Unity or Contradiction?

One aspect of the article “Rereading Faulkner: Authority, Criticism, and The Sound and the Fury,” by Stacy Burton, really struck me. Burton allows the reader to question the notion of both unity and contradiction within William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury. This article examines the following question: is contradiction, or unity, the true theme of the novel? With “the three first-person narrators, who recount interior monologues of the three Compson brothers, speak in distinct voices . . . : Benjy by mental limitations, Quentin by neurosis, Jason by defensive self-justification. The fourth does not resolve them but instead demonstrates, in conjunction with them, the impossibility of an omniscient point of view,” Burton shows that some critics believe that this novel does in fact, demonstrate unity (610). On the contrary, other critics “have focused on its contradictions and the ways it complicates attempts at resolution and undermines attempts at closure” (610). With the first two narrations by Benjy and Quentin, the complicatedness of the novel is evident; however, as the reader moves on to the next narration through Jason’s point of view, things slowly begin to unfold, and the reader is able to get a better sense of the issues within the Compson family. To me, there is a certain unity in Faulkner’s novel with the three narrators giving the reader a chance to see inside each brother’s mind and observe the Compson family through his eyes. Each narration allows the reader to decipher the nature of each character from different points of view. I think it’s interesting that Faulkner chose Benjy, Quentin, and Jason to act as narrators versus Caddy; the same incidents, though the same actions and consequences, would be portrayed differently through Caddy’s eyes; therefore, those incidents would more likely than not have a very different effect on the reader.

I chose this article because the word unity barely comes to mind when reading a book such as The Sound and the Fury. It wasn’t until I read this article that I really took a step back and realized the unifying factors that are portrayed through the narrations, especially when certain scenes are replayed in two different narrations, through two different Compson brothers’ eyes. (367)

Rereading Faulkner: Authority, Criticism, and "The Sound and the Fury"
Stacy Burton
Modern Philology, Vol. 98, No. 4 (May, 2001), pp. 604-628
Published by: The University of Chicago Press

June Second, 1910

The dysfunctional Compson family is played out before Quentin’s eyes in the scene where Mother talks about how Caddy and Benjy are “cursed.”

When Quentin remembers the scene in which Mother says to Father, “. . . I can take Jason and go where we are not known I’ll go down on my knees and pray for the absolution of my sins that he may escape this curse try to forget that the others ever were,” does his mother talking about his siblings as a curse heavily affect Quentin (104)? Quentin is the one who repeats what he has heard when he says to Caddy, “theres a curse on us its not our fault is it our fault . . . you cant make me theres a curse on us” (158). What is the purpose of Faulkner having Mother believe that all her children except Jason are “cursed”? What is the effect on Quentin when he remembers this and reiterates his Mother’s words to Caddy?

I think that Quentin almost feels that it’s his responsibility to “lift the curse” from his siblings. He was not specifically mentioned during Caroline’s rant, so maybe he feels that he is not directly part of that category. It almost seems as if his not being directly mentioned in that group makes him even more protective of Caddy, in whatever way, especially when he attempts to fight Dalton Ames. (234)

half blog

So far, I’ve read 3 short stories: “Allegiance,” by Aryn Kyle; “So Much for Artemis,” by Patrick Ryan; and “Elder Jinks,” by Edith Pearlman. I enjoyed “Elder Jinks” the most. Basically, the lesson I took from this story is this: there are always second chances in life, but it’s up to you to take the initiative to find or perhaps, form, those chances, just as Grace and Gustave attempt to mend their relationship at the end of the story. Their relationship almost seems broken from the beginning with the subtle disagreements between something as seemingly trivial as the way the lawn chairs are placed. Toward the middle of the story, when Gustave unexpectedly returns home to find an interesting group of people in his living room, the relationship is already “over.” When Hal Karsh pulls Grace out of the house, the relationship seems to be completely terminated. They weren’t on the same page, especially shown when Gustave thought the sweater was for him, whereas Grace actually made the sweater for her granddaughter. The ending of the story was quite surprising to me; given the circumstances of the characters, I thought the relationship was doomed from the start. But, nonetheless, Pearlman gives us a “happy” ending; however, I’m not sure how long the happiness will last between Grace and Gustave. But, nevertheless, I enjoyed the lesson because Pearlman does address the dangers of this second chance for both of them. Consequently, she shows that the dangers of giving yourself and somebody else second chances might be worth the risk if the reward is great enough.

I am curious about the title of the story, though. So far, this is what I’ve thought about the title: the two main characters are “elderly,” hence the first word of the title. Jinks can be defined as “a sudden, quick change of direction” according to the Oxford dictionary, which reminds me of the nature of Grace and Gustave’s relationship. I saw it like this: at any time, something can alter their relationship. (337)