What did Poe mean when he said "I must punish with impunity"?

[Indian Boy]

I just read Edgar Allen Poe's "The Cask of Amontillado" again. I especially like the sentence when says that he must punish Fortunado but must "punish him with impunity".

"Impunity" is defined as the exemption from punishment.

So reading the sentence literally the statement reads: "I must punish him [Fortunado] but I must punish him without punishment."

This statement is quite interesting, and very ambiguous, and, as such, is open to multiple interpretations. What do you think this statement means?

[Calidore]

Been a long, long time since I read that, so I'd have to hit Gutenberg and reread before I could be specific.

"Punish him without punishment" sounds very Bruce Lee. Merriam-Webster defines "impunity" as "exemption or freedom from punishment, harm, or loss", and "...I must punish him without harm" makes more sense. Slapping his wrist, in other words, or putting him on time-out, or grounding him.

[togre]

I must not only punish, but punish with impunity. A wrong is unredressed when retribution overtakes its redresser. It is equally unredressed when the avenger fails to make himself felt as such to him who has done the wrong.--longer quote


I have not read the book in question, but from the quote and the longer quote the meaning is pretty clear. The "impunity" is for the one who does the punishing. I could not spank a bad 5 year-old without a host of criminal and civil charges being filed. So even if a specific 5 year-old has earned or needs a spanking, I refrain, not from a sense of promoting justice, but for fear of my being punished in turn. The quote says for true retribution to be handed out, the one doing the handing out must be free on any consequences for his punishing actions.

Does that make sense?

[Calidore]

Well, obviously my brain still thinks it's early morning. Of course "impunity" refers to the doer ("she insulted him with impunity"), not the receiver.

So, never mind.

[Indian Boy]

Togre,

I think your explanation makes good sense. I guess I was interpreting it differently. I understood it to mean that he must punish Fortunato but punish him without punishing/harm, i.e. without physically hurting him in any way. That was why he cunningly had Fortunato drink himself into a vulnerable stupor, then without actually harming Fortunato in any way, he chained him to the wall and buried him behind the wall, leaving him for a long, drawn out death. All this rather than just killing him quickly with a knife or an ax, etc.

[Syd A]

Montressor wants retribution, but he doesn't want to be punished for his revenge, otherwise the revenge will not be nearly as sweet. Also, remember Montressor's family motto: Nemo Me Impune Lacessit - no one assails me with impunity. Montressor wants what Fortunato wanted to get away with: attack with impunity.