Conflict In Mary Maloney's 'Lamb To The Slaughter'

In the short story “Lamb to The Slaughter” Mary Maloney and all the characters took a lot of risks. One monumental risk is when she killed Patrick Maloney. Mary Maloney killed Patrick Maloney because he wanted a divorce so, she slaughtered him with a frozen piece of lamb. One risk that the cops took is when Mary Maloney told them to eat the price of lamb. Mary Maloney told the cops to eat the leg of lamb because that was her murder weapon, even though the cops shouldn't have eaten it because they were on duty. The last risk is from Patrick Maloney when he was telling her about the divorce. It was a risk for Patrick Maloney

In Roald Dahl’s short story “Lamb to the Slaughter” , Mary Maloney murders her husband, a detective, after he declares that he is leaving her. Mary then has to cover her tracks or else she and her unborn child will be killed. Throughout the story, Mary’s character changes from loving wife to cold killer and back again based on her situation.

Mrs. Maloney gets away with the murder in the end. This caused by a revolting ending in which he police detectives eat the leg of lamb that was used to kill Patrick. The writer creates an unbelievable ending by making the story, up to the murder, set in a very normal family house. It is not somewhere you would associate with a morbid killing. The writer builds up an impression that the marriage may not be as good as it could be, and both were under strain not to release the tension onto each other.

In the short story “Lamb To The Slaughter”, written by Roald Dahl, the two main characters, Mary and Patrick Maloney, show many emotions and the emotions are portrayed in certain ways depending on how Dahl uses word choice and figurative language. Throughout the story the emotions of the characters change and alter depending on how specific events happen and show how the character will react in the situation, whether it be good or bad. Mary and Patrick Maloney have very different emotions towards each other and it’s very surprising to see how the emotions change during the course of the story.

Dahl’s use of dramatic irony during the story helps displays the actions of Mary Maloney and other characters. Mary Maloney swings the leg of the lamb to the back of the head of her husband. Dahl says, “ she swung the big frozen leg of lamb high in the air and brought it down as hard as she could on the back of his head” (Dahl 320). As a result, this quote is effective because the lamb was used as a weapon, instead of food; which shows that Mary could use anything to harm someone without her trying or when it was her attempt to hurt that someone. The story writes, “Probably right under our very noses. What you think, Jack”. In the same way as the first quote, this sets back to Mary because she sabotages the police to eat the lamb. With the police eating the lamb she is getting rid of the evidence so she does not get caught. From the use of dramatic irony in the story, Dahl's builds Mary as a character; he also uses different irony to create her.

Mary Maloney is a sympathetic character because she covered up Patrick’s death to protect her baby. All of the tricking and deceiving she did was to save her unborn child from what could have happened as a result of her actions. She did not know what the laws were for murdered with unborn babies and she did not want to find out. Dahl states, “ What were the laws about murderers with unborn children? Did they kill both-mother and child? Or did they wait until the tenth month? Mary Maloney didn’t know. And she certainly wasn’t prepared to take a chance” (3). Mary’s number one concern was for her baby. She did not want

At the beginning of the story, Mary Maloney loves and adores her husband, this does not last very long. Dahl uses simple but strong sentences to portray the killing of Patrick Maloney “At the point, Mary Maloney simply walked up behind him and without any pause she swung the big frozen leg of lamb high in the air and brought it down as hard as she could on the back of his head.” This illustrates Mrs. Maloney walking without any hesitation, killing her beloved husband and this also exemplifies the ultimate transformation of Mrs. Maloney from her calm behavior to being over dramatic. Another detail that this phrase demonstrates is that Patrick is so focused in his thoughts that he doesn’t sense his wife walking up towards him. Dahl reveals this unexpected transformation of Mary Maloney through her actions and thoughts. Another phrase that exemplifies Mrs. Maloney’s change in character is when she thinks to herself, after killing Patrick, “‘All right,’ she told herself. ‘So I’ve killed him.’” This illustrates Mrs. Maloney’s impeccable life, or what she conceives to be her life is demolished. At this point of the story, Dahl uses direct and indirect sentences to develop the protagonist and to show the complete transformation of Mrs. Maloney and brings her to

Author also surprises readers, when he introduces conflict between a couple that used to love each other deeply. Diverting the story from love to betrayal, author develops an irony. In the story, reader sees two examples of betrayal. Ms. Maloney, while talking with her tired husband, finds out her husband no longer want to keep their marriage. Without giving any kind of reason, Patrick betrays her wife with a decision of breaking marriage. Mary shocks, when her husband, boldly, says, “ This is going to be bit shock of you”(P. Maloney) Author creates a total opposite picture of Patrick by describing him as a husband who used to give her wife surprises; he is now giving her shock in the middle of her pregnancy. Mary, who was previously shown as “anxiety less”(Dahl), with “a slow smiling air”(Dahl) and “curiously tranquil”(Dahl), had began to get upset and now inculcate her eye with a “bewildered look.” After betrayed by her husband, she, without any argue, she goes to the basement to look for frozen food. She decides to have leg of a lamb as a last dinner with her husband, but she smashes the frozen leg in to Patrick’s head with killing him. Mary betrays her husband by killing him and takes revenge of her betrayal. Later, Author confirms her as a murdered with the statement of “I’ve killed him”(Mary) from her own lips. Dahl, in the story,

Mary is very manipulative in that she is able to create the character of the poor, pregnant wife, whose husband has just been murdered. She is able to convince the police to take pity on her, to mix her a drink and then to even eat the evidence, the leg of lamb that she has left in the oven. "Why don’t you eat up that lamb that is in the oven" (Dahl, p. 17). Mary realizes that if the police find the evidence she will go to jail. Her quick thinking and manipulative character results in the police officers eathign the evidence and therefore she cannot be charged of this crime. These actions show the complex character that Mary Maloney truly is.

The story “Lamb to the slaughter” first introduced to us the wife, Mary Maloney. The story tells us based on her actions and the way she speaks that she loves her husband very much. The story also tells us that based on what her husband says and the way he acts he doesn't have strong feelings towards her. The text it states "This is going to be a bit

To start off, it can be clearly seen from the short story that Mary Maloney is guilty. She makes a conscious effort to make sure she reacts as if she has not committed this crime in the text “Lamb to Slaughter” she says, “If she finds anything unusual or terrible when she got home, then it would be a shock and she would have to react with grief and horror.”(Dahl 383) By her stating this it shows that she knows she is guilty and that she killed her husband. The main reason I chose this quote was that it shows that she knows what she is talking about and that she has to act like this otherwise she will be caught and

This is a twisted, gripping tale of Mary Maloney, who murders her own husband by hitting him with a frozen leg of lamb and then hiding her crime and disposing of the evidence by feeding the lamb to the policemen who come to investigate the murder.

Everything has been done routinely and Mrs.Maloney is anxiously awaiting her husband’s return. “Why,?” you may ask. So that she could murder him! Patrick only wanted to come home and relax after a long day at work. He worked long hours to protect the innocent. Meanwhile, Mary who seemed innocent, spent those hours planning his death. Patrick trusted his seemingly-loving wife. She betrayed him. Mary Maloney is guilty of first-degree murder.

Dahl’s protagonist in “Lamb to Slaughter”, Mary Maloney, displays her deceitful nature when her husband comes home from a long day of work. Mary kills Patrick with a frozen leg of lamb after he informs her that he wants a divorce. Immediately thereafter, she goes to the store to purchase vegetables. This is the beginning of her deceit. Mary clearly does not need vegetables. Her trek to the store is her way of creating an an alibi. This adds another layer to her deception. Here, she engages in a conversation with a seemingly familiar clerk, Sam. She informs him that Patrick “decided he’s tired and doesn’t want to eat out tonight” (Dahl 3). This gives Sam the impression that her husband is still alive when in all actuality, he is dead. She has added yet another layer to her level of deception. Mary’s deception has no limits. She eventually deceives herself into thinking she did not murder her husband. She convinces herself that she is “not expecting to find

Mary in “Lamb to the Slaughter” and Minnie Foster, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters in “A Jury of Her Peers” have similarities and differences between the two short stories. Both Mary and Minnie Foster are childless housewives who were fearful of their husbands. The wives were both interrupted from their normal routine by an incident that triggered them to murdering their husbands. After finding out he was leaving her, Mary is shocked into killing her husband with a leg of lamb which they were having for dinner. Minnie puts a rope around her husband’s neck while he is sleeping because he broke her pet canary’s neck. The two stories depict the wives as sympathetic figures who were justified in the crimes; neither murder was premeditated.