Related Keywords

No Related Keywords

Register NowHow It Works Need Essay Need Essay
In this essay I will be looking at two stories one written in the nineteenth century "The signalman" and the other in the twentieth century "Lamb to the Slaughter". I will look at these two stories and compare all the similarities and differences between them, especially in terms of style, content and language. At the beginning of Dahl's "Lamb to the Slaughter" Dahl sets the scene very well by using a lot of adjectives, this gives the reader a better description of where and when the story is set "the room was warm and clean the curtains drawn, the two table lamps alight "“ hers and the one by the empty chair opposite." "There was a slow smiling air about her" From these quotes we can see that Dahl has set the scene and it is happy and relaxed. At the beginning of "The Signalman" Dickens begins with speech, this makes you want to read on I think, he also uses the narrator to make the story more interesting. These are two very different ways of beginning a story, the readers expectation depends on how they interpret the beginning but I think that Dahl tried to make the reader ask them self who is this woman waiting why is she so happy, but Dickens on the other hand wants the reader to think who is this shouting who is this person telling the story, both beginnings make you want to read on. Dahl creates suspense by building the scene and using a lot of adjectives, this helps build up the suspense very well. Dickens builds suspense by keeping the characters very secretive so the reader is always asking questions so they will read on this I think is a very good way of building suspense. We aren't told what Patrick says to Mary in "Lamb to the Slaughter" because this would be a bit of a predictable story, I think not being told also creates more suspense. Where "Lamb to the slaughter" is set at home adds to the story it is homely but at the same time deadly because anything can happen behind closed doors "the room was warm and clean the curtains drawn, the two table lamps alight "“ hers and the one by the empty chair opposite." "The Signalman" is set in a valley like place on a train track this sets a scary mood because down there anything could happen "his post was in as solitary and dismal a place as ever I saw". Both of the stories were written at different times "Lamb to the Slaughter" in the twentieth century and "The signalman" in the nineteenth century so the styles are very different. "Lamb to the slaughter" is written in the third person and so there is lots of direct speech, but "The Signalman is written in the first person and so there is not really any direct speech. I think direct speech is better and adds more to the story. I think the language used by Dickens, because it is older makes the story more eerie. The stories do have different purposes I think they both have morals but they are very different in the way that I think Dahl wrote his story with a moral but also made the story funny to prove that not all stories have to be serious to have a moral. On the other hand, Dickens wrote his story to warn people. Dickens didn't support new technology like trains and so wanted to warn people about the terrible tragedies that could happen. Dahl, on the other hand, wanted to express that even if you love someone they can still make you angry enough to kill them. I think both of the authors use the same sort of main characters even though the stories were completely different! Both of the characters had been very nervous and unsure about themselves. I think the authors used violence and death to put across their stories because it grabs people's attention and makes them think about what is going on in the stories. I don't think it is very important that the stories are written in the First person or the third person "she might as well have hit him with a steel club" "I was not sure, I told him that I did fully understand" these ways of telling the story are just as good as each other. Dickens wrote about a train killing someone because people were afraid of trains in those days, in 1866 trains were relatively a new invention. Dickens didn't support new technology and trains so in his story he could express his dislike for train and warm people of what they could do. Dahl's massage had more of a moral to it the concerns about the rights and wrongs murder. He used Mary Maloney as an example that murder is a spur of the moment thing and you can even use the anger to hurt someone you love. This shows that both writers suggested in their stories that new technology is not always helpful for example trains, forensic science-finger printing etc. For the time we are in now Dahl is more up to date and writes for a more modern audience and often his work is written for television and radio, he would assume that his readers would know what a typical household would look like because they would have seem many on the television. This is because Dahl's story was written in 1979 when the TV and radon had been invented "she carried it upstairs, holding the thin bone-end of it with both her hands, and she went through the living room she saw him." This quote does not use a lot of description about what the living room and stairs etc looked like because it would be the same as on TV every other suburban household. Dickens wrote his story in a lot more detail because people only had access to books and written words they would need to build a picture of this story in their imaginations, and because this story was a ghost story this would have thrilled and excited them. Televisions were not invented when this story was written in 1866 "there was a fire, a desk for an official book in which he had to make certain entries, a telegraphic instrument with its dial, face, and needles, and a little bell of which he had spoken." This quote uses a lot of description because if you had a TV you would have probably seen an example of a signalman box or a little hut before but because the television hadn't been invented Dickens had to use a lot of description. I have found the difference between these two stories are, "The signalman" is supernatural "Lamb to the Slaughter" is not, both writers have a serious but different purpose for writing their stories, both writers suggest that modern science and technology don't give you all the answers in life, both have central characters who have seem to have "lost their minds", both writers involve violence and death in their stories to draw the readers attention, and the ending to both stories had a twist which in both of the stories I did not expect. "Lamb to the Slaughter" is very funny but at the same time ends on a cliff hanger, but "The signalman" is not really a cliff hanger but leaves you thinking.
0 User(s) Rated!
Words: 1256 Views: 588 Comments: 0
In this essay I will be looking at two stories one written in the nineteenth century "The signalman" and the other in the twentieth century "Lamb to the Slaughter". I will look at these two stories and compare all the similarities and differences between them, especially in terms of style, content and language. At the beginning of Dahl's "Lamb to the Slaughter" Dahl sets the scene very well by using a lot of adjectives, this gives the reader a better description of where and when the story is set "the room was warm and clean the curtains drawn, the...
but different purpose for writing their stories, both writers suggest that modern science and technology don't give you all the answers in life, both have central characters who have seem to have "lost their minds", both writers involve violence and death in their stories to draw the readers attention, and the ending to both stories had a twist which in both of the stories I did not expect. "Lamb to the Slaughter" is very funny but at the same time ends on a cliff hanger, but "The signalman" is not really a cliff hanger but leaves you thinking.

Become A Member Become a member to continue reading this essay orLoginLogin
View Comments Add Comment

Written by H.G. Wells,... Written by H.G. Wells, the story of 'The Time Machine' is regarded by some as one of the greatest science fiction novels of all time. It puts forward many views on time travel, communism and other types of leadership which H.G. Wells felt strongly about, and also against. Herbert George Wells was born on September 21, 1866 in Kent, England. His father was a professional cricketer and shopkeeper, and his mother a former lady's maid. He took lots of short part-time jobs, including as a teaching assistant at a grammar school before going to college to study biology, where he graduated in 1888. He was influenced by a number of other writers at that time, notably Jules Verne, and he wrote his first novel 'The Time Machine', partly in response to the kind of writing Verne produced. The Time Machine was released as a book in 1895. This book was successful and ensured that he would not have to worry about the future. After this H.G. Wells wrote a number of other novels, with the most well known ones being, 'The Island of Dr. Moreau', 'The Invisible Man', and 'The War Between the Worlds'. H.G. Wells is now sometimes named 'the father of modern science fiction'. He died on the 13th August 1946, whilst working on a project that dealt with the dangers of nuclear war. The novel begins with the Time Traveller explaining his theories about the fourth dimension to a group of friends and associates gathered at his home for a weekly dinner. Most of the men present follow his explanations, agree in theory to most of his observations, but quickly become sceptical when the Time Traveller moves from speaking of the nature of time, to the possibility of moving within it. Their disbelief only increases when the Time Traveller offers to supply evidence to support his theories, bringing a small model into the smoking room. Made of metal, ivory and quartz, the machine, as the Time Traveller explains, is a replica of a full sized machine that he has built in his laboratory, and on which he plans to explore time. With his guests watching, he demonstrates the use of the machine, pushing a lever, which causes the model to disappear, into the future, the Time Traveller claims. Most of the men are initially disturbed by the presentation, not quite sure what to think, but most come to believe that the Time Traveller has been playing a trick on them, and easily dismiss his assertion that he plans to explore time within the next week. The following Thursday, another group of men gather at the Time Traveller's house, and find that the host is not at home, but has left a note asking them to start without him. They do so, entertaining themselves with guesses as to why the narrator is not present, when their host enters, dishevelled, dirty, and limping. The Time Traveller returns after washing and changing clothes, to tell the story of his morning, in which he travelled eight days. After dinner, the men gather around him to hear the uninterrupted story. The Time Traveller then tells them that this very morning his machine was finished, and he soon departs into the future. He explains that at first he could only pay attention to the sensation of time travelling, which makes him feel queasy. Once he regains his full sentences, he begins to be able to observe more fully the speed at which he is travelling, as well as the world as time passes. He watches the swiftly changing scenery and then decides to stop to see what the future holds. His stop is sudden, throwing him from the machine into the grass. He finds he Is in the same location as his laboratory, but in the year 802701. He first encounters the Eloi, who approach him soon after his arrival, leading him into a large structure in which they eat and sleep. The Time Traveller takes part in a fruit feast with the Eloi, and explores the area around the structure, observing and making judgements about the nature of the future, which quickly are shown to be incorrect. When he is in the field next, he realizes that his machine has been moved; to where, he cannot fathom. In the next few days, the Time Traveller continues to explore the area, and in the process befriends one particular Eloi named Weena, who he saves from drowning. The Time Traveller, who normally sleeps outside, eventually meets the Morlocks, the other species who inhabit the planet in 802701. He descends down a well to the underground lair where the Morlocks lived, and fought his way back to his time machine using a metal bar and some matches. After a big struggle he finally sends himself away, but mistakenly starts going forwards to time. After millions of years he sees that the moon has disappeared, the earth has stopped rotating, and the sun just bobbed on the horizon. After being attacked by a crab-like creature he went forward again until he saw the earth grow cold and dark, with a frightening eclipse of the sun, and the last remnants of life. Back at home he still tries to prove his journey through time, but still only the narrator really believed him, despite pulling out an unknown species of flower that Weena has given him. The narrator drops by the next day, and as he is just about to leave he remembers that he needs to tell the Time Traveller something, and rushes into his laboratory just in time to see the time machine vanish once more. H.G. Wells, as well as being a well-known English novelist, was also a sociologist, a historian and a scientist, and his style of writing showed this. He wrote like a scientist, with very little emotion, passion or dialogue in his work, and wrote using descriptive writing as if he was describing a practical experiment. Here is an example of this from the narration, "The fire burned brightly, and the soft radiance of the incandescent lights in the lilies of silver caught the bubbles that flashed and passed in our glasses." If the quote was simply, 'The fire burned brightly and the light caught the bubbles that flashed and passed in our glasses,' you would think nothing of it. But because Wells adds the extra scientific adjectives and extra sentences of describing where a simple sentence would have been sufficient, it is an example which makes Wells style of writing stand out plainly and clearly to the readers. For a very unimportant sentence in the book the quote is rather long for just describing the fireplace and the glasses that they were holding, and it seems unnecessary to describe these sorts of objects which are superfluous to the storyline. Well's wrote like this because he thought it would make people take this novel seriously for its political and social context, not merely its creativeness, and the fact that it was written rather like an account would make important politicians and leaders of the time notice his work. He didn't want people to think of his book a fictional novel like other authors at the time Wells obviously had an interest about these sorts of unfamiliar topics at the time, as could be seen from his other novels e.g. The Invisible Man, A Modern Utopia, The Discovery of the Future, The Island of Dr. Moreau, and as these topics were rather audacious for Victorian England, he must have had an extraordinary imagination to have been able to think up such ideas. Could this have been because he was alive during a time as beneficial as the industrial revolution when everything began to change, since something like germs existed then why not another dimension? Wells also used an unidentified third person narrator to do his story telling, he does this because he wants his writing to seem more impersonal and more real, and less of the normal ' I did this' or 'I did that'. It makes it seem like the narrator was with the Time Traveller constantly but of course he was nowhere in the story except at Time Traveller's dinner parties, "The Time Traveller pushed his glass towards the silent man and rang it with his fingernail; at which the Silent Man, who had been staring at his face, started convulsively, and poured him some wine." The Time Traveller himself speaks in direct speech whilst he was either talking to the guests or the Eloi, or thinking to himself, where he used a lot of hypothetical questions, and can spend a whole page describing something like a building to the exact detail, "As the columns of hail grew thinner, I saw the white figure more distinctly. It was very large, for a silver birch-tree touched its shoulder. It was of white marble, in the shape something like a winged sphinx, but the wings, instead of being carried vertically at the sides, were spread so that it seemed to hover"¦" Well's is trying to achieve more interest and make people wonder what could be about to happen with the hypothetical questions and trying to give the readers the picture that he wants to create with the very accurate descriptions, he doesn't want people's imaginations straying too far from what Wells wants them to think. In general, the pseudo-scientific lo lend credence to the reality of the tale together with a dispassionate look at things that happen in the future make the reader focus on what is being said and less on how it is said. This strips away any real involvement with the characters and makes you focus on the story itself and the message Wells is trying to give. Wells was very much a political author. He had definite points he wished to make in his books about the state of not just the nation, but the whole world. The Time Machine was one of his earliest novels and when first written was called a 'scientific romance', rather than Science Fiction. Interestingly enough, a book has been written by Ronald Wright, called 'A Scientific Romance', which is a modern novel detailing what happened when the time machine returned to London. After Well's had witnessed the first world war he proceeded to write more non-fiction books, and undoubtedly told people that war was wrong: "The professional military mind is by necessity an inferior and unimaginative mind; no man of high intellectual quality would willingly imprison his gifts in such calling." from The Outline of History 1920 He went on in that book to give profoundly pessimistic views about mankinds future prospects, as he did in his earlier novel, The Time Machine where he went forward until the world was nothing but a shocking wasteland with barely anything left living. Well's felt that writing so convincingly about it might make people actually think about what they were doing to ruin the planet. "Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe." The Outline of History 1920 Well's passionate concern for society led Well's to join the socialist Fabian Society in London. The Fabian Society was an intellectual movement concerned with the research, discussion, and publication of socialist ideas. The Fabians believed that social reform could be achieved by a new political approach of gradual and patient argument, 'permeating' their ideas into the circles of those with power; they aimed for democratic socialism throughout London. Wells was a member of this group for a few years before he had a falling out with the leaders of the party and left. This certainly tells us a lot about Well's political views and helps you understand more closely the remarks and points he has put in the Time Machine novel. It has also been said that Well's was a supporter of communism which explains why he had these views against capitalism and class division. He has also been recorded to have had some conversations with Lenin and Stalin après the Russian Revolution to further this idea. The main political theme in the Time Machine is that capitalism is dangerous, and harmful to the workers, the connection Is that the Eloi are the lazy upper class supposedly unintelligent people from 19th century London, whilst The Morlocks are the working class. The point Wells tries to make is that for people to be rich and powerful, others have to be suffering for this to happen, an example in modern day society are big sports brands like 'Nike' or 'Adidas', who are multi-million pound companies, but the people who suffer for their wealth are the poor people who make their goods for nothing in third world countries. The second theme in the story was that unlike some contemporary thought, humankind will not continue to develop forever, and there will be a time when backwards steps will be made. Wells changed this idea that the world would continue to improve and science would always get more advanced, with the idea that war could leave two very basic groups of people who were very uncivilised as the only people left on the earth. Wells tried to make people realise that if you all live too easily you will turn in to Eloi and sit and do nothing all day, and that Morlocks are a result of Capitalism gone mad, with the lower class rebelling against the upper classes to result in chaotic circumstances. Of course he made this clear that these changes would not happen immediately, but over long periods of time, and he tried to warn people that if nothing is done about it now then terrible things could happen in the future. In conclusion, the Time Machine by H.G. Wells was a very successful book that has been made into two films and has had numerous attempts to continue the story where Wells left off. It was meant to tell an interesting story but also to put forward views about capitalism and evolution. Even though Wells didn't use the most flowing and spectacular language, and used very scientific and dispassionate language, this didn't halt the success of the book. The main key ideas in the book are, is Capitalism dangerous? Could Communism solve societies' problems? Will all the hard work that has been put in to make the world such an advanced place be wasted in the future? Are complex theories such as Time Travel possible? This book has made scholars and philosophers think about these ideas and many books regarding time travel e.g. Back to the Future, communism and capitalism e.g. Animal Farm, and evolution e.g. Planet of the Apes have been written and made into films because of H.G. Wells and his incredible imagination and view of the world.   

Written by H.G. Wells, the story of 'The Time Machine' is regarded by some as one of the greatest science fiction novels of all time. It puts forward many views on time travel, communism and other types of leadership which H.G. Wells felt strongly about, and also against....

Words: 2529 View(s): 291 Comment(s): 0
Lamb to the Slaughter and The...Lamb to the Slaughter and The speckled Band share some of the characteristics of murder mysteries. Explain the similarities and differences between the two stories and say which you think is the most compelling to read. Roald Dahl wrote the story 'Lamb to the Slaughter' in 1954. Dahl is best known for his short, entertaining children's stories like 'James and the Giant Peach ' and 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory', which are both extremely popular. He wrote Lamb to the Slaughter 1 year after he married Hollywood actress Patricia Neal. Dahl was born in September 1916 in Llandaff, South Wales. His father was a shipbroker and Dahl was the third born of a second marriage. Both of Dahl's parents came from Norwegian backgrounds and his love for stories came from the stories his mother told him at bedtime, which were usually Norse myths and legends. Each summer his family would travel, by steamer, to Oslo on a two-day voyage, where they would be treated to a Norwegian feast be Dahl's grandparents. The next day they would board a smaller boat and travel to the 'magic island' where they washed away the long summer days bathing and sailing. This childhood is where Dahl got his love for short, exiting stories! He loved the bedtime stories and the trips to Oslo and the 'magic island', he probably started writing some of his stories in places like this. He usually wrote children's stories; this background is where this came from. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote the Speckled Band in 1842. Doyle is more popularly remembered as the creator of the legendary detective, Sherlock Holmes. He wrote this story a year before his alcoholic fathers death. Doyle took up medicine as a career when he left school at the age of 18. This explains his scientific knowledge within the stories. Soon after leaving school, he began to help his mother by becoming her medical assistant. He compressed a whole years study into six months. In August 1881 he received his bachelor of medicine and master of surgery awards, this started his career as he opened his own surgery, at which he created Sherlock Holmes during his wait for customers. This does not really explain his writing style, but it seems as if he was quite interested in detectives and he had a lot of spare time, so this must have been his main influence. The victim in Lamb to the Slaughter is Patrick Maloney. He was married to Mary Maloney in a seemingly loving relationship. He was killed when Mary Maloney hit him over the head with a leg of lamb that she was going to cook for supper. I started to suspect something was wrong when, 'on the evening of his death Patrick Maloney did an unusual thing. He finished his drink very quickly and then poured himself out another very strong one.' Another clue that may suggest that something is wrong is that he takes a long time to reply to his wife 'he didn't answer', 'Her eyes waited on him for an answer, a smile, a little nod, but he made no sign.' 'He had finished the second drink and was staring down into the glass, frowning.' In the Speckled Band the victim is Miss Helen Stoner, Dr Grimesby Roylotts' daughter. When we first see Helen in the story she was wearing black, veiled and grey haired. She was shivering and terrified 'we could see that she was indeed in a pitiable state of agitation, her face all drawn and grey, with a restless frightened eyes, like of those of some hunted animal', 'the lady gave a violent start', 'It is fear, Mr Holmes. It is terror.' Helen was scared that her father would do the same to her as he did to her sister, kill! In Lamb to the Slaughter the murderer was Mary Maloney. Mary Maloney was pregnant and looked beautiful 'Her skin"¦for this was her sixth month with a child"¦had acquired a wonderful translucent quality, the mouth was soft and the eyes, with their placid look, seemed larger, darker than before.' Her motive for murdering her husband was a little unknown conversation, where I think he told her he was leaving her for someone else. Mary didn't get caught because the detectives in the story wee gullible, and ate the evidence while looking for it, ' 'Probably right under our noses, what do you think Jack?' I feel sympathy for her, that her husband was going to leave her for someone else but I think Mary Maloney over reacted to the situation. The murderer in The Speckled Band was Doctor Grimesby Roylott. He was a violent man who had a bad and short temper 'In a fit of anger, however, caused by some robberies which had been perpetrated in the house, he beat his native butler to death'. After his wife dies he shut himself up and became very violent 'But a terrible change came over our step-father about this time"¦' 'He is a man of immense strength, and absolutely uncontrollable in his anger.' His motive for trying to kill Miss Helen Stoner, his daughter, was money. His deceased wife left money for her daughters, but if they die he would receive the money, if they got married they would receive this money. I do not feel sympathy for Doctor Roylott because he's sick and twisted. He is also very selfish, but a very dangerous man. In Lamb to the Slaughter, in the scene of the crime there is a very calm, loving and relaxed atmosphere 'The room was warm and clean, the curtains drawn, the two table lamps alight "“ hers and the one by the empty chair opposite.' Although there is calm and relaxed atmosphere, it is a little too calm which creates the murderous tension. I understand that her husband wanted to leave her because she created too much tension and she fussed over him too much. The scene of the crime in The Speckled Band is an old house. The house is described as 'The building was of grey, lichen "“ blotched stone, with a high central portion and two curving wings, like the claws of a crab, thrown out on each side. In one of these wings the windows were broken and blocked with wooden boards, while the roof was partly caved in, a picture of ruin.' This creates a murderous, killing and spooky atmosphere. The atmosphere makes me feel very cautious because it is a typical description of a haunted house where anything could happen. This atmosphere is also typical of that of a murder mystery. To add to the atmosphere or fear and horror were both a baboon and cheetah living in/around the house. In Lamb to the Slaughter the detectives did not suspect Mary at all, put pressure on her, suspect a women or solve the crime. These were things, which should have been done. Things they did do which they should have done were discussing the crime with Mary, drinking alcohol, eating on duty and eating the evidence the biggest crime of them all. The detectives were very sloppy with the investigation 'she could hear them speaking among themselves, their voices thick and sloppy.' This has a double meaning about the detectives and their investigation. They were thick because of eating the evidence and sloppy because of the way they ran the case. In The Speckled Band both Sherlock Holmes and Helen Stoner suspect Dr Grimesby Roylott. Holmes treats the case as urgent, treats Helen Stoner kindly, spots all the clues, recognises red herrings, takes personal risks to solve the crime. He does this by spotting all of the easy noticeable clues 'My attention was speedily drawn"¦to this ventilator, and to the ropes which hung down to the bed. The discovery that this was a dummy and that the bed was clamped to the floor, instantly gave rise to suspicion that the rope was there as a bridge for something passing through the hole and coming to the bed. The idea of a snake instantly occurred to me.' I had an idea that Dr Grimesby Roylott had something to do with the murder, but when Sherlock Holmes revealed it couldn't be him I had a suspicion that it was an animal because there was a cheetah and a baboon in/around the house. Sherlock Holmes is a great detective because he is very observant and picks up on clues extremely quickly. He also thinks very logically. In Lamb to the Slaughter, the murderer, Mary Maloney gets away with killing Patrick very easily. She wasn't suspected at all. At first she was sad and got over this by going to the shop and coming back, to act surprised that Patrick was dead. This doesn't usually happen in murder mysteries. I think she was clever how she managed to dispose of the evidence. What else is unusual is that the murderer was a 6-month pregnant woman. In The Speckled Band the murderer, Dr Grimesby Roylott, gets killed by the snake, his secret murder weapon. I think he deserved to get killed because it gave him a taste of his own 'medicine' and he is sick, twisted and does not care for any one apart from himself. I like my murder mysteries to have a twist at the end and that good usually wins. The most exciting part of Lamb to the Slaughter was when Mary Maloney hit her husband over the head with a leg of lamb. 'At that point, Mary Maloney simply walked up behind him and without and pause she swung the big frozen leg of lamb on the air and brought it down as hard as she could on the back of his head.' The part which made me carry on reading the story was when Patrick Maloney was going to tell Mary the bad news 'This is going to be a bit of a shock to you, I'm afraid' he said 'but I've thought about it a good deal and I've decided the only thing to do is to tell you right away. I hope you won't blame me too much.' The most exciting part of The Speckled Band was when the snake killed Dr Grimesby Roylott. 'His chin was cocked upwards, and his eyes were fixed in a dreadful rigid stare at the corner of the ceiling. Round his brow he had a peculiar yellow band, with brownish speckles, which seemed to be bound tightly round his head. As we entered he made neither sound nor movement.' Another part, which made me want to read on, was when Doctor Roylott followed Helen to Holmes' office 'Don't you dare meddle with my affairs.' The Speckled Band is set in Victorian times. We know this because it uses old language, and difficult words. We also know this because dogcarts were around in this time. 'There is no dog cart which throws up mud in that way.' You can tell the Lamb to the Slaughter is set in the 80's because the language used is modern. In the story there is also a car 'tyres on the gravel outside,' and a thermos bucket 'Fresh ice in the Thermos Bucket.' They both show that the story was set in the 1980's. I don't think it is unusual that there are no female detectives because both before and after the 1900's and during half of the 20th centaury women were only thought of as house wives and who only listen to their father who would have no say in anything. Both stories are extremely compelling to read. For the younger reader, Lamb to the Slaughter would be the best as it is very short with easy language. But, I would rather read The Speckled Band as it has some difficult language and I like the way Holmes always gets his murderer. It is great to see how Holmes puts the clues together to find the killer.   

Lamb to the Slaughter and The speckled Band share some of the characteristics of murder mysteries. Explain the similarities and differences between the two stories and say which you think is the most compelling to read. Roald Dahl wrote the story 'Lamb to the Slaughter' in 1954. Dahl is...

Words: 2040 View(s): 686 Comment(s): 0