From what we have read, it is clear
that Faulkner never really makes the setting of a story clear. The
place where the story takes place is discovered along the way, but
figuring out the time of the story takes very careful reading.
Looking at the book as a whole, each story within the book comes from
a different time period, but even within these stories, there is
variation in time. For example, there is a section in "The Fire
and the Hearth", pages 40-57, which is entirely a flashback that
Lucas has of attempting to kill Zack Edmonds. I only understood that
it was in the past after going back and reading the passage a second
time. The constant ambiguity concerning time forces the reader to
read some passages multiple times before truly understanding when the
event is taking place. However, playing with something like time
sequence, which is usually so definite in most books, could distract
the reader from any underlying messages that Faulkner intended to
portray. Why do you think Faulkner makes it so unclear when he is
changing time periods? Obviously, Faulkner is an incredible writer, but by doing this do you think he enhances the stories or takes
away from them?
The confusion with time sequence is unique to Faulker's writing. Like Merilla said, there were many times when I had to go back and figure out if I was reading in the moment or reading a flashback. I think Faulkner purposefully does this to parallel the theme of hierarchy and heritage. Almost all the characters are related in some way, yet they still have hierarchy based on race, age and gender. The sequence of the book separates the older generation from the younger generation. He mirrors the flashbacks with the present stories so that it seems like they could all be the same. Since it is one big, connected family with different ties, Faulkner writes his book in one long, connected story to show the flow of the family's growth in generation to generation.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sadie. The flashbacks that are interwoven throughout the vignettes of the book mirror the intertwined relationships of the characters both emotionally and biologically. By using the flashbacks Faulkner drops into the middle of paragraphs, the reader is able to assemble and connect the puzzle pieces of the fragmented story in order to create a fluid series of events and show the passage of time and the change that comes with it. An example of this would be the relationship between Zack Edmonds and Lucas Beauchamp mirrored in the relationship between their two sons Roth Edmonds and Henry Beauchamp. Comparing the two, the reader is able to see how much, and at the same time how little, change has occurred throughout the generations and how they connect to one another.
ReplyDeleteThe point of "Was" and a major theme in "The Fire and the Hearth" is this idea, as we discussed in class, that what was, still is. The point of Faulkner's confusing style is to lose the reader in the lives and occurances of the McCaslin clan. While the story spans many lives and much time, the reader is left with no impression of sequence which is intentional to show the relationship between them all, that bridges any gap, even time.
ReplyDeleteI believe like Maddy said the main reason for this style is to display the theme of what "was" now "is". I think this choice adds to the underlying themes of hierarchy, family and even lack of change in having the reader focus on the situations and the events at hand rather than developing a main character and focusing on how that individual evolves. Of course there is character development but many of the traits from one character to another are very connected again adding to the mindset of the south, as displayed throughout the story.
ReplyDeleteI think Faulkner's style of writing (not using punctuation often, messing with sequence, etc) is a major theme in this novel. He brings the reader back and forth through multiple decades and, as Merilla noted, it is often difficult to figure out what time period we are in. I don't, however, think Faulkner's sequence draws away from the story. One of the major purposes of his stories so far has been to prove what was is, and that history has not changed much on this plantation. A lot of his writing is clearly satirical, so I think he's making a statement about southern culture as a whole. This may be a stretch, but could Faulkner be saying that there is no difference between the Old South and the New South? That, as opposed to popular belief, not much has changed and the reason the people view the South differently is because the North changed so much after the Civil War. That could be totally off the point, but my point here is that Faulkner is using satire, he's trying to say something about the South as a whole by playing with time sequence.
ReplyDeleteI think Faulkner makes it so unclear because, as everyone has already said, the themes of importance of family, and the patriarchal hierarchy, etc. are timeless. What I found from the timelessness is that Faulkner may be saying that these values, these societal norms could in fact not be changing so much over time. Going back to the theme of the Old South vs the New South, I think this is Faulkners way of saying there really isn't a great difference between the generation from McCaslin to Henry & Roth's. I thought this timelessness definitely enhances the quality of the book but in the story telling sense causes much more confusion to the reader. Similar to Merrila's experience when I read the book I constantly think about the missing setting or what time the event is taking place, which makes rereading the chapters much more important.
ReplyDeleteI think the reason that Faulkner made the time periods so unclear is because he is trying to show the magnitude of McCaslin family and how many generations it reaches back. I also think that by making the time periods unclear, he is making it easier to see the connections between each generation and how time can repeat itself. Like everyone else said, he makes the theme of what was, is, evident by showing how the past is always with you. I think this style enhances the theme but also detracts in the sense that a lot of times I find myself going back and rereading a passage to make sense of it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Peter that Faulkner's style regarding time, setting and generational developments is not only intentional but necessary to flush out thematic elements. I find that instead of detracting from the story, the vagueness surrounding times helps prove Faulkner's point that what was is, and that the attitudes in South have not changed significantly from the time of the Civil War to just before the Civil Rights movement. The parallels within generations, particularly the relationships between Lucas and Zack and Henry and Roth, ironically become clear because of the unclear setting in time. Furthermore the flashbacks serve to give the reader a more complete picture of characters as we see them at different points in their lives. The timelessness of these relationships allows these short stories to become applicable to the greater society of both the 'old' and 'new' South.
ReplyDelete