Running head: MISDIRECTION 1

The Sacrifice and Selfishness of Misdirection

Connie Rowe

University of Phoenix

AAHCA/MR-012

Shelly Godwin

September 17, 2010

MISDIRECTION 2

The Sacrifice and Selfishness of Misdirection

Misdirection continues to reveal the many ways it seems to manipulate us. It leads us in

our pursuit of narcissism and personal justice, while it allows the negative emotions to influence

the choices and sacrifices we’re willing to make. The victims in both stories seem to walk a

willing path, though it is truly only reached through manipulation. Fortunato’s ego and vanity

lead him down his path to a dark, lonely, and torturous destiny at the deceptive hands of

Montressor (Cummings, 2005). Tessie Hutchinson’s ego plays a role as well, alongside her sense

of duty, as she meets her death at the hands of neighbors who share a misdirected thought of

atonement (Cummings, 2005). The loss of life in both conclusions reminds us of consequences

that can follow when narcissism gives way to manipulation. Human Instinct is about self-

preservation. When saving oneself or standing by ones convictions are the choices; convictions

are not as important as they seem (Gines, 2010). Whereas “The Cask of Amontillado” tells of a

man who seeks revenge, “The Lottery” tells of a town who seeks salvation; though the reasoning

may be different, the end result will remain the same.

Misdirection and temptation lure the victims to begin their walk down the path of

undeserved fate. In “The Cask of Amontillado,” Montressor appeals to Fortunato’s love of wine,

his ego, and his vanity (Cummings, 2005). As Montressor watches Fortunato in his approach; his

only thoughts are of revenge for the wrongs he feels this man has committed against him

(Cummings, 2005). Fortunato, unaware of Montressor’s anger, is delighted as he listens to

Montressor tell him of the Amontillado he has acquired (Abcarian & Klotz, 2007). Fortunato’s

thoughts are altered by the effects of alcohol, however, believing he is a connoisseur; he knows

only he can truly judge the genuineness of Montressor’s wine (Cummings) (Abcarian & Klotz,

2007). He shakes his hand and agrees to take this journey with him to the wine cellar
MISDIRECTION 3

(Cummings). And so it begins; Fortunato’s destiny as he descends into the depths of

Montressor’s personal hell (Cummings).

In “The Lottery,” the entire town is lured to participate in the yearly event of murder

because they share a misdirected thought of atonement for the community’s sins (Cummings,

2005). They must all do their part in assuring the survival of the town, for the yearly tradition

brings a plentiful harvest. The thought of the cost becoming personal never enters the mind of

the individual (Cummings, 2005). Or, does it? There is some rumor of the lotteries in other

towns being seized, but Old Mr. Warner states, “Pack of crazy fools (American Literature,

2009)!” The lottery will proceed as planned (Gines, 2010).

Disillusionment and deception entice the victims and keep them connected to the

allusions of the false reasoning. In” The Cask of Amontillado,” Montressor deceives Fortunato,

giving him that false sense of friendship, by continuously showing concern for his health

(Cummings, 2005). Deep within his devious mind, Montressor thinks only of his personal justice

as he speaks of Fortunato’s worsening cough and suggesting they should turn back (Cummings,

2005). Fortunato states his cough will not be the death of him; “very true,” Montressor responds

as he feels the inner flutters of his glee (Cummings). He then hands Fortunato a bottle, and they

toast to his long life, as they descend further into the depths hell that awaits him (Cummings).

In “The Lottery,” the town is deceived into believing their lack of attendance will mean

all in the town will starve or worst yet, parish (Cummings). Self-sacrifice is needed to assure the

town’s survival and continued success (Cummings). The town is reluctant to reject tradition,

ideas, and self-made laws. Maybe it is truly, that deep down, each individual town member feels

their conduct is beyond reproach; they will never be the one chosen (Gines, 2010). Ordinary

people can do horrifying things, no less heinous than a serial killer (Cummings). As these
MISDIRECTION 4

ordinary townspeople do plan to go back to work, home, and to play, as if they just went to run

an errand (Gines, 2010) What is most horrifying, is the children of the town, are allowed to not

only participate in the lottery drawing, but of the stoning itself. How could this still occur? This

is supposed to be modern times. The elimination process begins (Abcarian & Klotz, 2007).

The fate of the undeserved victim is sealed as they move closer to the path’s end.

Montressor in “The Cask of Amontillado,” has already cleared a space in the bones of past

redemption (Cummings, 2005). It will now be the tomb that holds Fortunato responsible for the

wrongs he’s committed, if only from the two iron staples on the wall fitted with a padlock and

chain (Cummings, 2005). He will pay for the sins committed against Montressor (Cummings).

Fortunato drunkenly proceeds into the tomb, and seems confused while being chained to the

stone wall. Failing to understand what is about happen; he puzzlingly asks Montressor, “The

Amontillado?’ Montressor unmistakably reveals to Fortunato, his fate (Abcarian & Klotz,

2007), as he begins building the wall of brick that will close the crypt forever (Abcarian & Klotz,

2007). Montressor hears the screams of Fortunato, then the untimely sound of his laughter, as he

thinks this must be some kind of elaborate joke (Cummings). Upon completion of the crypt wall,

Montressor hears the faint sound of the jingle bells on Fortunato’s hat, as he bows his head in

defeat, accepting his fate (Gines, 2010). Montressor replaces the pile of bones against the wall,

so as no hint of the latest venture remains clear. Even though fifty years have come and gone,

Fortunato remains resting in eternal piece behind that wall, among Montressor’s bone collection

of trophies.

The costs of the town’s sins are paid by the chosen one of “The Lottery,” who draws the

paper with the black spot of atonement from the black box (Gines, 2010). Tessie Hutchinson

complains of the unfairness of the drawing, after she sees it was her husband who opened the
MISDIRECTION 5

paper with that black dot of atonement; signifying a member of her family will be chosen to be

the sacrifice (Cummings). “That has to be wrong, Tessie states. He wasn’t given enough time

(Cummings)!” How could this have become a personal sacrifice for her family? The reality of

the judgment sets in as the members of her family once again have to draw from the box

(Abcarian & Klotz, 2007). She continues to complain of the unfairness, as she open her paper

and it contains the black dot. At that point; finally realizing it is she who will pay this hefty price,

as the townspeople begin to stone her and she feels the impact of the first stone (Cummings,

2005).

Therefore, in conclusion, although each story displays the different ways misdirection

can affect us, in these two instances, a loss of life is still the end result. Misdirection walks

alongside manipulation, greed and self-centeredness as violence becomes a justification for their

disillusionment. The misdirection of twisted tradition in “The Lottery,” and the misdirection of

ones need for personal justice in “The Cask of Amontillado,” shows the results of the power

misdirection and manipulation can display. When we make our choices with negative emotions it

can lead us to conclusions that hold a tremendous amount of regret. The hypocrisy of the

characters becomes clear when anonymity is no longer present and the end results become

personal. In “The Cask of Amontillado, Fortunato is tricked into the final destination of his body

(Cummings, 2005), chained and encrypted inside the tomb, waiting for his death to finally

conclude the mental contemplation of the injustice in his mind. Montressor feels no guilt, just

inner righteousness and satisfaction; for he has accomplished what he felt the law never would.

In “The Lottery,” Tessie wrapped herself in the blanket of her faith (Gines, 2010),

allowing her to feel anonymous to the undesired fate of the town’s atonement. She only begins

doubting her faith when she is chosen (Abcarian & Klotz, 2007), knowing she should be above
MISDIRECTION 6

reproach; for the last year her faith has never faltered. She comes to the realization, that it could

be someone else in her family that has veered from being one of the faithful members of the

community (Gines, 2010). Thereby; still feeling she is above reproach; she begins to believe she

was chosen to sacrifice herself, becoming a martyr, for the survival of that family member. She

would have to be the one to grant them their second chance; the only way they could prove

themselves worthy of continuing their life (Gines). Although she still questions the fairness, she

accepts her fate; for in her heart, she knows that it is her sacrifice that allows the unknown family

member to live on, giving them back their future. Because of the strength of Tessie’s own faith,

in knowing she personally doesn’t deserve what is about to happen to her; her reasoning is still

misdirected and manipulated by realizing and accepting the only possibly solution for the

situation at hand (Cummings, 2005). All the while; at the same time, the townspeople still doubt

her faith, only thinking of themselves (Gines, 2010) (Cummings). There is, after all, a reason

why she was chosen instead of them. Therefore; because her faith becomes questioned, they find

their needed justification in the process of her being the chosen one. They begin gathering the

stones of sacrifice (Cummings); while the last moments in her mind are filled with the narcissism

of knowing a wrong has been done, she still has the willingness to be the martyr. For she knows

deep within, it is she alone, who is saving her family. Misdirection leads the characters to their

demise by successfully manipulating the reasoning and sense of superiority of those involved in

the story. So, in effect, do the ends justify the means? Maybe in the eyes of misdirection.
MISDIRECTION 7

References

Abcarian, R., & Klotz, M. (2007). Literature: The Human Experience (Shorter 9th ed.). Bedford,

Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.

American Literature (2009). Lottery. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from

http://www.americanliterature.com/Jackson/SS/The Lottery.html

Cummings, M. J. (2005). Cask of Amontillado By: Edgar Allen Poe A Study Guide. Retrieved

August 15, 2010, from http://www.cummingsstudyguides.net/Guides2/Caskofhtml

Cummings, M. J. (2005). Lottery By: Shirley Jackson A Study Guide. Retrieved August 20,

2010, from http://www.cummingsstudyguides.net/TheLottery.html

Gines, D. (2010). Psycho Parrot Used Bookstore, Owner/Tutor. Retrieved September 18, 2010,

from http://www.psychoparrotbooks.com

Walk, K. (1998). How to Write a Comparative Essay. Retrieved August 18, 2010, from

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~wrientr/documents/CompAnaalysis.html

The Writing Center of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (2010). Comparing and Contrasting.

Retrieved August 18, 2010, from

http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/comparison_contrast.html