Angela Carter skillfully weaves fact and fiction in her account of the Fall River Axe murders. After reviewing newspaper articles and/or trial testimonies from 1893, how well do you think she used factual
details to support her fictional version of events?
11 comments:
Angela Carter uses facts & fiction to prove her claims that Lizzie Borden murdered her parents and that Lizzie is insane. Miss Russell's testifies that Lizzie believes her father to have many enemies. In Carter's story, Lizzie confesses that her father is not liked by many people. Carter uses this evidence to prove that Lizzie wants people to think that she did not murder her parents and it could've been one of Borden's enemies. Carter also includes the detail that Lizzie is afraid someone will break into the house since a burglary already occurred. Lizzie confided this to Miss Russell and she admits it in her testimony. Carter does use the factual detail that Lizzie stopped referring Mrs. Borden to "mom." Carter somewhat twists the truth about Lizzie being able to get anything she wanted from her father because Emma testifies that Lizzie didn't have to do anything she didn't want to do. Carter also uses the fact about Mr. Borden killing Lizzie's pigeons.
Carter adds in the hints towards sexual assault on the part of Mr. Borden. This idea would not have been brought up in court during this time period. Carter never mentions that everyone in the Borden household was sick. Carter never mentions the dress that Lizzie was wearing or why she burned it. In Miss Russell's, Emma's and Lizzie's testimonies the dress is brought up. Why did she burn it? What paint could have possibly been on it for her to have such a need to destroy it? Carter never answers these questions in her short story. Overall, Carter does a good job of picking the facts she needed and embellishing when necessary to convince the reader of her two claims.
Although Carter uses many facts from the trial, she manipulates some of the facts and makes many implicit suggestions to convince the readers that Lizzie killed her parents. One fact that she uses is that all the doors in the house were kept locked all the times. In Lizzie’s testimony she says “Father's bedroom door was kept locked and his door into my room was locked and hooked.” In her short story Carter uses this fact that his bedroom led into Lizzie’s room to suggest that there was incest or sexual abuse. This is fiction because there was nothing mentioned or suggested in the trial that such a relationship existed. Another fact that Carter uses is the testimony of Miss. Russell. It is true that the night before the murders, Lizzie talked with Miss Russell about her fear that someone is trying to put poison in the milk and that her father had enemies. In the trial, Miss. Russell says that Lizzie was “afraid that somebody will do something to [Mr.Borden] because he is so discourteous to people.” In the story however, Carter uses fiction when the narrator says “how can she tell Miss. Russell that she gripped by an imperious need to stay in Fall River to murder her parents.” This line shows how Carter used fiction interweaved with the facts to make a very explicit claim that Lizzie is guilty. Another way in which Carter manipulated the facts is that she left several details out of her story. One that stands out is the Portuguese laborer" who had visited the Borden home earlier in the morning and "asked for the wages that were due to him.” Since Mr. Borden had enemies, it is very possible that somebody wanted to get revenge but Carter eliminates any suspects so that the readers are forced to believe that Lizzie had to be the one who did it.
In Angela Carter's "Fall River Axe Murders" facts and fiction are used to portray Carter’s claim that Lizzie Borden is guilty of committing a double homicide. Angela Carter, was a fictional writer who was known for her interest in the fantastic and the surreal. Yes it is true that Lizzie did not like her mother very much and as a result referred to her as her stepmother, even though she has been Lizzie’s mother since age two. Another true-to-story fact is that Lizzie attempted to buy prussic acid—poison, just a day before the murders were committed. This is fair grounds for intent to kill. Angela Carter includes this fact as well as the characterization that Andrew Borden was a mister and loved money. She also calls Abby a glutton. Many prosecuted witnesses have said the relationship between Lizzie and her parents was less than loving. Angela Carter presents the facts for sure, but she also stretches the truth a bit to sway the readers towards her claim.
Angela Carter provides extensive details on Lizzie’s love for her pigeons. Mr. Borden kills these pigeons with the hatchet, making it likely that Lizzie would be very angry with him. The fact is, Lizzie only maintained their roosting spot in the barn loft, which does not have to involve love for the pigeons. Angela Carter also provides details on Lizzie’s memory lapse during an alleged burglary, which happened years earlier. There is no proof, however that Lizzie had a memory issue or mental problem. Angela Carter mixes fictionalizes facts to make her claim more likely to be true.
In reviewing numerous newspaper articles as well as testimonies of the many people involved in the Lizzie Borden trial, it becomes evident that Carter in fact incorporated numerous factual details into her writing to form her version of an argument. For instance, the account of Lizzie’s father killing her pigeons because “Abby fancied the slaughtered pigeons for a pie,” (Carter 189) is also found within Lizzie’s testimony of the murder. Additionally, the mentioning of a ring from Lizzie that Mr. Borden kept on his finger in place of a wedding ring is also found within Emma, Lizzie’s sister’s testimony of the events. Emma offered claim that her father “always” (Emma Borden’s Testimony) wore a ring from Lizzie for about “ten or fifteen years” (Emma Borden’s Testimony) of his life since she gave it to him. These two facts in particular are supported by both Angela Carter’s story “The Fall River Axe Murders” and testimonies from the 1890’s. She includes these factual details in her work to develop the claim that Lizzie had a legitimate reason to revolt against her parents and kill them because of the negative relationship she had with her stepmother as well as the potential sexually abusive relationship with her father. On the other hand, Carter leaves out numerous facts concerning the murder in order to portray her argument persuasively. Among some details found in the testimonies of Miss. Russell, Emma, and Bridget the audience is made aware of some additional information that can be useful in forming an educated opinion about the Lizzie Borden Trial. In Miss. Russell’s testimony she mentions seeing Lizzie and Emma at the stove on the day after the murder. She describes the scene as Lizzie is burning an old skirt over a stove as “it is covered with paint” (Alice M. Russell’s Testimony). One can gather from this description that she was in fact burning the clothing she wore while committing the murder, yet there is no mention of this in Carter’s account of the murder. Despite the fact that Carter leaves this detail as well as some others, her argument is overall very convincing and displays a clear portrayal of factual information within a fictional account. While Carter excluded some details in order to strengthen her argument she implemented numerous others that ultimately made her account believable.
Even though Carter utilizes many facts from the transcripts, she changes a few of the details and implies certain things to make the readers think that Lizzie is a murderer. Carter does not want people to think that somebody else killed Lizzie, so she morphs all of the evidence, only including what she thinks would be beneficial in supporting her claim. Carter makes the assumption and infers that there could have been a sexual problem between Lizzie and her father. There is very little mention of this in the factual testimony. The ring is something that does come up, but its not as clear that there could have been any rape or assault. The pigeons, however, and many more pieces of evidence are factual, at least to some extent. The issue is that there is no concrete evidence whatsoever linking Lizzie to the murder. There is nothing that makes the murderer inherently obvious.
Overall, Angela Carter is very effective with using specific evidence to support her fictional ideas about how certain events occurred in the Borden household on the morning of the murder and the days prior to it. In the newspaper article, “Thursday’s Affray: No Clue Yet as to Its Perpetrator,” the reporter states that everybody who was associated with the crime agreed that money was at the bottom of the foul murder, but in what measure and concerning what person could not be conceived. Carter states this information to readers in a different and more convincing manner in order to support her claim that Lizzie is guilty. She states, “She used to call her stepmother ‘mother,’ as duty bade, but after a quarrel about money after her father deeded half a slum property to her stepmother five years before” (Carter 185). This quote shows how Carter stretched evidence to convince readers that Lizzie was guilty. She leads the reader to believe that money was one of the main reasons why Lizzie killed her stepmother, but as the report states there was no proof that money was Lizzie’s real motivation for the murders. Through Carter’s word choice and her stretching of the truth, she is able to portray evidence as fictional details in order to support her claim. In another article it talks about how Mr. Borden wore his daughter’s high school ring on his pinky finger. Carter describes, “He wears a gold ring, not a wedding ring but a high-school ring, a singular trinket for a fabulously misanthropic miser” (183). Through Carter’s use of words like “singular trinket,” “misanthropic,” and “miser” she gets her point across to readers that Mr. Borden and his daughter had a very close relationship and she implies that he may have sexually abused her and therefore, this could be another motive Lizzie had for killing her parents. Carter intricately intertwines fact and fiction throughout her short story in order to prove that her two claims are valid.
Erica Ellermeyer
In response to Kate, I agree with your interpretation that Carter does a very good job of combining fact and fiction in order to support her two claims. I also agree with you that Carter did a great job of choosing facts that supported her claims, and leaving out the evidence that proved her claims contrary. For example, Carter chose to leave out of the script one important individual, John Vinnicum Morse. She chose to leave him out because he did not support her argument. Carter chose to leave out specific details and embellish other facts in order to prove to her audience that Lizzie was guilty and that she was a mentally unstable individual.
Erica Ellermeyer
In “The Fall Axe Murders,” Angela Carter twists facts from the true story of Lizzie Borden’s execution story to make the reader believe that Lizzie Borden is the reason for the two killings. Carter, by stretching and moving around truths, successfully persuades the reader that Lizzie is the one who committed the slaying. Carter states that John W. Morse “is visiting, passing through, he is a chance bystander, he is irrelevant. Write him out of the script” (179). She acts as though his presence is not important, but in the Fall River Herald’s article, “Thursday’s Affray: No Clue Yet as to Its Perpetrator,” clearly states that he was “visiting at the house on the day of the murder” (par. 8). Carter accurately discusses the absence of the Borden’s oldest daughter Miss. Emma Borden, removing another potential suspect. Carter, along with the article “Mrs. Borden Was Dead a Full Hour Before Her Husband Came,” in the New York Herald discusses Mr. Borden’s enemies. Although Mr. Borden’s enemies could be thought of when trying to put a murderer’s name to this vicious crime, Carter and investigation throw that possibility away. Carter discusses the locks on the doors, and how no one could possibly have gotten in, and investigation shows that the stepmother was slaughtered an hour before Lizzie’s father was killed. This implies that the murderer either left and came back or hung around in the house without anyone: the maid or Lizzie, seeing. This leads to the suspicious idea that the murderer must have lived or been a normal resident of the house. A few key facts that Carter used that showed up in the testimony was the fact that Lizzie could get whatever she wanted from her father, but he did kill her pigeons. That’s a motive. Another key point is that Lizzie did, in fact, go out to buy poison, two days before the homicide. These strong fact are key to Carter’s persuasion to prove that Lizzie is guilty of her parents’ murder.
I agree with Kate that overall Carter picks out the right facts to twist and embellish, but she could have involved even more. Carter could have discussed the burning of the dress and posing the question, what paint was so destructive that the dress had to be burned, not jus discarded? Was it too explicit for Carter’s argument?
Angela Carter provides evidence towards Lizzie’s guilt in “ Fall River Axe Murders” which is overall an accurate representation of the factual evidence. She accurately depicts Lizzie’s cold attitude towards her mother saying how she refered to her as he stepmother and never mom. Also how she had tried to purchase prussic acid the day before the murders. What she does leave out though is also very crucial such as how the entire family was sick the day of the murders, and how Lizzie burned a dress the day after the murders. She also leaves out how Lizzie confides to a neighbor how she is afraid of another burglary. Her depiction of Mr. Borden is accurate describing in vivid detail how money oriented he is and how he adores his daughter Lizzie. Her description of Mrs. Borden is equally accurate saying she is a glutton. In real life she was a whopping two hundred pounds. Overall Carter does a fair and accurate job relaying the story of these brutal murders but her own little twist skews the reader towards her view on the events
Alot of what I wantd to say has been said already... So yea I agree with everybody. Angela Carter definitely uses factual evidence to support her fictional version of events. In class, we discuss the first 3 articles written in the midst of the murder trials several major points are established. The most important is probably the idea that money was at the bottom of the crime an idea author Angela Carte elaborates on in the story. Money was the reason for discourse between Lizzie Borden and Abby Borden. In Lizzie Borden's testimony she also discusses the money quarrel; how it started, how it escalated, and how it ended. This money quarrel I think was also used against Lizzie in the trial just like it was used against her in the story by Carter.
The 3rd article we discussed builds on the quarrel and goes onto give details that Carter didnt disclose
Angela carter skillfully infuses actual facts and details into her imaginative short story thriller “Fall River Axe Murders.” Carter competently takes real facts from Newspapers articles and trial testimonies and from this acquired information she crafts her story. The short story uses anecdotes as the primary means of evidence. Story after story is told about Lizzie and the other members in the house. This information is used to create characters and influence the reader about who the actual murderer is. In Carter’s story there is a deep and resounding hatred that is seen between Lizzie Borden and her stepmother. Carter develops this level of hatred throughout the course of the story and eventually uses it as Lizzie’s motive for killing her stepmother. In the New York Herald article published on august 7, 1892, light is shed on Lizzie and her stepmother’s relationship, “Lizzie resented his [Father] liberality toward the stepmother.” The newspaper said that Lizzie hated her stepmother because of financial reasons. Carter takes this basic information and evolves it into a large and complex hatred. Angela Carter does a very effective job of using available facts and intertwining them with her story, in order to convince the reader that Lizzie Borden is guilty.
In response to Brad: I think the point you brought up about Carter “Morphing” evidence so that there is only one possible murderer is very intriguing and offers a unique perspective on Carter’s story and how it relates to the actual facts. However, I disagree with your point regarding Lizzie’s supposed sexual problems between her and her father. The original sources (Newspaper articles, trial transcripts…) make no mention of any sexual problem, this I agree with and also find quite irrefutable. The problem is that you are reading things in the story that are not there. There is no example of sexual problems between Lizzie and her father in the short story. It is always possible to infer and interpret lines one way or another, but the point is that the possible reference in the story to a sexual confrontation of any kind is far too vague ambiguous to be used in juxtaposition with actual fact. If Carter did not intend for this information to be in the story, then it certainly cannot be used to counter her depiction of events.
Post a Comment