The narrator is sharing the story from his own perspective and shares the story is first person view. By using personal pronouns like I, me and my the narrator is able to share his story as he has experienced it.
The engine of the story is the narrator's insistence, not on his innocence (which would be normal) but on his sanity. But this reveals a self-destructive drive, since it is pretending to demonstrate sanity through guilt in crime. His denial of madness is based, above all, on the systematic nature of his homicidal behavior, on his precision and on the rational explanation of an irrational behavior. This rationality, however, is undermined by its lack of motivation - "There was no reason. There was no passion. »-. However, the murderer claims that the idea was hovering day and night in his head. Thus, the final scene is nothing more than the result of the character's guilt. Like many other characters in traditional macabre literature, passions dictate their nature. And despite all his efforts, evidently, the pretense of having heard the heart beat at a distance, despite his acute sensitivity, is the evidence of madness and insanity. Readers of the time surely felt very interested in the subject of the allegation of transient madness that recreates the story.
Add more to it. Why was the preponderance of men great?
Book 1: Mentes, a Taphian.
<span>Book 2: she is disguised as a Mentor to Telemachus as he walks away at the end of the Ithacan assembly. After, Athena disguises herself as Telemachus and goes among the Ithacan asking to their help. Lastly, to avoid the suitors Athena again takes the appearance of Mentor and urges Telemachus to set sail.</span>
Answer:
i- dude what happened like
