Comparison between Two Short Stories by William Faulkner - Essay Example

?Your Full Your 9 March Comparison between Two Short Stories by William Faulkner William Faulkner’s short stories “A Rose for Emily” and “Barn Burning” are essentially quite different; however, they do have some points in common. “A Rose for Emily” relates the story of a reclusive woman, Emily Grierson, who lives in a Southern town of the United States. The story is told from the perspective of the townspeople (at least one of them is narrating it as the words “we” are used throughout to describe the townspeople), and narrates the incidents in the life of the local recluse, Miss Grierson, and a macabre discovery made after her death. “Barn Burning,” is also set in the Southern part of the United States, and tells the story of a little boy named Colonel Sartoris Snopes, or Sarty, whose father, Abner Snopes, bitter due to the class differences, is virulently acting out against the rich and influential even as he works for them. The story highlights the awkward relationship between the boy and his father, while also touching upon the young boy’s conscious and difficult decision to choose between familial loyalty and the truth. At the outset, both stories seem to have very different themes and plots. “A Rose for Emily” starts at the end of the story, and is a tale with gothic elements. “Barn Burning” on the other hand starts at the middle, and is essentially a tale regarding the triumph of what the protagonist perceives to be right over wrong. However, upon closer inspection, they do seem to have an identical theme – that of exploring a strange and strained relationship of children with their respective fathers. It is suggested in “A Rose for Emily” that Miss Grierson’s father was a strict patriarch. Emily Grierson’s suitors were not considered to be “good enough” for her, and it was no wonder, as the father, “a spraddled silhouette…clutching a horsewhip” (Line 22), implied to be a man still holding on to his family’s past ideals, despite having none of the fortune and riches, cut a forbidding figure in this regard. It is only when the father has died that the townspeople are able to humanize Emily. Before his death, she was seen to be a part of her father, a “tableau” (Line 22). However, after his death, she comes out of the hold that her father had on her. Although it is interesting to note that she does not want to come out of that hold herself. She is caught off guard when her father dies, and not knowing how to handle life now that her father is dead, is shown to have denied the death altogether. This, in essence, shows that she could not come to terms with living life independently. In “Barn Burning,” similarly, the relationship of Sarty with his father, Abner, is explored – although, here the analysis is much more in-depth than in “A Rose for Emily”. Abner Snopes is shown to be a man filled with vengeance and hatred for the rich. He holds them in contempt and carries out acts of, what he perceives to be, rightful retribution. Sarty Snopes observes all this and though he tries to side with his father, based on ideas of familial loyalty, it is shown that the father mistrusts him all the same. Abner is a very controlling man, who does not allow his family to challenge or even question his actions. His hold on his family is complete. However, despite that, Sarty, in the end, goes against his father when he goes to report the burning to the barn’s owner, De Spain. That is where these two stories seem to differ: Emily does not know what to do without her father’s hold on her. She cannot go against her father even after he has died, so much so that she refuses to acknowledge his death. Whereas in “Barn Burning,” Sarty willfully chooses to go against his father in reporting his actions to De Spain, thus, freeing himself of his hold. Both these stories are set in southern towns and explore certain “southern” values, so to speak. Miss Emily Grierson is caught between the changing times where the old Southern values seem to have become incompatible with the changing times and what they entail. She cannot come to terms with the changing times herself and, thus, shuts herself out from the rest of the world. The whole town has gone through a transition; however, Miss Grierson and her symbolic old house refuse to do so. They are still stuck in their old ways and it is as if Miss Grierson wants to turn back time and go into a world where her ideals and values are in practice. Her desire is also apparent through her actions that are revealed at the end – she kills Homer Barron, her suitor, perhaps because he refuses to marry her, in a bid to keep him with her forever. “Barn Burning” is also set in a Southern post-Civil War setting. The antagonist of the story, Abner Snopes, is also someone who refuses to change himself and his view of the world. He cannot come to terms with his place in the world as a poor, migratory worker, and is resentful towards the world at large and the rich in particular. Even his stride sends the message that he wants to “resist [the world] and try to change the course of its events” (38th Paragraph). He is not happy with his lot and how disrespectfully he is treated (or at least how disrespectfully he thinks he is treated), and does all in his power to get back, so to speak, at the world for it all. The burnings that he carries out are an active part of his seeking to control the events of the world. However, a difference in this regard is that in Miss Emily Grierson’s case, nobody actively sought to stop her from carrying out her whims. The townspeople effectively left her to her own devices. Though it is true that she cut a forbidding and unapproachable figure, however, the townspeople did not do much to ease her suffering by sharing her loneliness. There was nobody Emily could confide in or be close to, perhaps because of her father’s influence on her and her personality as well as because nobody was willing to get close to her. Tobe, her black servant, could, of course, render no such service – he was a black servant in the house of someone who subscribed to the old notions of African-Americans being inferior. Hence, she was free to carry out her heart’s desires, however misguided they may have been. In this regard, it is also interesting that the druggist did not even insist on carrying out the proper paper work needed for buying arsenic when she went to buy it from him. In “Barn Burning,” Abner Snopes faces much opposition from everyone around. He is not free to carry out his acts of vengeance. His actions are seen as illegal by the society at large. It is no wonder that he carries them out in secret. What is more, even his own son, Sarty, in the end, decides to stop him from carrying out his whims by reporting his actions to De Spain. Abner Snopes is, then, supposedly killed by De Spain in a bid to stop him. There is a certain sense of seriousness in the narration of “Barn Burning.” With long, complex sentences, there is a sense of solemnity. It uses intense language that somehow retains a sense of urgency till the very end. This effect is effectively portrayed by the use of the third-person narrative, the narrator is essentially unconnected with the story itself, therefore, is able to narrate it without any emotional involvement therein. “A Rose for Emily,” on the other hand, although exploring a macabre topic, has a sense of jocular levity in the way it is narrated. It is poetic at times; however, there is a laconic and satirical side to it as well. Perhaps, this comes with the narrator coming to terms with the idea that it is their (the townspeople’s) attitude that caused these events to occur and, hence, a self-deprecatory style has been employed. Also, the endings of the stories are quite different from one another as well; one can even say that they are at opposite ends. In the case of Emily, the story portrays her end. She has died and the story, with her, has finished. In the case of Sarty Abner, in “Barn Burning,” the ending of the story portrays a new beginning for him when he reports his father and then runs away from his family knowing full well that now he will never be able to return to his family and, thus, has to make his own way in the world. All in all, the two stories are quite different from one another. They explore different themes and different topics; therefore, there is not much they have in common with one another. However, the one point that they unquestionably have in common is that both of them are pieces of excellent literature that provide the reader with entertainment as well as many serious points to ponder upon. Works Cited Faulkner, William. “A Rose for Emily.” Literature to Go. Ed. Michael Meyer. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. Page range of entry. Print. Faulkner, William. “Barn Burning.” Literature to Go. Ed. Michael Meyer. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. Page range of entry. Print. Read More