In a Grove
Bondoc, Cris Vincent A. 11-20-08
HUM15-A4 Prof. Bantay
In a Grove
One cannot get a conclusion from the story because every character says one thing that is refuted by another. For instance, Masago said that Takehiro was repulsed by her after the rape. In Takehiro’s version, Takehiro was furious at his wife because of what happened, while Tajomaru said that the samurai still loved her wife as he was ready to fight to the death for her. Another was the strange character who took the dagger out of the chest of Takehiro. No, this man isn’t the murderer, I suppose this man was also a thief, and first man who found the body was the woodcutter. So the woodcutter can no longer be accused, even though he quickened the death of the samurai by taking the dagger, for more blood flowed in the samurai’s mouth when the dagger was removed. The facts that remain undisputed are that Takehiro died, Masago was raped, and Tajomaru stole the samurai’s quiver, bow, and horse.
So, I think that the true culprit of murder must be Masago, because in each of their story, Masago wanted Takehiro dead, although the details vary. In Takehiro’s story, he killed himself because his wife wanted him to die after the rape. In Masago’s story, she was the one who stabbed her husband. In Tajomaru’s account, he killed the samurai by crossing swords with him, and he did this because of the woman. Therefore Masago is the mastermind of the crime, because in Tajomaru and Takehiro’s account, she ordered the thief to kill the samurai, and in her story, she was the murderer. Tajomaru and Takehiro’s story is related because of Masago’s actions, thus giving 67% chance that she is the culprit. Why is say she’s the mastermind? As I said, in both stories, she ordered the thief to kill her husband, if that story was modernized, it would go like this: she gives a gun to the thief and orders the thief to silence the man. Therefore, we cannot say she’s out of the crime; she wanted it, even if
HUM15-A4 Prof. Bantay
In a Grove
One cannot get a conclusion from the story because every character says one thing that is refuted by another. For instance, Masago said that Takehiro was repulsed by her after the rape. In Takehiro’s version, Takehiro was furious at his wife because of what happened, while Tajomaru said that the samurai still loved her wife as he was ready to fight to the death for her. Another was the strange character who took the dagger out of the chest of Takehiro. No, this man isn’t the murderer, I suppose this man was also a thief, and first man who found the body was the woodcutter. So the woodcutter can no longer be accused, even though he quickened the death of the samurai by taking the dagger, for more blood flowed in the samurai’s mouth when the dagger was removed. The facts that remain undisputed are that Takehiro died, Masago was raped, and Tajomaru stole the samurai’s quiver, bow, and horse.
So, I think that the true culprit of murder must be Masago, because in each of their story, Masago wanted Takehiro dead, although the details vary. In Takehiro’s story, he killed himself because his wife wanted him to die after the rape. In Masago’s story, she was the one who stabbed her husband. In Tajomaru’s account, he killed the samurai by crossing swords with him, and he did this because of the woman. Therefore Masago is the mastermind of the crime, because in Tajomaru and Takehiro’s account, she ordered the thief to kill the samurai, and in her story, she was the murderer. Tajomaru and Takehiro’s story is related because of Masago’s actions, thus giving 67% chance that she is the culprit. Why is say she’s the mastermind? As I said, in both stories, she ordered the thief to kill her husband, if that story was modernized, it would go like this: she gives a gun to the thief and orders the thief to silence the man. Therefore, we cannot say she’s out of the crime; she wanted it, even if