Can someone shed some light please? I love the short story 'Murder Mysteries' but I am at a loss to understand the significance of the main character getting trapped in the elevator at the end of the story. So what's the deal with that? I understand that he killed Tink and the daughter and the friend, and that Raguel's kiss took away his rememberance of the event, but I can't for the life of me figure out the whole elevator thing.

any insight is much appreciated!

It's a clear reference (not quite a true parallel) to the room in which Raguel waits to be called, to know his name and perform his function, and from which he first looks at the City. Home.

There's also another thread about MM here, but I don't remember if that point was raised...

It seems to me that God always has a backup. He's a big believer in redundancy this God of ours. Look at the story of Saul and David. Saul was God's prophet, his chosen spokesman but started going a little wacky and zany doing things like sacrificing on the wrong days and disobeying some instructions. God simply replaces Saul with David. David is the new prophet. God is without an angel of vengeance (which is probably not a good thing) and he is need of another as Raguel as left his post. Just as God goaded Lucifer into rebelling, he prodded the Narrator in murdering Tink et al. Did Raguel make the Narrator forget his crimes by the kiss? I don't think so because as we have seen in the story the Narrators memory is already spotty. Human's can't see or view God without some "advanced preparation" (my quotes)or the will burnt to a crisp. The Narrator was positive Raguel's kiss gave him something. That something was his, the Narrator's, passport to the Silver City. Just some thoughts

but if Raguel fell, would he really be giving out kepys to the silver city all over the place? I'm pretty sure that the kiss takes away his memory of the event of murdering Tink et. al. given all that stuff the Name says about forgetting and memory. On top of that, there is a quick reference on the plane where the narrator sees a newspaper article about a triple murder --the murder he committed -- but it doesn't ring any bells. that to me goes way beyond having a "spotty" memory. If you hit someone over the head with their actions, and they still don't remmeber, don't you think there's probably something else involved?

I believe that the narrator's memory is spotty because he is telling the story in past tense, 10 years after the kiss from Raguel. It stands to reason that his memory can be spotty before the kiss in the story, the whole thing is a narrative told 10 years after the fact.

I'm talked out on this one - read the link Davey posted for numerous speculations into the story

I read that thread before I started this one, but I felt like the speculation got wilder and wilder as it went on, not to mention it's from 2 years ago. I feel it's appropriate to bring it back.

I need to know whats up.

Xine says you're in finals and not to listen to your grumpies.

But Raquel kept saying quite forcefully that he did not fall. He didn't fall in the sense that Lucifer fell. He wasn't thrown from the walls he simply vacated his post. Did the Narrator actually kill those three people? I may have chosen the wrong word in "spotty" but I think you grant the power of memory far to much authority or weight. The Narrator does suffer from some form of selective memory and he even admits that in the story.

But simply because Raguel claims he didn't fall, doesn't mean he didn't fall. He adamantly says "I don't care what anyone says, I never fell" or something to that effect, indicating that he did fall and was in denial about it.

How can you say I am granting too much authority to "memory" the whole second mystery is about memory. If he had his memory intact, there wouldn't be any mystery.

i read the old thread awhile ago, so this may have been brought up, but...

i think it's important to note that the story takes place 10 years AFTER raguel's kiss ("it was ten years ago, give or take a year"), so his memory is only spotty in the relation of the story to us. arguably, when raguel is telling HIS tale, before the kiss, the narrator has full memory of his actions, which makes the story more meaningful, i think. but, when he tells the story to US ten years later, he has lost any part of the memory that would prove to him that he was a murderer. that was raguel's gift.

(hope that's accurate, and that it clears something up!)

i also hugely recommend the audio version, because it is a brilliant work. i think the story works even better as a play because the timing is really beautiful.

But the narrator is retelling all of the stories, his and Raguel's, ten years after the fact. Raguel isn't retelling any tale, the Narrator is simply relating it to us the reader. So his memory cannot be faulty or spotty. He, the Narrator, retains his memory.

Am I to faulted into relying on what a character states implictly in the text (aka Raguel didn't fall)? So if a character says "Call me Ishmael...." I should refer to him as Gary or Bill?