The Lady, or the Tiger? (1882) | Hacker News Reader

The Lady, or the Tiger? (1882)

en.m.wikisource.org

54 pointsavador59 comments

SPOILERS!!!

Its interesting that in 1882 the authors refusal to give an ending would have been seen as challenging and innovative but to me in 2020 it seems like a cop-out. I don't need the undercurrents made clear to me - I can already see all that. I want an ending to the story.

The more interesting angle is that the guy should realise that the princess might direct him to the wrong door. His thought process about it is much more interesting to me than my own as the reader.

A 2020 version needs some extra twist at the end. The King, perhaps, knows his daughter all too well, and has put a wedding behind both doors. Or the Princess has loftier aims, and has secretly trained the tiger to attack the King, and usher in a new era of civility, but to do that (somehow or other ) she has to allow her love to marry someone else etc etc

Still, I love that things people wrote in 1882 are now being zinged accross the world by a huge world-spanning machine made of billions of devices that people in 1882 would barely have been able to imagine.

edit: drewzero1, elsewhere in this thread, reminds me of the They Might Be Giants song that looks at the situation from a much more 21st century perspective: http://tmbw.net/wiki/Lyrics:The_Lady_And_The_Tiger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nQemVw2Lb0

> Its interesting that in 1882 the authors refusal to give an ending would have been seen as challenging and innovative but to me in 2020 it seems like a cop-out.

In the early 90's, my English teacher read this story to the class and it blew my teenage mind. It's been one of my favorite short stories ever since.

Yes maybe as a teenager I would have experienced it differently.

Was there a discussion afterward?

There likely was but I can’t remember any specifics.

Also the idea that (in the Kings mind) guilt or innocence (and in turn happiness or death) could be determined by something random, like some sort of quantum witch trial, is kind of interesting, like you might be able to eke out some sort of obversation about the human condition from that. But the story doesn't seem interested in exploring that.

Wasn't there an actual practice in some cultures? For example, in trial by combat where the person who won was considered morally right?

Or some forms of witch trials I suppose ("will she float or sink") but I'm never sure how much of that is true and how much is fiction, as in Monty Python's ;)

I'm sure you already know this, but this story is like a Zen koan: it's purpose is not to provide a conclusion, but for you to ponder something. In this case, human nature.

Had the story provided a conclusion, in 2020 or any other year, it would be entirely unremarkable.

And I'm saying a story can still explore issues and have you ponder about them without the author having to step in and explicitly tell you to do so.

The story could, for example, have explored the issue of which way the princess might lean from the guys point of view, which covers all the same human nature angles, and then it could also have gone on to have a proper ending. I value storycraft.

I'm not saying the story should have been different back then, I'm sure it was perfect for 1882, and thats why its remembered now. I'm interested in how I differ from the 1882 audience.

edit: and koans are more about invoking mind states beyond words, like a kind of mind-hack, than they are about pondering ponderable things.

I'm not particularly fond of this story -- I think its preamble is too long and meandering -- but why do you think this has something to do with 1882 vs 2020 audiences? And why do you think it's bad storycraft to leave the conclusion open-ended?

This kind of device is used to great success in modern fiction, such as Stephen King's (non-supernatural!) short story "All that you love will be taken away", where the conclusion is not only open-ended, but also left to chance!

Well I'm hoping someone more familiar with cultural history might be able to tell me. 138 years ago is a hell of a long time. E.g. maybe murderous jealousy was a more risque concept then? And hence asking your audience to consider it was more provocative?

> I value storycraft.

The form of this story has used widely since, and those stories have been incredibly popular with both authors and audiences for well over 100 years now. Implying that a tried-and-true technique of story-telling lies outside of storycraft betrays basic a lack of understanding of the subject.

Story tellers enjoy this form for the challenge of balancing what the omniscient narrator reveals-- too much or too strong in one direction and the whole thing falls flat. Readers enjoy the form because it feels a bit like ski jumping-- the writer provides the momentum and the reader's imagination leaps off the end with all the story's implications flying past.

In fact, Nabokov balanced this same form masterfully in the short story, "Signs and Symbols." The effect there is that the reader leaps off into a level of... well, I don't want to ruin it. :) But it's enough to say that outside of VR I don't think that story could have been effectively written without using the lady-or-the-tiger form.

Great comment! Now I'll have to hunt down that story by Nabokov.

> Readers enjoy the form because it feels a bit like ski jumping-- the writer provides the momentum and the reader's imagination leaps off the end with all the story's implications flying past.

Great metaphor. The story zips you down at full-speed, and then launches you upwards into the air. If you're comfortable feeling ungrounded, you'll be able to look across the horizon, in awe of the sights you couldn't see before. But if you're a lazy or cowardly person, your overriding urge will to return to the earth, to get back down to the safety of the soft slopes. Heck, later on, you might even petition the proprietor of the ski-resort to get rid of the ramp.

Well that would be great if the story had anything profound for me to ponder. I don't think it earnt it (speaking of my personal experience of the story). "Murderous jealousy exists" is hardly that earth shaking.

I think partly with this story it was because it was on the front page of HN, so I had very high expectations. The story is clearly building to something, to me in 2020 it seemed disappointing. I'm interested to hear how it was received in 1882 though.

Actual koans do have conclusions, though. The westernised and mysticised ones do not.

Interesting variation on "No True Koan (Scotman)".

How many Buddhists does it take to change a lightbulb?

Two. One to change the bulb, and one not to.

> How many Buddhists does it take to change a lightbulb?

Zero, change is in the nature of all things. It is natural that the light bulb itself will change.

Question: how many Buddhists does it take to change a light bulb?

Answer:

I mean, this story is remarkable only in that it is badly written.

That's a bit unfair, though I agree the story is not particularly well written.

To me, the ending question is interesting. I want to know what happens! I think the princess leads her lover to the tiger, after all her temper is barbaric and she also thinks she'll reunite with him in the afterlife. That bloodshed though...

It's also remarkable in that it apparently inspired the Monty Hall door challenge, which is of obvious interest to the HN crowd.

One problem is that the story gives zero information on princess except her blood being barbaric. And the story also have overall very odds treatment of justice and fairness. And characters are cartoons. And the only property of wife that matters is her look.

Which is why I did not cared about how it ends. The people in story are not real enough to reason about them. They don't have psychology beyond crude stereotypes.

Like, ok, she grew with psychopathic dad, which the story author basically praises. She had likely accumulated trauma and resentment towards dad and own never met emotional needs. Is she even capable of strong emotiomal commitment? People with dads like that struggle in that area.

Maybe whole relationship was just her way to get revenge on dad by being involved in humiliating relationship for him. We really don't know whether she will be jealous or not, given that she knew she wont marry this dude from day 1. Or she hinted nothing, or she had no idea and hinted only to unparalyze him.

But the story author does not consider such option, because she is not real character. She is just literary device. She is supposed to be motivated solely by dudes body beauty, but that is not real people think.

Good point, one of the reasons I find the 'well lets stop the story and imagine what she might have done' thing doesn't work is because she is not very real.

> One problem is that the story gives zero information on princess except her blood being barbaric [...] And the only property of wife that matters is her look.

This is the only information you really need.

> They don't have psychology beyond crude stereotypes.

Do you similarly judge a fable by Aesop? Or poetry about human emotions? Have you read Saki's masterful short story, "Sredni Vashtar", and do you similarly dislike it because its characters are not full-fledged?

Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice. What information would you need to decide?

Fables by Aeson are better translated typically - sentences flow better. They also don't pretend to create deep puzzle about humanity while being shallow. They are what they are, simple stories.

That being said, I did not particularly enjoyed them. But again, they come across as more honest.

> This is the only information you really need

No it is not. Really really it is not if the puzzle is supposed to tell something about you or humans. It could have been interesting if she had actual complex personality and actual relationships. But she does not.

Well beyond "what if you are raised by abusive psychopathic dad and then someone looking down on you all writes story about it".

Your proposals sound rather dull. :) We in 2020 still appreciate prompts for thought and discussion. The popular media by which we transmit them has changed, though.

> A 2020 version needs some extra twist at the end

I was hoping the guy would turn around and knock on the door under the king, and the priest would come out and marry him to the Princess.

Alternatively, if “it mattered not that [criminals] might already possess a wife and family”, why couldn’t the guy marry the princess after marrying the damsel of the court?

We had to read this story and write an essay about it back when I was 15 years old, and I think the story was written for that market, as an essay starter for young people.

Apparently there is a sequel called 'The Discourager of Hesitancy' about five travellers trying to find out what happened in the original story (and failing). I'm kindof intriuged by that.

One has to suppose it was the lady behind the door. The princess would choose which door to direct him to based on his love for her. If he truly loved her, she could not bear to see him torn apart. If he did not love her, she could not bear to see him move on to some other woman. In his turn, he must recognize that there is some chance that she is lying to him, that she has chosen to send him to his death. Yet he turns towards the exact door she has directed him to with complete faith and calm. There is no doubt whatsoever in his mind that she has chosen to let him live. If he had been the conniving sort, he might assume that the indicated door was the one containing the beast, and on this basis selected the opposite door. Indeed, he is still offered a choice, between faith and deception, whether to do as she says, or to turn away from it. On this basis, one assumes, she would direct him towards the door of salvation, knowing that he might choose to ignore her, and turn towards the door of certain doom instead. (There is a parallel here to C S Lewis' description of religious faith, if you are familiar with his writing)

He chose to trust his love. He was not certain she would save him, since she was not certain herself. He knew she was jealous. Her had a choice between a quick death and a life without his love (which I wouldn't romanticise, love being more complex than binary.) I don't know what he faced. I do know that I would choose to trust my love, and open her door, as an act of love and trust for us both to have, whatever the outcome.

I learned about this story from a They Might Be Giants song, told from the other side of the doors. The characters are bored waiting for the resolution of the story (Spoilers? forever). [] http://tmbw.net/wiki/Lyrics:The_Lady_And_The_Tiger

Aha! thank you. I'm a big TMBG fan but I'd never understood what this song was referring to.

If he believed the Princess truly loved him, he'd expect her to point to the door with the Lady behind it. However truly loving her, he would rather die than live without her, and would choose the door opposite to the one she indicated intending to die.

On the other hand if he truly understood the depth of the Princess's jealousy and expected her to indicate the door with the Tiger, he would realise her cruelty and choose the door opposite to that she indicated, in order to forsake her and enjoy a happy life.

So either way he should choose the other door.

Although the author is unwilling to state his answer, it's rather heavily implied she pointed him to the tiger.

> How often, in her waking hours and in her dreams, had she started in wild horror, and covered her face with her hands as she thought of her lover opening the door on the other side of which waited the cruel fangs of the tiger!

contra

> But how much oftener had she seen him at the other door! How in her grievous reveries had she gnashed her teeth, and torn her hair, when she saw his start of rapturous delight as he opened the door of the lady! How her soul had burned in agony when she had seen him rush to meet that woman, with her flushing cheek and sparkling eye of triumph; [...].

It is also interesting to see the sprinkles of social Darwinism throughout out the story.

> Had it not been for the moiety of barbarism in her nature, it is probable that lady would not have been there; but her intense and fervid soul would not allow her to be absent on an occasion in which she was so terribly interested.

> I opened the door on the left, knowing it contained the tiger or the princess. As the tiger leapt on to me, I begged the King for a do-over.

-- https://twitter.com/VeryShortStory/status/502108012501544960

> To my surprise, the King agreed, and I opened the other door. Too late, as the princess leapt on me, I realized my mistake.

-- https://twitter.com/VeryShortSequel/status/50210825752861081...

Talking about ladies and tigers...

   There was a young lady of Niger

   Who smiled as she rode on a tiger.

   They returned from the ride

   With the lady inside,

   And the smile on the face of the tiger.

Recently made into a tv series called, The Undoing with Nicole Kidman and Hugh Grant.

I'm intruiged, what are the parallels between that series and this story?

Would a betrayed wife act out of compassion or revenge when given the chance to free or condemn her cheating husband?

Is there a similar test psychiatrists or therapists use to understand their patients? Seems like the answer would reveal a lot about the person giving it.

There are so called projective tests[1], with the basic premise to create a highly ambiguous situation, where there is a lot of freedom for a human. Also I could think about Kohlberg's dilemmas[2], and the most known one is "Heinz dilemma"[3].

To make a projective test from this story one needs to ask a few hundred of participants for answers, to look for patterns in answers, to form hypotheses how personal traits correlate with patterns in answers, then to run correlational study with an other group of participants. Maybe something would be found. Maybe not.

To make something like Kohlberg's dilemmas one would need a theory to predict in advance patterns in answers without gathering the "live data".

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projective_test [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg%27s_stages_o... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_dilemma

Could the man take his faith in his own hands and chose the opposite door?

Could someone on trial ignore the doors, to force the king to execute the decision?

Sure, but that would describe someone with a different relationship. Knowing that they loved and trusted each other is important to the story.

the story specifically leaves trust as an ambiguous quantity in that relationship. she obviously doesn't trust him. so, not only are we left to ponder her nature, but his relationship to her. does he take her suggestion at face value, assuming goodwill on her part, or does he expect her jealousy?

For her part, maybe you're right. But we're told that he immediately went to the door that she indicated.

See also The Monty Hall and Sleeping Beauty Problems which seem to cover similar (or at least somewhat related) quandaries.

Related as in they involve doors?

It's a clear precursor in its framing, while this seems to be more of a psychological question.

Edit: googled...

https://jewishjournal.com/commentary/opinion/rob_eshman/1176...

Ok that is quite interesting. 'Choose a door' is such a trope, its funny to think of it originating as recently as 1882.

In particular ... https://www.amazon.com/Lady-Tiger-Other-Puzzles-Recreational...

"The Lady or the Tiger?: and Other Logic Puzzles" by Raymond Smullyan

Inspiration for a great They Might Be Giants song called “ The Lady and the Tiger”

People in 1882 must have been really patient. I was annoyed that I’ve spent 10 minutes reading a story that could have been conveyed in 5 sentences at most.

Please go ahead, it is in the public domain after all. Try to rephrase it in 5 sentences and see if people still share your version after more than a century.

They had fewer things competing for their attention. What were you going to do in those 10 extra minutes, refresh Twitter again?

Agreed. At this point in 2020, this much text for this elementary of a morality problem is a waste. I was really hoping for something more earth shattering than how humans have a hard time finding the bounds between themselves and others.

Having read this in middle or high school (back in the 90s), and having picked up a copy of the book years later when I saw it at a Half Price Books, this comment makes me really sad.

A 5 sentence version of this story would not have stayed with me the same way this did. Just like Aesop's Fables, or the Brothers Grimm, wouldn't have the impact on people/civilization in general if they had been just the moral of the story.

The writing of that story was insufferable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com