“An Elderly Lady Is Faced with a Difficult Dilemma” is a companion story to the collection’s previous story, “The Antique Dealer’s Death.” This time, the point of view returns to the third-person-limited narrator following Maud’s perspective. This narrative choice creates continuity while also sharpening the tension, as readers are now inside the head of a woman they already know is capable of murder. Pairing two stories that narrate the same central event from two different perspectives creates a juxtaposition between Maud’s perspective and outside perspectives. This structural move also invites readers to question not only Maud’s morality, but the ways in which perspective shapes perceived truth.

In the earlier story, one of Maud’s victims is described from an outside perspective for the first time. The police describe Frazzén with relative objectivity: He has “Bleached hair, tied back in a ponytail” and is “between forty and fifty. Slightly overweight, medium height, well-dressed in an evening suit and expensive shoes” (110). Richard’s first-person narration describes Frazzén as wearing “a smart dark-blue suit” (109). By contrast, in “An Elderly Lady Is Faced with a Difficult Dilemma,” Maud’s perspective is openly critical. Although she barely knows the man, she judges him as “[a] real popinjay, who wore his over-long hair in a silly ponytail” and thinks disparagingly about what she considers a tastelessly flashy suit (132). This juxtaposition makes clear how harsh and critical Maud is about things that do not bother others, creating doubt about Maud’s perceptions and empathy for her victims. It also reinforces a key discussion within the collection: how self-righteousness and internalized superiority can distort ethical judgment, highlighting The Impact of Self-Centered Thinking.

Another effect of the paired stories is the creation of dramatic irony. When readers begin “An Elderly Lady Is Faced with a Difficult Dilemma,” they are already aware that Frazzén will die. When Maud and Frazzén make plans for him to visit Maud’s apartment, this seals his fate—a fact that neither he nor Maud is aware of. Maud sees “cold calculation” in the antique dealer’s eyes and understands that the silver goblet has “aroused his greed” (136). That he is about to die for this greed reinforces the theme of The Impact of Self-Centered Thinking: He will die for thinking only of himself, and Maud will murder because she thinks only of herself. When Maud sees his greed and thinks “Good […] It’s going to cost you,” she is imagining charging him a high price for the silver to finance her lavish South Africa trip, not murdering him. The reader’s knowledge of what it will really cost Frazzén creates a darkly comic moment of dramatic irony. This moment also highlights how Maud weaponizes ordinary transactions, transforming plausible social interactions into fatal miscalculations for her victims.

As with earlier stories in the collection, the narrative stops short of providing explicit evidence about whether Maud is right or wrong in her evaluation of her victim—but here, there are several indications that her victim has bad intentions. Frazzén brings a large bag into Maud’s apartment, as if intending to cart away her collection, but it is also possible that he intends to purchase the items before removing them. Frazzén asks for water as if trying to get Maud out of the room, but it is also possible that he simply was thirsty. However, although he is ostensibly there to discuss silver, Maud catches him inspecting her Zorn painting with a speculative look after already removing several pieces of silver from the cabinet. He reaches up to take the painting down from the wall, which seems surprising even for an art lover and expert. Frazzén’s apparent greed and questionable actions create The Ambiguity Between Justice and Vengeance in the story: He may be a liar and a thief set on taking advantage of an elderly woman—or he may simply be a somewhat unprofessional art expert who cannot help but take a closer look. This ambiguity forces the reader into the uncomfortable position of playing judge, just as Maud often does—raising questions about how we, too, interpret intent through limited evidence.

In either case, Maud’s moral hypocrisy is on display. She feels justified in killing Frazzén for trying to steal from her, but she herself has stolen from many others over the course of the various stories in the collection. This echoes the way she kills Jasmin for trying to use family wealth and privilege to plant the seed of taking of Maud’s apartment, which she holds through her family’s former wealth and privilege. It is similar to her murder of Zazza for the crime of apparently marrying Gustaf for his money and social position—even though she herself once tried to marry the same man as a means to an end, hoping to escape her family situation by moving in with Gustaf. She considers the attorney a violent nuisance and solves the problem through violence. That Maud never sees similarities between herself and her victims offers more evidence of her self-centered thinking. This lack of self-awareness functions as both a character flaw and a satirical commentary on how power and victimhood are often reframed to serve the needs of the narrator.

One additional aspect underscored by this story is Maud’s calculated manipulation of others’ assumptions. After killing Frazzén, Maud does not panic or behave impulsively. Instead, she executes an elaborate cover-up plan, complete with staged evidence and a false trail that includes planting silver in Frazzén’s bag, using her father’s old clothing and shoes, and deliberately creating misleading shoe prints and blood smears. These steps highlight Maud’s cold, methodical intelligence and her willingness to weaponize age and gender stereotypes to elude suspicion. Her actions suggest premeditated criminal thinking, rather than impulsive violence, reinforcing the theme of The Mistake of Stereotyping the Elderly. By orchestrating a crime scene that conforms to police expectations—two men fighting over valuables—Maud ensures that she remains above suspicion, even when the two female officers voice doubts.

The story’s shift in perspective in its final pages allows the third-person narrator—previously completely bound to Maud’s perspective—to broaden out the collection’s view, recounting a conversation among the police officers investigating Frazzén’s death. The question left hanging at the end of the previous story, of whether the police will finally catch up with Maud, is answered. Richard’s perception is correct: Maud has escaped and will go unpunished. The conversation among the police officers demonstrates The Mistake of Stereotyping the Elderly and echoes the outdated gender expectations of Richard’s attitude in the previous story. The male officers refuse to entertain the perceptive observations of the only two female officers, finding their suggestion that Maud may be a killer ridiculous. The frustration of the two female officers amidst the laughter of their male counterparts is another moment of dramatic irony and underscores the way in which people like Maud are doubly underestimated. Maud is both female and elderly, and this final scene creates empathy for her by contextualizing her actions within a society that often scorns women in general. Yet the story resists simple sentimentality: Even as readers empathize with how she’s dismissed, they must also reckon with the chilling cost of that underestimation.

Another important motif in the story is Maud’s casual return to comfort and routine after committing murder. After disposing of evidence and enjoying a short spa trip, Maud returns to a decomposing body and simply opens a window, makes herself a meal, and watches one of her favorite films. This dissonance between the horror of the crime and the mundanity of Maud’s response deepens the reader’s awareness of her detachment and amorality. Her ability to enjoy wine and ice cream after the murder and her methodical laundry to eliminate any blood traces further support the idea that Maud is not merely a misguided vigilante but someone who has grown disturbingly accustomed to killing as a means of solving problems. Her final act—feigning confusion and calling the police days later—completes her performance, adding another layer of theatricality to her manipulation of the system.