John Stockton’s famous story, The Lady or the Tiger, has gained much review especially about the possible ending to the story. Stockton’s treatment of the ending and his presentation of the background for the ending come with just the right formula to make his story a hit.
But what really came out of the opened door? The lady or the tiger?
The author used a lot of words to somehow bring the ordinary reader to an immediate conclusion that it’s the tiger. Words such as “hot-blooded”, “despair”, “jealousy”, and “barbarism” will create such picture of the princess as a person more inclined to lead her man to the door that would show her selfish love and her brutal nature.
But what did the author mean when he said, “The more we reflect upon this question, the harder it is to answer. It involves a study of the human heart which leads us through devious mazes of passion out of which it is difficult to find our way”? Well, Stockton’s magic is actually in the descriptive word semi-barbaric which he used to picture the king and the princess, and impliedly, the suitor.
Had the author removed the prefix “semi-”, the question would have been easier to answer. But those four letters imply a half-and-half nature of the princess. Those four letters show her heart as equally dominated by both brutality and humanity. Those four letters tell us that she was not just capable of easily dumping her man into a bloody death, but that she was equally bothered by the wickedness of such a fate especially that it would befall the very man she loved.
When she signaled to her man to open the door on the right, did she make that decision based on the SEMI or the BARBARIC part of her? The author said she made that decision after “days and nights of anguished deliberations.” What level of anguish would she have to go through to make her finally bring her man to the tiger’s deadly fangs and paws? What other level of anguish would she have to go through to show her man that her love was willing to let go and give him another lease on life in the arms of the lady behind the door?
Another point of issue is her extent of barbarism. If she indeed had to decide on the basis of her barbarism, did she decide in a more barbaric way? And which was more barbaric: to let her man die a cruel death or to let her man live a life of regret? The princess knew how much the man loved her and it is safe to assume that he loved her with the same ardour and passion that was enough to show a highly barbaric level.
Why in the world did the man love the princess when there was that other lady who may have been lovelier and more attractive? How much pride did the princess feel when she realized that she was loved more than any woman in all the kingdom? And when she had to make that decision based on her barbaric nature, did she make it to tell her man to say “thank you” to him for the love he shared to her; that though it was only for a moment, it was enough to make her live a fulfilled semi-barbaric life? Was not her presence in the arena an indication that the extent of barbarism inside her was enough to witness only the delightful wedding and not the horrible demise of the man she loved with semi-barbaric intensity?
Or was she still so barbaric that she decided not to suffer alone in a losing cause for love? That she wanted also her lover to feel the pierces of pain brought about by a semi-barbaric passion? Did she want that they both suffer: she for longing to shower a barbaric love to a person forever absent, and he for showering a barbaric love to a person forever wrong?
I hope I did my share in making you, reader of the story, decide on the most logical outcome of the story. Or did I make you more confused?
Share your reactions, please.