Analysis Of Killings By Andre Dubus

1332 Words3 Pages

A Justification for Murder

Is murder ever truly justified? Many people might proclaim the adage, "Two wrongs don't make a right,” while others would argue that the Old Testament Bible states, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" (Deuteronomy 19:21). Andre Dubus explores this moral dilemma in his short story, Killings. The protagonist, Matt Fowler, a good father and husband, decides to take revenge for his son's murder. Richard Strout is a bad man who murders his soon-to-be ex-wife's lover. These facts are complicated by the complexity of interpersonal relationships when seen through the lens of Matt’s conviction, Strout’s humanity, and ultimately Matt’s personal sacrifice on behalf of his loved ones. Though on the surface this tale might lead someone to think that Dubus is advocating for revenge, a closer look reveals that this a cautionary tale about the true cost of killing another human as readers are shown how completely Matt is altered by taking a life. …show more content…

When he realizes that his wife Ruth is becoming ill, he begins to think of killing his son's murderer. His eldest son has already expressed the desire for revenge, saying, "I should kill him" (1123). Ruth is forced to see the murderer on a near daily basis, which is "killing her” (1124). This cannot only be a revenge killing, else he would have been planning the killing far before Ruth became ill. Matt desperately wants to protect his family. Yet throughout the children's young life, he has forced himself to maintain control, "relief was his only acknowledgement of his fear" (1128), and allow his children some space. How difficult it must be to maintain control when your youngest son is beaten simply because he loves the woman, Mary Ann, presented as a good woman, though perhaps unfaithful to an abusive

Open Document