He shows readers that a non-professional observer can be successful in untangling even the most puzzling mystery. He compares solving a crime to solving a cipher or gambling with cards or chess.
He introduces a playful analysis to solving a crime—no matter how gruesome the act may have been. To solve difficult puzzles, he suggests that an analyst must use a combination of tools including physical action, intellectual analysis, and intuition. His approach incorporates the ingenious, the fanciful, and the truly imaginative. However, it is also profoundly analytic. Dupin states that the Parisian Police often fail because they only analyze cases using circumstantial evidence.
He believes that to know what to observe, he must form a strategy before seeking to understand the clues and solution. However, it is possible that in this relationship the narrator may distort what Dupin is thinking or doing by introducing his own subjective point of view of what he observes. However, with such demonstrations, Dupin brings more attention to his personal idiosyncrasies than to the relevant case details. The narrator, whose inner thoughts are observed, is amazed.
The occupation is often full of interest by the apparently illimitable distance and incoherence between the starting-point and the goal. He employs many sophisticated skills, including tracking thoughts and actions back to their origins, making visual and auditory inferences, and reading body and facial signs phrenology. Dupin discards this unproven assumption and embarks on finding a different solution.
Dupin concludes, after questioning all the witnesses, that the murder could not have been committed by the prime suspect, or by any human.
Like a mathematician, he views the crime scene as a site of calculation, and he considers the moves of the murderer as though pitted against him in a chess game.
Whereas the Paris police tread lightly around the actions of Minister D——, an important government official, Dupin ignores politics just as he ignores emotion in the gruesome murders of the Rue Morgue.
In this story, Dupin reveals his capacity for revenge. When the Minister insulted him in Vienna years before the crime presently in question, Dupin promised to repay the slight.
He cunningly analyzes the external facts of the crime, but he is also motivated by his hunger for revenge. Consider the moments when Dupin suddenly interrupts the silence between them to say exactly what the narrator's thinking, out of the blue. He loves watching faces and body language to make deductions, and he values the surfaces of things as the best source of clues for what's going underneath them.
It's this trait that makes Dupin a great detective. He can look beyond obvious clues that confuse the police like the four thousand francs on the floor, which the police think have to provide the motive, because who doesn't want lots of money?
As we learn, an orangutan, that's who. He sees the small details that indicate what really happened — like the broken nail in the second window frame. But it also makes him hard to deal with as a friend: how would you feel if your best friends kept staring at your face, trying to figure out your feelings, instead of just, you know, asking? He's mostly interested in games, puzzles, and philosophizing — and not so much in interpersonal bonding.
By the way, a last word about Dupin's character: he sneers that the Prefect of Police is "all head and no body" in his reasoning, that he lacks creativity even though he's got plenty of "cunning. Where's all of his passion, rage, what have you? Well — maybe in the Ourang-Outang? Check out our "Character Analysis" of the Ourang-Outang for more on our favorite ape and its relation to Dupin.
Parents Home Homeschool College Resources. Study Guide.
0コメント