A Plot to Kill Dubus’ ordering of the story events non-chronologically create room for several plot devices to be presented. Plot devices such as suspense and in medias res warrant intrigue on behalf of the reader because he/she is left in the dark as to why events and actions occur the way they do. They are also part of a unifying whole that explains the context of the story. Plot is a progression of events that are purposely connected that lead to a resolution. In “Killings,” Dubus wants the reader to immediately feel sympathy for the grieving family. Yet he does not give any information as to how Frank dies. Only threats and gestures are revealed to show some of the emotions expressed by the family. This lack of knowledge regarding the circumstances of Frank’s death builds suspense and curiosity within the reader to make he/she want to read more. The reader can only speculate as to what happens later and why. If the entire story were told in a linear, chronological fashion like the second half of the story where Dubus shows a methodical pattern of events committed by the protagonist, the story would not entail the aforementioned plot devices that are integral to the plot. Since those aspects of the story would not be present, “Killings” would not be as appealing or interesting to the reader. With his ordering, Dubus emphasizes intrigue, suspense, and a element of surprise that the reader would otherwise ascertain before events happen. The story begins in medias res as each family member grieves in his or her own way for the death of Frank. “I should kill him”(Meyer 81). This is the statement made by Frank’s brother, Steve as the story opens at the funeral. In his grief and anger he repeated the statement. This immediately invokes suspense because the reader does not know whom Steve is speaking of or if he will follow through with the threat. “Beneath her eyes there was swelling from the three days she had suffered”(81). This is the pain seen on Ruth’s face by her family as she laments. Ruth means compassion or pity for another and she most definitely exudes those characteristics. “I don’t see him. I’m in the store all the time. Ruth sees him. She sees him too much. She was at Sunnyhurst today getting cigarettes and aspirin, and there he was. She can’t even go out for cigarettes and aspirin. It’s killing her”(82). Matt admits this to his friend, Willis Trottier, at Willis’ diner. The author doesn’t really present Matt as the woebegone father in the beginning but rather shows the reader as the story unfolds. Dubus grabs the readers attention with such an emotional plot to expound the actions of the protagonist, Matt, in the second half of the story. Dubus is perhaps trying to gain support for Matt to justify his actions because the heart wrenching pain of losing a child is something that a parent should never have to endure. Matt very badly wants to relieve the pain especially for his wife because she sees Frank’s killer, Richard Strout, out on the town all the time; however, in Matt’s quest alleviate the situation he creates his own internal conflict.
Willis of course does not make the situation better because he tells Matt how much he dislikes Richard Strout. “I hate him, Matt”(82). Then he asks Matt how often does he think about the death? While conversing with Willis, Matt seems to rehash his feelings of always wanting to protect his family. “He had always been a fearful father: when his children were young, at the start of each summer he thought of them drowning in a pond or the sea, and he was relieved when he came home in the evenings and they were there; usually that relief was his only acknowledgment of his fear, which he never spoke of, and which he controlled within his heart”(86). No matter how much he wanted to protect his family he really could not. Prior to Frank’s murder, Strout beat him so bad he had to go to the hospital. “Before ten o’clock on night Frank came home; he had driven to the hospital first, and he walked into the living room with stitches over his right eye and both lips bright and swollen”(83). Even though Frank insisted that he was okay, Ruth was worried. “Ruth didn’t like it because Mary Ann was in the process of divorce, because she had two children, because she was four years older than Frank, and finally- she told this in bed, where she had during all of their marriage told him of her deepest feelings: of love, of passion, of fears about one of the children, of pain Matt caused her and she had caused him-she was against it because of what she had heard: that the marriage had gone bad early, and for most of it Richard and Mary Ann had both played around”(84). Matt was brooding the entire time; the story gets intense as the struggle with knowing his son’s killer is out on bail while his wife grieves incessantly at home. The time he spends with Willis discussing Strout builds even more suspense because as the reader moves within the story, Dubus doesn’t reveal exactly what Matt is going to do. They simply express their hatred for Strout and Dubus uses flashback allowing to Matt to reminisce about his times with Frank. The same effect could not be achieved if the story were told chronologically throughout. From the point of recollecting childhood memories with Willis, talking of Strout’s freedom, and carrying a gun, Matt begins a systematic plan to avenge his son’s murder. Willis told him where Strout worked and also about a few other people who, like Strout, committed murder then relocated to begin new lives of their own. “He’s tending bar up to Hampton Beach. For a friend. Ever notice even the worst bastard always has friends? He couldn’t get work in town. It ‘s just tourists and kids up to Hampton. Nobody knows him. If they do, they don’t care. They drink what he mixes”(82). Willis also advised Matt that Strout has always been a bully even in high school. He was considered a spoiled rich kid without a care in the world. Dubus shows how these statements serve as the falling action that lead to the final resolution of Matt killing Strout in a methodical manner but at a price. “Strout turned to walk, the suitcase in his right hand, and Matt and Willis followed; as Strout cleared the front of his car he dropped the suitcase and, ducking, took one step that was the beginning of a sprint to his right. The gun kicked in Matt’s hand, and the explosion of the shot surrounded him, isolated him in a nimbus of sound that cut him off from all his time, all his history, isolated him standing absolutely still on the dirt road with the gun in his hand, looking down at Richard Strout squirming on his belly, kicking one leg behind him, pushing himself forward, toward the woods. Then Matt went to him and shot him once in the back of the head”(92). In “Killings” classic examples of plot unity and plot devices like flashback and suspense keep the reader on the edge of his/her seat. Dubus intentionally sequenced the story in medias res to capture the readers’ attention then appeal to his/her emotions. The plot is arranged in a non-linear way at first so that the surprise ending is not prematurely elucidated. The latter part of the story is linear and chronological to allow or force the reader to relate to the pain and anguish the family feels about Frank’s death. Dubs wants the reader to agree or condone the actions of Matt yet he displays another surprise in the end when Matt imprisons himself within himself once he commits murder. The structure of Dubus’ story serves its purpose to keep the reader engaged from beginning to end.

Works Cited
Dubus, Andre. “Killings.” The Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer. 5th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1999. 81-93.