Skip to main content

Why do they destroy Old Misery's house in "The Destructors" by Graham Greene?

They destroyed Old Misery’s house because it was there, and because mob mentality took over. 


The boys in this story destroy the house for fun.  It is a way to pass the time.  It sounds very odd, but it was one of those situations where one person suggested the idea, they all went along with it, and they could not seem to stop.  


Old Misery is a bit eccentric, hence the name.  His house was not in good shape to begin with.  After the bombings, he tried to rebuild his house as best he could.  However, he had a reputation as a cheapskate. 



[It] was common knowledge that since the bombs fell something had gone wrong with the pipes of the house and Old Misery was too mean to spend money on the property. He could do the redecorating himself at cost price, but he had never learned plumbing. 



One of the main reasons the gang became destructors is because of the new member, T.  The gang should have resented T, but instead they were enamored of him.  He told them that he had been inside Old Misery’s house, and it was beautiful.  It is T’s idea to destroy the house. 



Blackie said, “Nobody’s going to pinch things. Breaking in—that’s good enough, isn’t it? We don’t want any court stuff.”


“I don’t want to pinch anything,” T. said. “I’ve got a better idea.”


“What is it?”


T. raised his eyes, as gray and disturbed as the drab August day. “We’ll pull it down,” he said. “We’ll destroy it.” 



In order to maintain his status in the group, T has to suggest something serious and explain why he went in the house.  The boys are bored, and jaded.  They amuse themselves by destroying the house because they are there, and it is there.  Any boy who didn’t would be seen as a coward.  That is how the mob mentality works. 


T tells the boys he doesn’t hate Old Misery.  It would be no fun if he did. He seems to be a sociopath.  However, he has a charisma that leads the other boys to follow him.  Therefore, one boy turns a group of boys into destructors.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.