Critical Introduction

Ambrose Bierce (1842–1914?) was an American journalist and fiction writer best known for the satirical Devil's Dictionary and the short story, “An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge.” Twenty years before he mysteriously disappeared in 1913, he published a science-fiction/horror story that rivals the work of Jules Verne or Edgar Allan Poe. Following a documentary approach (like that in Frankenstein and Dracula), Bierce begins his story at the end of the action and works backward, slowly filling in gaps and details as he goes: what starts as a typical mystery slowly reveals itself to be a science-fiction/horror tale.

Bierce was not the first to incorporate an invisible adversary: Fitz James O’Brien included one in “What Was It?” in 1859. However, Bierce brings a depth to the story that had been lacking before. Here, we never know just what the invisible thing is. The mystery is never solved, and the ending of the story is not the ending of the creature (if it is, indeed, a creature at all). Bierce gives us just enough detail to believe in the existence of the creature, but not enough to picture it in our mind's eye. By the end of the narrative, the characters and readers are left in the classic situation that monsters cause: we must rely on known events and classifications that do not quite fit the facts or accept the presence of something outside our ken based on imperfect evidence. The characters, despite the evidence, choose the former and label the death due to a mountain lion. The story—from the title onwards—seems to delight in foiling the reader's attempts to do the same.

Reading Questions

The beginning of Bierce's story is unsettling and confusing for most first-time readers, though on a second reading one can see what he is up to. Why do you think Bierce chose to fragment the plot line is such a way? Why would he want to confuse or mislead the reader?

The purposes of both the story's form and some of its characters are to provide answers. What is it about this monster (and monsters in general) that seem to defeat those purposes? Can you think of any other texts you’ve read that show this same tension? How do monsters in other texts compare to Bierce's creation?

Editorial Note

All explanatory footnotes are our own insertions.