Now that you’ve spent some time studying Dassin’s vision of the “The Tell-Tale Heart,” it’s time to put that analysis to good use. The places where the director and screenwriter chose to change Poe’s story have a significant impact on the audience’s overall interpretation. These differences prove how important it is not to rely on the “movie version” of a text when writing about literature. Throughout the rest of this lesson, you will revisit your analyses to compose a longer-form essay on the meaning of these newer interpretations.
The exercise below asks you to revisit both the Jules Dassin film and Poe’s original tale in an effort to compare their interpretations. Each question will direct you to the relevant part of Poe’s story as well as providing a timestamp to help you compare it to the film version.
The Tell-Tale Heart
by Edgar Allan Poe
(1) TRUE! —nervous—very, very dreadfully nervous I had been and am; but why will you say that I am mad? The disease had sharpened my senses—not destroyed—not dulled them. Above all was the sense of hearing acute. I heard all things in the heaven and in the earth. I heard many things in hell. How, then, am I mad? Hearken! and observe how healthily—how calmly I can tell you the whole story.
(2) It is impossible to say how first the idea entered my brain; but once conceived, it haunted me day and night. Object there was none. Passion there was none. I loved the old man. He had never wronged me. He had never given me insult. For his gold I had no desire. I think it was his eye! yes, it was this! He had the eye of a vulture—a pale blue eye, with a film over it. Whenever it fell upon me, my blood ran cold; and so by degrees—very gradually—I made up my mind to take the life of the old man, and thus rid myself of the eye forever.
(3) Now this is the point. You fancy me mad. Madmen know nothing. But you should have seen me. You should have seen how wisely I proceeded—with what caution—with what foresight—with what dissimulation I went to work! I was never kinder to the old man than during the whole week before I killed him. And every night, about midnight, I turned the latch of his door and opened it—oh so gently! And then, when I had made an opening sufficient for my head, I put in a dark lantern, all closed, closed, that no light shone out, and then I thrust in my head. Oh, you would have laughed to see how cunningly I thrust it in! I moved it slowly—very, very slowly, so that I might not disturb the old man's sleep. It took me an hour to place my whole head within the opening so far that I could see him as he lay upon his bed. Ha! would a madman have been so wise as this. And then, when my head was well in the room, I undid the lantern cautiously—oh, so cautiously—cautiously (for the hinges creaked)—I undid it just so much that a single thin ray fell upon the vulture eye. And this I did for seven long nights—every night just at midnight—but I found the eye always closed; and so it was impossible to do the work; for it was not the old man who vexed me, but his Evil Eye. And every morning, when the day broke, I went boldly into the chamber, and spoke courageously to him, calling him by name in a hearty tone, and inquiring how he has passed the night. So you see he would have been a very profound old man, indeed, to suspect that every night, just at twelve, I looked in upon him while he slept.
(4) Upon the eighth night I was more than usually cautious in opening the door. A watch's minute hand moves more quickly than did mine. Never before that night had I felt the extent of my own powers—of my sagacity. I could scarcely contain my feelings of triumph. To think that there I was, opening the door, little by little, and he not even to dream of my secret deeds or thoughts. I fairly chuckled at the idea; and perhaps he heard me; for he moved on the bed suddenly, as if startled. Now you may think that I drew back—but no. His room was as black as pitch with the thick darkness, (for the shutters were close fastened, through fear of robbers,) and so I knew that he could not see the opening of the door, and I kept pushing it on steadily, steadily.
(5) I had my head in, and was about to open the lantern, when my thumb slipped upon the tin fastening, and the old man sprang up in bed, crying out "Who's there?"
(6) I kept quite still and said nothing. For a whole hour I did not move a muscle, and in the meantime I did not hear him lie down. He was still sitting up in the bed listening—just as I have done, night after night, hearkening to the death watches in the wall.
(7) Presently I heard a slight groan, and I knew it was the groan of mortal terror. It was not a groan of pain or of grief—oh, no!—it was the low stifled sound that arises from the bottom of the soul when overcharged with awe. I knew the sound well. Many a night, just at midnight, when all the world slept, it has welled up from my own bosom, deepening, with its dreadful echo, the terrors that distracted me. I say I knew it well. I knew what the old man felt, and pitied him, although I chuckled at heart. I knew that he had been lying awake ever since the first slight noise, when he had turned in the bed. His fears had been ever since growing upon him. He had been trying to fancy them causeless, but could not. He had been saying to himself "It is nothing but the wind in the chimney—it is only a mouse crossing the floor," or "It is merely a cricket which has made a single chirp." Yes, he had been trying to comfort himself with these suppositions: but he had found all in vain. All in vain; because Death, in approaching him had stalked with his black shadow before him, and enveloped the victim. And it was the mournful influence of the unperceived shadow that caused him to feel—although he neither saw nor heard—to feel the presence of my head within the room.
(8) When I had waited a long time, very patiently, without hearing him lie down, I resolved to open a little—a very, very little crevice in the lantern. So I opened it—you cannot imagine how stealthily, stealthily—until, at length a simple dim ray, like the thread of the spider, shot from out the crevice and fell full upon the vulture eye.
(9) It was open—wide, wide open—and I grew furious as I gazed upon it. I saw it with perfect distinctness—all a dull blue, with a hideous veil over it that chilled the very marrow in my bones; but I could see nothing else of the old man's face or person: for I had directed the ray as if by instinct, precisely upon the damned spot.
(10) And have I not told you that what you mistake for madness is but over-acuteness of the sense?—now, I say, there came to my ears a low, dull, quick sound, such as a watch makes when enveloped in cotton. I knew that sound well, too. It was the beating of the old man's heart. It increased my fury, as the beating of a drum stimulates the soldier into courage.
(11) But even yet I refrained and kept still. I scarcely breathed. I held the lantern motionless. I tried how steadily I could maintain the ray upon the eve. Meantime the hellish tattoo of the heart increased. It grew quicker and quicker, and louder and louder every instant. The old man's terror must have been extreme! It grew louder, I say, louder every moment!—do you mark me well I have told you that I am nervous: so I am. And now at the dead hour of the night, amid the dreadful silence of that old house, so strange a noise as this excited me to uncontrollable terror. Yet, for some minutes longer I refrained and stood still. But the beating grew louder, louder! I thought the heart must burst. And now a new anxiety seized me --the sound would be heard by a neighbor! The old man's hour had come! With a loud yell, I threw open the lantern and leaped into the room. He shrieked once—once only. In an instant I dragged him to the floor, and pulled the heavy bed over him. I then smiled gaily, to find the deed so far done. But, for many minutes, the heart beat on with a muffled sound. This, however, did not vex me; it would not be heard through the wall. At length it ceased. The old man was dead. I removed the bed and examined the corpse. Yes, he was stone, stone dead. I placed my hand upon the heart and held it there many minutes. There was no pulsation. He was stone dead. His eve would trouble me no more.
(12) If still you think me mad, you will think so no longer when I describe the wise precautions I took for the concealment of the body. The night waned, and I worked hastily, but in silence. First of all I dismembered the corpse. I cut off the head and the arms and the legs.
(13) I then took up three planks from the flooring of the chamber, and deposited all between the scantlings. I then replaced the boards so cleverly, so cunningly, that no human eye—not even his—could have detected anything wrong. There was nothing to wash out—no stain of any kind—no blood-spot whatever. I had been too wary for that. A tub had caught all—ha! ha!
(14) When I had made an end of these labors, it was four o'clock—still dark as midnight. As the bell sounded the hour, there came a knocking at the street door. I went down to open it with a light heart,--for what had I now to fear? There entered three men, who introduced themselves, with perfect suavity, as officers of the police. A shriek had been heard by a neighbor during the night; suspicion of foul play had been aroused; information had been lodged at the police office, and they (the officers) had been deputed to search the premises.
(15) I smiled,—for what had I to fear? I bade the gentlemen welcome. The shriek, I said, was my own in a dream. The old man, I mentioned, was absent in the country. I took my visitors all over the house. I bade them search—search well. I led them, at length, to his chamber. I showed them his treasures, secure, undisturbed. In the enthusiasm of my confidence, I brought chairs into the room, and desired them here to rest from their fatigues, while I myself, in the wild audacity of my perfect triumph, placed my own seat upon the very spot beneath which reposed the corpse of the victim.
(16) The officers were satisfied. My manner had convinced them. I was singularly at ease. They sat, and while I answered cheerily, they chatted of familiar things. But, ere long, I felt myself getting pale and wished them gone. My head ached, and I fancied a ringing in my ears: but still they sat and still chatted. The ringing became more distinct—It continued and became more distinct: I talked more freely to get rid of the feeling: but it continued and gained definiteness—until, at length, I found that the noise was not within my ears.
(17) No doubt I now grew very pale,—but I talked more fluently, and with a heightened voice. Yet the sound increased—and what could I do? It was a low, dull, quick sound—much such a sound as a watch makes when enveloped in cotton. I gasped for breath—and yet the officers heard it not. I talked more quickly—more vehemently; but the noise steadily increased. I arose and argued about trifles, in a high key and with violent gesticulations; but the noise steadily increased. Why would they not be gone? I paced the floor to and fro with heavy strides, as if excited to fury by the observations of the men—but the noise steadily increased. Oh God! what could I do? I foamed—I raved—I swore! I swung the chair upon which I had been sitting, and grated it upon the boards, but the noise arose over all and continually increased. It grew louder—louder—louder! And still the men chatted pleasantly, and smiled. Was it possible they heard not? Almighty God!—no, no! They heard!—they suspected!—they knew!—they were making a mockery of my horror!—this I thought, and this I think. But anything was better than this agony! Anything was more tolerable than this derision! I could bear those hypocritical smiles no longer! I felt that I must scream or die! and now—again! –hark! louder! louder! louder! louder!
(18) "Villains!" I shrieked, "dissemble no more! I admit the deed!—tear up the planks! here, here!—It is the beating of his hideous heart!"
How does the film interpret the relationship between the protagonist and the old man at the start of the story?
- It shows that the old man was an oppressive tyrant who had tormented the protagonist for no good reason.
- It suggests that the old man was let down mainly because the protagonist failed to live up to his potential.
- It reveals that the old man was disgusted by the protagonist’s laziness and lack of independence.
- It implies that the old man was jealous of the protagonist for his youth and talent.
The dialogue between the two characters—particularly when the protagonist defends himself—reveals this most clearly.
The dialogue between the two characters—particularly when the protagonist defends himself—reveals this most clearly.
The dialogue between the two characters—particularly when the protagonist defends himself—reveals this most clearly.
The dialogue between the two characters—particularly when the protagonist defends himself—reveals this most clearly.
How does the short story interpret this same relationship?
- It shows a friendly relationship between the characters.
- It shows a neutral relationship between the characters.
- It shows the same hateful relationship between the characters.
- It shows the two characters do not yet have a relationship.
The story says that the protagonist “loved” the old man, and focuses on his Evil Eye as the target of his aggression.
The story says that the protagonist “loved” the old man, and focuses on his Evil Eye as the target of his aggression.
The story says that the protagonist “loved” the old man, and focuses on his Evil Eye as the target of his aggression.
The story says that the protagonist “loved” the old man, and focuses on his Evil Eye as the target of his aggression.
How does this difference in interpretation from the short story to the film affect the audience’s understanding of the story?
- The film suggests that the protagonist needed a clearer motive to murder the old man.
- The film suggests that the protagonist did not need a clear motive to murder the old man.
- The film suggests that the old man’s mistreatment drove the protagonist insane.
- The film suggests that the old man’s mistreatment justified the protagonist’s murder.
As the film does not show the protagonist’s madness until after the murder, the difference in the interpretations has more to do with providing motive.
As the film does not show the protagonist’s madness until after the murder, the difference in the interpretations has more to do with providing motive.
As the film does not show the protagonist’s madness until after the murder, the difference in the interpretations has more to do with providing motive.
As the film does not show the protagonist’s madness until after the murder, the difference in the interpretations has more to do with providing motive.
[3:57] How does the film interpret the old man’s understanding of the protagonist’s intent to kill him?
- It suggests that the old man became suspicious of his murder well before it occurred.
- It shows that the old man felt the protagonist was powerless to go against him.
- It demonstrates that the old man was completely ignorant to the protagonist’s murder plot.
- It reveals that the old man had been trying actively to uncover the protagonist’s murder plot.
The film uses cinematic and dramatic elements to indicate the old man’s deep apprehension.
The film uses cinematic and dramatic elements to indicate the old man’s deep apprehension.
The film uses cinematic and dramatic elements to indicate the old man’s deep apprehension.
The film uses cinematic and dramatic elements to indicate the old man’s deep apprehension.
How does the short story interpret this same understanding?
- It shows that the old man had no idea what was coming before the night it happened.
- It shows that the old man had known he was being plotted on for several days’ time.
- It shows that the old man had suspected that he was being stalked by an unknown creature.
- It shows that the old man had intended to kill himself before he could be killed.
The story does not present the old man’s fearful reaction until paragraph 5, when he clearly indicates that he does not know who has come for him.
PThe story does not present the old man’s fearful reaction until paragraph 5, when he clearly indicates that he does not know who has come for him.
The story does not present the old man’s fearful reaction until paragraph 5, when he clearly indicates that he does not know who has come for him.
The story does not present the old man’s fearful reaction until paragraph 5, when he clearly indicates that he does not know who has come for him.
How does this difference in interpretation from the short story to the film alter the audience’s understanding of the story?
- The film suggests that the old man understood that he had inspired vengeance that was deserved.
- The film suggests that the old man was ignorant, defenseless, and innocent.
- The film suggests that the protagonist’s desire was to terrorize the old man rather than murder him.
- The film suggests that the protagonist would not have killed the old man if he had not been awake.
The film’s decision to note the old man’s suspicion makes this story more clearly about revenge.
The film’s decision to note the old man’s suspicion makes this story more clearly about revenge.
The film’s decision to note the old man’s suspicion makes this story more clearly about revenge.
The film’s decision to note the old man’s suspicion makes this story more clearly about revenge.
[10:45] How does the film interpret the perspective of the police officers?
- It reveals that they remain somewhat suspicious of the protagonist.
- It shows that they are completely convinced by the protagonist’s lies.
- It suggest that they believe that the protagonist is a criminal from the moment they meet.
- It demonstrates their ignorance to clues that are plain and obvious.
In the film version, the officers’ suspicion varies wildly throughout the film’s final scene, but never goes away.
In the film version, the officers’ suspicion varies wildly throughout the film’s final scene, but never goes away.
In the film version, the officers’ suspicion varies wildly throughout the film’s final scene, but never goes away.
In the film version, the officers’ suspicion varies wildly throughout the film’s final scene, but never goes away.
How does the short story interpret this same perspective?
- It suggests that they are not suspicious of the protagonist until the very last moment of the story.
- It suggests that their suspicion drives up the intensity of the noise the protagonist hears.
- It suggests that they are trying to lure the protagonist into a trap.
- It suggests that they are not suspicious of the protagonist until he places his seat on the floorboards above the corpse.
The final mention of the officers in the short story comes toward the end of paragraph 17, where they are still “chatting pleasantly” and “smiling.”
The final mention of the officers in the short story comes toward the end of paragraph 17, where they are still “chatting pleasantly” and “smiling.”
The final mention of the officers in the short story comes toward the end of paragraph 17, where they are still “chatting pleasantly” and “smiling.”
The final mention of the officers in the short story comes toward the end of paragraph 17, where they are still “chatting pleasantly” and “smiling.”
How does this difference in interpretation from the short story to the film alter the audience’s understanding of the story?
- The film suggests that the protagonist never stood a chance at getting away with the murder.
- The film suggests that the protagonist was driven to confess based primarily on being suspected.
- The film suggests that the protagonist was not smart enough to live independently.
- The film suggests that the protagonist thought that his actions were unjust and wanted to be punished.
The officers in the film version are keener about picking up on the suspicious activity of the protagonist, which shows itself much more clearly in his words and actions.
The officers in the film version are keener about picking up on the suspicious activity of the protagonist, which shows itself much more clearly in his words and actions.
The officers in the film version are keener about picking up on the suspicious activity of the protagonist, which shows itself much more clearly in his words and actions.
The officers in the film version are keener about picking up on the suspicious activity of the protagonist, which shows itself much more clearly in his words and actions.
Summary
Questions answered correctly:
Questions answered incorrectly: