and literary works, which he
described as novels, on which he thought his literary reputation was to be based. As his career
lengthened, both Greene and his readers found the distinction between “entertainments” and “novels”
to be less evident.

Greene’s literary style was described by Evelyn Waugh as “not a specifically literary style at all. The
words are functional, devoid of sensuous attraction, of ancestry, and of independent life.” Commenting
on the lean prose and its readability, Richard Jones wrote that “nothing deflects Greene from the main
business of holding the reader's attention.”

The Case for the Defence is a short story by Graham Greene which is about a case which takes unusual
turns. Published in 1939, it is part of the short-story collection Twenty-One Stories.

SUMMARY
The story begins with the statement that what is about to be described is the strangest murder trial the
narrator has ever witnessed. The narrator is a reporter who attends the trial on assignment. He has
reported many other trials but never one that ended so oddly.
11 DURÁN

The trial should have been an easy one, the narrator claims. Four eyewitnesses were available to
provide statements that they had seen the murderer at the scene. The murderer has a unique
appearance and so is easily recognizable. He is a stout man with thick thighs and bulging eyes. The
reporter describes the accused as an ugly man with a face and figure that are hard to forget. The four
witnesses saw the accused outside the victim’s house. One woman, Mrs. Salmon, even saw the accused
with a hammer in his hands. She watched the man drop the hammer in the bushes. The man then
turned his face toward a street lamp, and that was when Mrs. Salmon got a full view of the killer’s face.
She had been watching him from her window across the street. A town clock had just struck two in the
early morning, so even the time of the murder was easily established.

When the judge calls Mrs. Salmon to the stand, the narrator assumes the trial will be over quickly; a
verdict will be reached easily. Mrs. Salmon is a perfect witness. It is not hard to distinguish that Mrs.
Salmon has no malice in her manner or voice as she gives her account of that fatal evening. She not only
sounds honest but has a very truthful look about her. Her face reflects care and kindness. She exudes no
sense of self-importance as she takes the stand, though everyone in the courtroom is staring at her,
listening intently to every word she says.

In addition to Mrs. Salmon, there is Henry MacDougall, who was driving home that night when he came
close to running over the accused man, who was walking down the middle of street with a glazed look in
his eyes.

Mr. Wheeler, who lived next door to the victim, Mrs. Parker, had heard noises coming from Mrs.
Parker’s flat. The noises roused him from bed. He went to his window and saw the accused man from
behind. When the murderer turned, he too, like Mrs. Salmon, saw the man’s face and described his
distinctive, bulging eyes.

After the witnesses’ testimonies, the defence lawyer cross-examines Mrs. Salmon. He asks her if she is
sure she recognized the murderer. Mrs. Salmon states that she would know that man anywhere. He has
a face she would never forget. The lawyer asks Mrs. Salmon about her eyesight. After all, the murder
happened very late at night. To this Mrs. Salmon responds that she has never worn eyeglasses and that
the moon had helped to light the night. She also reminds the lawyer that the accused man had turned
his face to the lamplight. She saw him perfectly and without a doubt; the man sitting in the courtroom
dock is indeed the murderer. Then she repeats that the man has a face that is hard to forget.

The defence lawyer then asks Mrs. Salmon to look around at the faces of people who are sitting in the
court. While she does so, the lawyer asks a Mr. Adams, who is sitting in the back, to stand up. When he
does, everyone turns to look at him. The narrator reports that this Mr. Adams is the spitting image of
the accused murderer. He has the same bulky figure and the same bulging eyes. He is even dressed
identically to the man on trial.

The lawyer asks Mrs. Salmon again if she is sure she has identified the correct man, the one she saw on
the night of the murder. Mrs. Salmon cannot be sure.

This closes the case. None of the witnesses is now sure they correctly identified the right man. So, the
accused man—and his twin brother—walk out of the courtroom. Once outside, the brothers are pushed
into the street; no one knows for sure who pushed them. One of them is hit by a bus. His skull is crushed
and he is pronounced dead. Even after this strange twist of events, however, no one knows if justice has
been served. Still no one knows for sure which of the twin brothers committed the crime.

PLOT
SITUATION/DATUM (EXPOSITION)  We first find out the story is going to be about a murder trial. An
element of mystery is created from the very first line (“It was the strangest murder trial I ever
attended.”). Mrs. Parker, an old woman who lives in Northwood Street, is dead. She has been battered
to death in her home and her killer is seen, hammer in hand, leaving the house after the murder by Mrs.
Salmon, and 3 more witnesses.
12 DURÁN

COMPLICATION (RISING ACTION)  The case begins at court with Mr. Adams, the alleged killer, sitting
next to the judge and Mrs. Salmon being called to testify by the counsel for the Crown. She is asked
about what she saw by both the counsel for the Crown and the counsel for the defence. In her
statement, Mrs. Salmon asserts having clearly seen the defendant at 2 o’clock in the morning leaving
the victim’s home with a hammer in his hand.

CLIMAX  The counsel for the defence discloses the existence of an identical-looking man who was
sitting at the back of the courtroom and reveals him to be Mr. Adams twin brother. Mrs. Salmon
becomes flustered.

OUTCOME (FALLING ACTION)  None of the witnesses can now swear that the man they saw the night
of the murder is actually the defendant and both twins have their alibis (they were with their wives).
The defendant is thus acquitted for lack of evidence and the case is closed. As the twins are leaving the
courtroom, a freak accident sees one of them pushed in front of a bus and killed, thus deepening the
mystery of the “Peckham Murder.”

CHARACTERS
THE NARRATOR (FLAT CHARACTER)  A reporter who is used to covering crime trials, yet he is
astonished by a particular case which ended with an acquittal of a man who, by all evidence, appeared
to be guilty. He has limited knowledge on the events, yet from the way he depicts them, we can
conclude that he thinks the accused, Adams, was guilty. He shows no sympathy towards him; quite the
contrary: “No one present at the opening of the trial believed that the man in the dock stood any chance
at all”; “… he was badly out of luck; he might as well have committed the crime in broad daylight.”

MRS. SALMON (ROUND CHARACTER)  One of the witnesses called to testify. Mrs. Salmon is described
by the narrator as “the ideal witness” who has “a slight Scotch accent” and an “expression of honesty,
care and kindness.” The author probably chose to describe Mrs. Salmon like that to point out that she is
a credible and reliable character who would tell the truth, so the reader can easily believe what she
says. She is confident at first, but then is confused and frightened when she learns of the existence of
the twin brother. There is a change in her feelings and in the way we see her.

MR. ADAMS (ROUND CHARACTER) / THE TWINS  The first Adams twin we are introduced to is the
main suspect of killing Mrs. Parker. He is described as a heavy stout man with bulging bloodshot eyes,
description that could serve the purpose of ruling out the chance of the witnesses being wrong. We
have a change of feelings towards him, he seems guilty at first but then we are not so sure. The second
Adams twin is later described as being the exact image of his brother, with a thick stout body and
muscular legs and a pair of bulging eyes. Then, at the end, we feel scared of the brother who is still alive.

PLACE OR SETTING
The story is set in England around the time it was written, in the late 1930’s, when the death penalty still
existed (it was abolished in 1965). It takes place in a courthouse during the day.

MOOD AND ATMOSPHERE

The mood and atmosphere are mysterious, suspenseful and tense. There is a murder, we never learn
who exactly did it and at the end we don’t know what will happen to Mrs. Salmon. There is also an
atmosphere of surprise when we find out what the case for the defence actually was.

SYMBOLS

THE BUS  After the verdict in which Adams is acquitted, one of the twins is ran over by a bus. Given
that one of them must have committed the crime, the bus is a symbol of Divine Justice. Someone had to
pay for the crime and, in the end, the bus redresses the balance.
13 DURÁN

BLOODSHOT EYES  One of the twins was guilty of murder and their bloodshot eyes might be a symbol
of the crime committed.

MRS. SALMON  She represents innocence and honesty.

THEMES
DON’T JUDGE PEOPLE TOO QUICKLY / SOMETIMES THINGS ARE NOT WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE  Adams
is accused of murder and it seems to be an open-and-shut case, yet as the story progresses, we discover
that he has an identical twin brother. There is no way that Mrs. Salmon can safely say that she saw the
defendant outside her house after she has seen his brother in court. Interestingly, the narrator also
assumes right away that Adams is guilty. At no stage does the narrator give Adams the benefit or
assumption of innocence nor does he disbelieve anything that any of the witnesses have said in court.
This may be important because as a reporter the narrator is supposed to be fair-minded and not
necessarily swayed by one opinion.

EARTHLY JUSTICE VERSUS DIVINE JUSTICE  Earthly justice refers to the judicial systems people have
implemented throughout history in order to punish crimes and maintain social stability and security. The
story targets the justice system of the UK in the 1930’s, a time when capital punishment was still used as
a way to punish crimes. The story clearly shows how defective the justice is and raises many dilemmas.
Since capital punishment is the ultimate definitive sentence, passing a judgment becomes a delicate
issue that needs to be dealt with caution. If an innocent man is convicted, there is no way of saving him
later and amending a wrongful capital sentence. This is, in fact, what allows for the accused in the story
to be acquitted. As nobody could say for sure whether he or his twin committed the crime and they
both had alibies, there was no other option but to set them free. We know that at least one of the
Adams is certainly the murderer, but they both escape free of guilt. After the twins escape human
justice, one of them is run over by a bus and dies. This can make the reader think that the one who died
was the actual murderer and that he died at the hands of Divine Justice. In this case, we could infer that
justice will always be served one way or another. However, despite a lengthy trial, and despite the death
of one of the twins, we still don’t really know if the twin who died was the real murderer or not. This
theme is enhanced by motifs such as fear, uncertainty and capital punishment.

STYLE
The story uses very descriptive language: “He was a heavy stout man with bulging bloodshot eyes.” It
also involves several judicial terms, but they don’t pose serious difficulties as they are merely used to
make the atmosphere and the story more authentic: “(…) the defence proposes to plead mistaken
identity.”; “Counsel for the defence rose to cross-examine.”; “And so the man was acquitted for lack of
evidence.” The judicial terms may also be interpreted as a technique used to draw attention on the flaws
of the British justice system in the 1930s. The author also uses everyday speech and strong words:
“bulging bloodshot eyes”, “eyes full of brutal fear”, “big brute”, “his skull smashed.”

POINT OF VIEW
FIRST PERSON (LIMITED)  The story is a 1st person narration, told from the perspective of a reporter
who had covered the trial of a murder (witness narrator). Consequently, the narrator has limited
knowledge on the events and a biased point of view. The narrator admits his limited perspective on the
events several times, allowing a certain ambiguity to the story. Even if it is obvious the narrator thinks
one of the twins is guilty, he cannot be certain who. Apart from presenting his perspective on the
events, using the personal pronoun “I”, the narrator sometimes also uses the personal pronoun “we”,
showing that his opinion was shared by most of the people at the trial. Finally, the narrator addresses
readers directly in his story, making it thus oral, as if he was telling it to an audience.
14 DURÁN

THE HEART OF A BROKEN STORY — J.D. SALINGER (1919-2010)

AUTHOR
Jerome David Salinger was an American author, best known for his 1951 novel The Catcher in the Rye, as
well as his reclusive nature. His last original published work was in 1965; he gave his last interview in
1980. Raised in Manhattan, Salinger began writing short stories while in secondary school, and
published several stories in the early 1940’s before serving in World War II.

In his youth, Salinger attended public schools on the West Side of Manhattan. In 1932, the family moved
to Park Avenue, and Salinger enrolled at the McBurney School, a nearby private school. Salinger had
trouble fitting in there and took measures to conform, such as calling himself Jerry. His family called him
Sonny. At McBurney, he managed the fencing team, wrote for the school newspaper and appeared in
plays. He “showed an innate talent for drama,” though his father opposed the idea of his becoming an
actor. Salinger began writing stories “under the covers [at night], with the aid of a flashlight.” He was the
literary editor of the class yearbook, Crossed Sabres, and participated in the glee club, aviation club,
French club, and the Non-Commissioned Officers Club.

The Heart of a Broken Story was published in the September 1941 issue of Esquire magazine. The story
was one of Salinger’s first commercial successes and brought him welcomed attention as a young
author. In the story, he pokes fun at the formulaic boy-meets-girl stories that appear with regularity in
many magazines during that era. The only story to be narrated by Salinger himself, it nonetheless shows
his unwillingness to control his characters.

In 1948 he published the critically acclaimed story A Perfect Day for Bananafish in The New Yorker
magazine, which became home to much of his subsequent work. In 1951 Salinger released his novel The
Catcher in the Rye, an immediate popular success. His depiction of adolescent alienation and loss of
innocence in the protagonist Holden Caulfield was influential, especially among adolescent readers. The
novel remains widely read and controversial, selling around 250,000 copies a year.

The success of The Catcher in the Rye led to public attention and scrutiny: Salinger became reclusive,
publishing new work less frequently. He followed Catcher with a short story collection, Nine Stories
(1953), a collection of a novella and a short story, Franny and Zooey (1961), and a collection of two
novellas, Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction (1963). His last published
work, a novella entitled Hapworth 16, 1924, appeared in The New Yorker on June 19, 1965.

Afterward, Salinger struggled with unwanted attention, including a legal battle in the 1980’s with
biographer Ian Hamilton, and the release in the late 1990’s of memoirs written by two people close to
him: Joyce Maynard, an ex-lover; and Margaret Salinger, his daughter. In 1996, a small publisher
announced a deal with Salinger to publish Hapworth 16, 1924 in book form, but amid the ensuing
publicity, the release was indefinitely delayed. He made headlines around the globe in June 2009, after
filing a lawsuit against another writer for copyright infringement resulting from that writer’s use of one
of Salinger’s characters from The Catcher in the Rye. Salinger died of natural causes on January 27, 2010,
at his home in Cornish, New Hampshire.

SUMMARY
1: The story opens by presenting the characters of Justin Horgenschlag and Shirley Lester. Justin is a
thirty-dollar-a-week printer’s assistant, who falls completely in love with Shirley at first sight while riding
the bus. Shirley is 20 years old (11 years younger than Justin), 5’4’’ (bringing her head to level of
Horgenschlag’s eyes) and weighs 117 pounds (light as a feather to carry). She is a stenographer and lives
with her mother —Agnes Lester, an old Nelson Eddy fan—, whom she supports. She is described as
being “as pretty as a picture.” One morning, Justin stands over Shirly on the bus and sees her with her
mouth opened in a peculiar way, which makes him fall in love with her instantly. He sees her as a cure
for the growing loneliness he has felt since he moved to New York.
15 DURÁN

At this moment it is revealed that all this is actually the beginning of a story that the narrator, a writer, is
trying to write for the Collier’s magazine. He is attempting to write a lovely tender boy-meets-girl story
and this brings about the problem of having the boy actually meet the girl, which he seems unable to do
with it making sense. The narrator starts listing the reasons for his inability to do so: Justin couldn’t just
bend over and proclaim his love to her, since it would make him look like a goof. He couldn’t either
pretend to be a cool and suave magazine illustrator and hand her his card under the excuse of wanting
to draw her. Nor did it seem reasonable for him to pretend to mistake her for someone else to start
conversation. Why? Because Justin had neither the looks, personality, or good clothes to gain Shirley’s
interest under the circumstances. He didn’t have a chance.

The writer then tries to come up with other scenarios: Maybe Justin can faint and grab Shirley’s ankle
for support, tearing her stocking in the process. This way he could ask for her address so as to pay for
the damage later, but she surely wouldn’t give it to him. Nor would Justin actually clutch Shirley’s ankle
in the bus, it was illogical. What was logical was for Justin to become desperate. In this scenario, Justin
might have snatched Shirley’s handbag and run with it towards the exit door, which would have made
Shirley scream and would have gotten him arrested. He would get hauled to court and Shirley would be
forced to attend and inform her address. Justin would get a 1-year sentence but would now be able to
write to Shirley and confess his actual intentions for stealing her purse. Shirley would show the letter to
her friends, who would encourage her to write back. Justin would reply and suggest meeting him during
visiting hours. Shirley would also show this letter to her friends, but this time she wouldn’t answer. He
was a goof and his letters were silly, after all. Meanwhile, Justin would be having a terrible time in
prison. His cellmates would see in his face a resemblance to someone who once ratted on them and
would make his life hell. Then, one day, there would be an escape attempt and he would get
accidentally killed by a guard. The writer’s plan to write a boy-meets-girl story is thwarted again, this
time by the death of his hero.

The writer laments that Justin was unable to write a lengthier and more honest letter, in which he
dropped all pretences and presented himself as he actually was, flaws and all. If he would have done
this, then maybe Shirley would have loved the letter and answered it, wishing that he had talked to her
instead of taking her purse. She would have spoken honestly about herself too and agreed to visit him
when allowed.

But Justin never actually gets to know Shirley, since she gets off the bus before he can even think of a
way to approach her. She goes to the movies that night with a guy with whom she is in love, although
the relationship never progresses. Justin stays home instead, thinking about Shirley all night. He is then
suddenly introduced to Doris Hillman, a woman who was starting to think she would never get a
husband. Before he knows it, Justin has forgotten Shirley. And since the boy never actually meets the
girl, the writer never writes the story for Collier’s.

2: This story is about a writer who fails in his attempt to write a lovely tender boy-meets-girl story for
the magazine Collier’s. He tries several pieces of writing with different plots each but he finds out at the
end that his objective was unaccomplished. He finds really difficult to get Justin Horgenschlag (a thirty-
dollar-a-week printer’s assistant) and Shirley Lester (a stenographer) together, so he tries different ways
of doing it. He tries to make them meet but they resist to it because of their own nature and due to
being completely different.

PLOT
SITUATION/DATUM (EXPOSITION) A writer is attempting to write a lovely boy-meets-girl story for
Collier’s magazine. He has a deadline so he is in a rush.

COMPLICATION (RISING ACTION)  In order for the story to happen, the boy must meet the girl, so the
writer thinks of different plausible encounters between them but keeps failing to achieve this due to the
circumstances and the character’s unmatching personalities.
16 DURÁN

CLIMAX  The writer realizes that he can’t alter the facts and none of his imaginary scenarios could
make the development of the love story between Shirley and Justin possible and feels disappointed and
frustrated.

OUTCOME (FALLING ACTION)  In the end, he fails to write the story for Collier’s.

PLOT INSIDE THE BOY-MEETS-GIRL STORY

SITUATION/DATUM (EXPOSITION)  Justin Horgenschlag, a lonely printer’s assistant, falls in love at
first sight with Shirley Lester, the most beautiful girl he had ever seen.

COMPLICATION (RISING ACTION)  He starts thinking about possible ways to approach her and chat
her up but realizes that because of his personality, Shirley would always end up rejecting him.

CLIMAX  The loving, understanding yet imaginary letter Shirley never gets to write Justin.

OUTCOME (FALLING ACTION)  Justin and Shirley never get to meet; she gets off the bus before he can
even decide of a way to approach her.

CHARACTERS
JUSTIN HORGENSCHLAG (ROUND CHARACTER)  A lonely printer’s assistant. He is 31 years old and is
originally from Seattle but has been living in New York for 4 years. He falls completely in love with
Shirley Lester at first sight. The writer puts him into different probable scenarios which reveal different
aspects of his character.

SHIRLEY LESTER (ROUND CHARACTER)  A stenographer. She is 20 years old and lives with and
supports her mother. She is an active member of the library and is described to be “as pretty as a
picture.” Her attitude and response change depending on how Justin acts in the different situations and
scenarios envisaged by the writer.

THE WRITER (ROUND CHARACTER)  The narrator of the story. He is trying to write a boy-meets-girl
story for Collier’s magazine but finds it difficult to get the boy to meet the girl. In the end, he decides
that the boy won’t meet the girl and makes Justin end up with someone else.

PLACE OR SETTING
The main story takes place somewhere in the US between 1888 and 1957, which can be inferred from
the mention of the magazine. The story the protagonist is trying to write is set in New York around the
1940’s-1950’s.

MOOD AND ATMOSPHERE

The mood within the entire story is a deep feeling of frustration, sadness and desolation. We are
introduced to many scenarios which never really happen and are thrown away by the author, which
makes both the author and the reader frustrated. We can also feel how desperate and lonely Justin is.
There is also a sense of irony, since the author himself keeps saying that there is no possible way all this
can happen and that Shirley would never pay attention to Justin. The author doesn’t seem to like his
own story and he constantly mocks it and its characters. The story is also a bit dark (when Justin is killed
in one of the possible scenarios) and twisted (all the ridiculous ideas the character comes up with to get
Shirley to notice him, instead of just talking to her like a normal person). Lastly, there is also a feeling of
emptiness due to the “lack of a story.”

SYMBOLS

THE HEART OF A BROKEN STORY  The story on its own is broken because there are many parts which
do not fit or cannot be united for it to happen. It represents the writer’s failed attempt at writing the
typical love story, often seen as formulaic and outlandish.
17 DURÁN

THE PARTED LIPS  The thing Justin likes most about Shirley. They could represent the moment in
which someone is about to speak but somehow doesn’t.

THE PURSE  It might represent Shirley’s heart, which Justin wants to steal but doesn’t dare to.

FEMME FATALE  Archetypical character who is often portrayed as a mysterious, beautiful, and
seductive woman whose charms ensnare her lovers, often leading them into compromising, deadly
traps. It’s often described as having a power akin to an enchantress, seductress, witch, having power
over men, and typically villainous, or at least morally ambiguous. The story states that there are 2 kinds:
that one who is a femme fatale in every sense of the word, and that one who is not a femme fatale in
every sense of the word. Shirley would fall on the 2nd group since Justin is unable to see her as
manipulative and frivolous due to the idealized image that he crated of her in his mind.

THE PRISON  It represents the loneliness the main character feels because of his lack of love.

THE FAILED ESCAPE ATTEMPT  It represents the desperation and need of being free to finally live
happily ever after with his true love and his impossibility to do so.

THEMES
NOT ALL STORIES ARE MADE FOR EVERYONE, INCLUDING WRITERS  Salinger wants to show his ideas
and feelings through the character of the writer. Specially, this idea of having to create content for a
magazine in order to produce and sell that maybe is not aligned with what the author usually writes or
wants to write.

CREEPY OBSESION, OVERTHINKING, LACK OF CONFIDENCE AND LONELINESS  Justin gets obsessed
with a woman he just met and gets thrown into impossible situations as part of the writer’s futile efforts
to make the characters meet. This brings Justin’s loneliness and insecurities to the surface, personality
traits that the author sees as inherent to the character and not as what they actually are, something he
made up and could change at will.

SPLENDID, EVERLASTING AND HOLLYWOOD-TYPE LOVE STORIES ARE UNREACHABLE  Many of these
stories tend to have ridiculous premises and be full of clichés, and are usually far from reality.

STYLE
The author uses everyday speech in order to approach the reader and set up a feeling of intimacy with
him. His style is very informal, using several idioms and phrasal verbs. He is ironic in his narration of
alternative stories that never happen. He is also very descriptive and uses dialogues to make it easier to
empathize with Justin. The format in which the story is written is combined between what the writer
imagines and what he actually attempts to write.

POINT OF VIEW
MULTIPLE POINT OF VIEW / ALTERNATE NARRATOR  The main story is narrated in 1st person
(narrator protagonist). The story the narrator is trying to write is also narrated by him, but in the 3rd
person (omniscient).

THE CHOCOLATE BOX — AGATHA CHRISTIE (1890-1976)

AUTHOR
Agatha Christie was an English crime novelist, short story writer and playwright. Often referred to as the
“Queen of Crime” after gaining international recognition for her work, she has written over 66 detective
novels, 17 plays and over 150 short stories, in addition to 6 pink novels under the pseudonym of “Mary
Westmacott.”
18 DURÁN

She is listed in the Guinness Book of Records as the best-selling novelist of all time, with around 2 billion
copies sold. Her books are among the most widely circulated in the world —behind only Shakespeare
and the Bible— and her play “The Mousetrap” is the longest-performed in British theatre. She also
remains the most-translated individual author in the world.

Born as Agatha Mary Clarissa Miller on September 15, 1890 in Torquay, Devon, Agatha was the youngest
of 3 children in an upper-middle-class family. Her brothers are placed in boarding school, but her
mother insists that she receive home schooling. Agatha learns to read at the age of 4, and she’s a
voracious reader from there, feeding her imagination through books taken from the family library. A shy
and introverted girl, much of her childhood is spent in solitude and seclusion from other children, with
her pets and imaginary friends she makes up for herself. Even so, Agatha describes her childhood as
“very happy.” At the age of 11, her father dies in poor health since the advent of financial difficulties. A
year later, she is sent to school for formal education and later to Paris. There she takes piano and singing
lessons —wishing to embrace a musical career— but her excruciating shyness acts as an obstacle.

In 1910, Agatha returns to England and finds that her mother has fallen ill. Her mother’s health and the
need to save money dictate their next move to Cairo, Egypt. There, Agatha attends many social events
and she visits ancient Egyptian monuments, without paying much attention to the archaeology and
Egyptology which will later become an important part of her writings. On her return to England, she
writes poetry, musical compositions, and she participates in the creation of some theatrical pieces. One
day, while Agatha is recovering from an illness, her mother suggests writing a story to distract herself.
This is how she writes her first short story, themed around madness and dreams. She sends it to a
magazine hoping it will be published, but it is rejected. Afterwards, her mother encourages her to
continue writing, but despite her efforts, his writings continue to be rejected.

In 1912, Agatha meets the non-commissioned officer Archibald Christie, whom she marries soon after.
In 1914, with the outbreak of World War I, Archibald is sent to France to fight German forces and Agatha
joins a unit of volunteer nurses in Torquay where she assists wounded soldiers. Her work there has a
considerable influence on her work: on the one hand, it allows her to familiarize herself with the
different types of poisons and other drugs that she will later use in her novels; On the other hand,
Belgian refugees give her the inspiration for the creation of her most famous character: Detective
Hercule Poirot.

Agatha is a fan of detective novels, having enjoyed Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories, as well
as the works of French novelist Gaston Leroux such as the famous locked-room mystery novel The
Mystery of the Yellow Room. One day she expresses her desire to write a detective novel to her sister,
who bets her that she will not be able to create such a complex narrative. This acts as her motivation to
write her first novel in her free time as a nurse, in which her detective Hercule Poirot would make his
first appearance: The Mysterious Affair of Styles.

At the end of the war, Agatha and her husband decide to settle in London, where they begin to have
some financial difficulties. In 1919, Agatha gives birth to her only daughter, Rosalind. Fortunately, the
following year Agatha finds a publisher willing to publish her novel. Although not well paid, it means an
increase in their income. Agatha continues to write, experimenting with different types of suspense and
murder mystery stories, first creating the couple Tommy and Tuppence and then the amateur
consultant detective Miss Marple. Receiving good reviews and an astonishing success for her novels,
Agatha becomes in a few years one of the major figures of detective novels.

In 1926, her mother dies. On top of that, her husband reveals to her that he is in love with another
woman and asks for a divorce. Soon after, apparently very affected by these events, Agatha disappears.
Her car is later found by a lake, with an expired driver’s license and clothes. This causes a great stir
among her fans and attracts the attention of the public press. Over a thousand police, 15,000 volunteers
and several planes are set to comb the rural area, and newspapers offer a lavish reward. Days go by and
growing speculation ranges from suicide and assassination ordered by her husband to a publicity stunt
to bolster the success of her books. Even Arthur Conan Doyle joins the search, bringing one of Agatha’s
19 DURÁN

gloves to a psychic who tells him she is still alive. Whether by chance or not, the psychic’s prediction
comes true, as she is found 11 days later in a hotel in Harrogate (North Yorkshire), where she had
registered under the name of Teresa Neele —her husband’s mistress name. Agatha doesn’t seem to
remember why she is there, and she doesn’t recognize her husband when he goes to meet her. She will
never speak about this subject, and the general opinion on what happened will continue to be divided
until today: while some believe that she had an episode of amnesia, others claim that she did all of this
to get revenge on her husband.

After this event, Agatha and Archibald divorce. In 1930, she marries the British archaeologist Max
Mallowan, who accompanies her until her death in 1976. During these years she continues to write,
having her most prestigious period during the Second World War. Some of her most important works
during this period are Five Little Pigs, Murder on the Orient Express and Ten Little Niggers (now called
And Then There Were None). The latter is Agatha Christie’s best-selling detective novel and also one of
the best-selling books of all time.

The Chocolate Box is a short story written by Agatha Christie in 1974 that was included in her book
Poirot’s Early Cases.

SUMMARY
In their flat one night, the conversation between Poirot and Hastings turns to the latter’s belief that
Poirot has never known failure in his professional career. The little Belgian tells him that is not the case
and tells Hastings of one occasion when he did not succeed in unravelling a crime.

The event was the death of Paul Déroulard, a French Deputy who was living in Brussels. The time was
the strife over the separation of church and state and M. Déroulard was a key player in these events as
an anti-Catholic and a potential minister. He was a widower, his rich young wife having died from a fall
downstairs some years before. He inherited her house in Brussels and, although abstemious in terms of
drinking and smoking, he had a reputation as a ladies’ man. He died suddenly in his house from reported
heart failure on the eve of his promotion to minister of the state at a time when Poirot was a member of
the Belgian detective force. He was taking a vacation when he received a visit from Mademoiselle
Virginie Mesnard who was a cousin of M. Déroulard’s dead wife who was convinced that the death was
not natural. M. Déroulard’s household consisted of four servants, his aged, but very infirm aristocratic
mother, Mademoiselle Mesnard herself, and on the night of the death, two visitors: M. de Saint Alard, a
neighbour, and John Wilson, an English friend.

Poirot was introduced into the household under a false pretext by Mademoiselle Mesnard and he began
by investigating the meal served on the night of M. Déroulard’s death but found no leads there. Looking
in the study where the death actually occurred, Poirot spotted an open but full and untouched box of
chocolates and found out that M. Déroulard ate some chocolates every night after dinner and finished
the previous box on the night of his death. However, he noticed that the two boxes, one blue and one
pink, had had their lids switched. Poirot then spoke to the dead man's doctor and discovered that M. de
Saint Alard was an ardent Catholic whose friendship with M. Déroulard was being sorely strained by the
political turbulence at the time. The doctor was also able to furnish examples of the types of poison that
could be introduced into the chocolates which would have induced the type of death suffered. This
caused Poirot to question local chemists where he found out that apart from eye drops for the aged
Madame Déroulard, a prescription was made up for John Wilson of trinitrin within tiny tablets of
chocolate (the medication being given to lower blood pressure). A large enough dose would prove fatal
and could have been hidden in one of the chocolates.

This latest development caused a problem for Poirot as Wilson had the opportunity but not the motive
whereas the position was reversed for M. de Saint Alard. Poirot then wondered why John Wilson had
not come from England with enough of his medication to last him throughout his visit and he discovered
from a maid in the house that a bottle of the tablets had been “lost.” He decided to investigate the
house of M. de Saint Alard in the Ardennes and, using the disguise of a plumber, he discovered in the
20 DURÁN

bathroom cupboard there the empty bottle of medication. He returned to Brussels and it was then he
obtained a summons from Madame Déroulard. Having discovered that Poirot was a police officer, she
confessed to the murder of her son. Some years before she had seen him push his wife down the stairs
and had realised the sort of man she had brought into the world. Afraid of the persecution that his new
role would bring upon the church, she resolved to kill him. She took John Wilson’s tablets and opened a
new box of chocolates before seeing that one remained in the previous box. Into this she put the tablets
and she put the empty bottle into M. de Saint Alard’s pocket thinking that his valet would throw it away,
not put it in the cupboard.

Madame Déroulard died a week later of her infirmities leaving Poirot to consider his mistakes: He knew
Madame Déroulard had bad eyesight so no one else would have switched the lids on the two boxes of
chocolates. Also, if M. de Saint Alard had been the criminal, he would never have kept the empty bottle.
To this day, Poirot laments the failure of his little grey cells on that occasion —although, as Hastings
notices, not enough to prevent him boasting about all the other times when they have served him well!

PLOT
SITUATION/DATUM (EXPOSITION)  It’s a tempestuous night and Poirot and Hastings are in their flat,
having a conversation.

COMPLICATION (RISING ACTION)  Hastings has the belief that Poirot has never failed a case in his life.
As a consequence, Poirot begins to narrate the case in which he made a fool of himself: the story of Paul
Déroulard’s death. A young lady called Virginie Mesnard comes to him to ask him to investigate, since
she believes it was homicide, and Poirot takes the case. He narrows the investigation down to a
chocolate box found at the scene, which he suspects was poisoned, causing Déroulard’s death.

CLIMAX  Poirot believes to have found Déroulard’s killer when he finds an empty bottle of trinitrine at
Saint Alard’s residence. He is then summoned by Madame Déroulard, who surprisingly ends up
confessing to the murder.

OUTCOME (FALLING ACTION)  Poirot realizes that he has failed, having overlooked key aspects in his
investigation which prevented him from successfully solving the case. Madame Déroulard explains how
she did it and why. Poirot agrees not to turn her to the police and she dies a week later. We finally learn
about Poirot’s mistake and he asks Hastings to remind him of it if he ever gets too conceited.

PLOT INSIDE POIROT’S NARRATION

SITUATION/DATUM (EXPOSITION) Paul Déroulard dies under mysterious circumstances.

COMPLICATION (RISING ACTION)  Poirot investigates the case. He suspects the chocolate box was
poisoned.

CLIMAX  When Poirot believes to have finally solved the case and thinks Saint Alard to be the killer, he
meets Madame Déroulard and she confesses to the murder.

OUTCOME (FALLING ACTION)  Poirot realizes he has failed. Madame Déroulard explains how she did
it and why. Poirot agrees not to turn her to the police and she dies a week later.

CHARACTERS
HERCULE POIROT (ROUND CHARACTER)  a French-speaking Belgian (Walloon) detective, former
member of the Belgian police force. He provides Captain Arthur Hastings with an account of what he
considers to be his only failure. He admits that he has failed to solve a crime “innumerable” times.
Nevertheless, he regards the case in The Chocolate Box as his only actual failure of detection. In earlier
works, he operates as a fairly conventional, clue-based and logical detective. Later on, he is shown as
focusing more on enquiring into the nature of the victim or the psychology of the murderer rather than
painstakingly examining crime scenes.
21 DURÁN

ARTHUR HASTINGS (FLAT CHARACTER)  Hercule Poirot’s companion-chronicler and best friend.
Introduced by Christie in accordance with the model of Sherlock Holmes’ associate, Doctor Watson, to
whom he bears a marked resemblance. Both narrate in the 1st person, both are slow to see the
significance of clues, and both stand as a form of surrogate for the reader. He is also Poirot’s only close
friend and the two share a flat briefly when Poirot sets up his detective agency.

M. PAUL DÉROULARD (FLAT CHARACTER)  A promising young French politician. He is a Deputy and
slated to become a government minister. He marries a young lady from a wealthy family, as her money
proves useful to his political career. His wife dies about 2 years after, after apparently falling down the
stairs. Déroulard inherits a house on the Avenue Louise in Brussels. While living in this house, Déroulard
himself also dies, quite suddenly after dinner, apparently from a heart-failure. Although his death is
attributed to natural causes, Poirot, at the time a member of the Belgian police, is persuaded to
investigate the case by Virginie Mesnard, a cousin of the late Mrs. Déroulard. According to Poirot, Paul
Déroulard is a peculiar man. He has many scruples and does not smoke or drink, but he has a weakness
for women. He is also a bitter anti-Catholic. Both of these attributes would feature in his fate.

VIRGINIE MESNARD (FLAT CHARACTER)  The cousin of Paul Déroulard’s deceased wife. At the time of
his death, she has been living with the family for several years. Shortly after, Virginie approaches Poirot
and asks him to investigate, as she feels certain that he has been poisoned. She cannot explain why but
attributes it merely to instinct. She mysteriously asks Poirot to drop the case as she becomes certain
that she has been mistaken in suspecting murder. According to François, a servant at Déroulard’s house,
Virginie is a very pious woman. At the end of the story, she enters a convent and becomes a nun.

M. DE SAINT ALARD (FLAT CHARACTER)  A neighbour of Déroulard’s in France, he is visiting his

Brussels home at the time of Déroulard’s death. When Déroulard is murdered, Saint Alard is briefly
suspected as the two were political opponents: Déroulard was a member of parliament against the
Catholic Church, and Saint Alard was a devout Catholic. Poirot disguises himself as a plumber to enter
his residence, where he finds the empty bottle of trinitrine used to poison the chocolates.

MR. JOHN WILSON (FLAT CHARACTER)  An English friend of Paul Déroulard. He comes to Brussels
from England on some business and asks him Déroulard to put him up. He suffers from angina and has a
prescription for trinitrine. While investigating Déroulard’s death, Poirot wonders why Wilson would
have come to Brussels without having brought enough trinitrine with him and speculates that he might
have lost a bottle of it. Félice, the maid in charge of Wilson’s room, confirms that Wilson has indeed lost
a bottle of trinitrine. Poirot then surmises that the killer might have taken it to poison Déroulard.

MADAME DÉROULARD (FLAT/ROUND CHARACTER)  The elderly mother of Paul Déroulard. Towards
the end of the story Poirot has almost concluded his investigation and is about to denounce the killer
when Madame Déroulard summons him and asks him to lay out his findings. Poirot is certain he knows
who the killer is and lays out all the proofs. It is only then that she stuns him with a confession: the true
killer is not who Poirot thinks but she herself. She is presented as flat at first, but at the end her story is
more developed than the other characters in order to explain the reasons why she killed her son.

THE DOMESTICS (FLAT CHARACTERS)  Jeannette, Félice, Denise and François: the maids, cook and
servant employed in the household of Paul Déroulard in Brussels.

PLACE OR SETTING
The main story is set in England around 1923. It’s a windy and rainy night and Hastings and Poirot are in
their flat.

The story Poirot narrates is set in Brussels, Belgium, before 1905. It takes place at the time of the
struggle in France between church and state. Poirot carries out his investigation in both Paul Déroulard
and Saint Alard’s residences.
22 DURÁN

MOOD AND ATMOSPHERE

The mood and atmosphere are that of suspense and intrigue, with a mixture of tension and mystery. By
doing that, Christie keeps readers engaged and at the edge of their seat.

SYMBOLS

THE CHOCOLATE BOX  It represents Poirot’s failure. It could also be said that it represents the story
itself: we have the box, which stands for the wrapping story, and the chocolate inside which could
represent the inner story.

THEMES
EVERYONE MAKE MISTAKES  Even one of the greatest detectives of all time like Poirot can make
mistakes and fail at least once.

NOT EVERYTHING IS WHAT IT SEEMS  What seems evident might not be the actual truth of things,
and there might be something deeper underneath if you look close enough.

DESPAIR, SELF-GUILT AND JUSTICE  After realizing the sort of man she had as a son and the problems
it would bring, Madame Déroulard decided to kill him in despair.

STYLE
What made Agatha Christie’s stories stand out were the characters. She created memorable and
dignified characters which any class of readers could relate to. Her most memorable and popular
characters, Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple, are great examples of her skill to develop “high society”
characters with mainstream appeal. Agatha regularly looked for “creative inspiration” by studying the
people around her. However, her chosen genre, the murder mystery, stunted her writing process
because it was difficult at times to put reality into fictional environments.

Despite being raised by an affluent upper-class family in England, her language was always simple, using
a writing style that every reader could understand and enjoy. Although simple in style, her intriguing
plots and sub-plots challenged readers to figure out “who done it” before the story ended. Agatha
cleverly paced material, allowing readers to move through stories at a steady or slow pace that
enhanced the drama. She relied heavily on dialogue, a technique to vary the pacing of the story as well
as to heighten suspense. The beginnings of her works are strong on description, which gradually drop off
as dialogue and interaction between characters take over. With shorter sentences and sharp dialogue,
she hurries readers along to what’s always a captivating conclusion.

She preferred to plot her crime stories from the murder itself. First, she would plan out the mode of
murder, the killer, and the purpose. Second, she would factor in the various suspects and their own
intents. Third, she would concoct potential clues and diversionary tactics to pull readers in different
directions. She restrained herself from including excessive misleading clues so as to not stifle the plot.
Agatha devised her mysteries with intricate deceptions to manipulate readers’ thoughts and feelings
and to make it more difficult for readers to solve the main mystery. Another characteristic of her stories
is the introduction of multiple characters and suspects and the presence of psychological struggles that
need to be solved.

POINT OF VIEW
FIRST PERSON (LIMITED)  The main story starts with Hastings 1st person narration. The narration then
switches to Poirot, maintaining the 1st person point of view. The author tells the story from Poirot’s
point of view so the reader will be influenced by what he thinks about the characters and events. These
makes us see things from his perspective, so we will probably miss a hint if he fails to highlight its
relevance. In addition, it’s important for this type of stories to use a limited point of view so as to keep
the mystery.