”At the heart of the modernist aesthetic lay the conviction that the previously sustaining structures of human life, whether social, political, religious, or artistic, had been either destroyed or shown up as falsehoods or fantasies” (Norton 1814). Thus literary features such as sequence or unity turned out to be only “expressions of a desire for coherence”. This “false order” had to be renovated to express the new interpretation of the world as a broken image. As a consequence, modernist literature abandons former traditional ideals. Instead of the tyranny of chronology, it is the construction out of fragments that now becomes a key formal characteristic. Without showing any linear sequence of events, Faulkner’s narrative technique in ”A Rose for Emily” mirrors exactly this modernistic ideal. By avoiding the chronological order of events, Faulkner gives the reader a puzzle consisting of fragments. Nevertheless, he gives hints that make it possible to put these fragments together and thus reconstruct the chronology of the life of Miss Emily Grierson. In order to find out “what dates are carved on [her] tombstone” (Moore 196) the reader has to become active which is a common attribute in modernist texts.
“A chronology of ‘A Rose for Emily’”, as stated by McGlynn, “is useful for at least two reasons: it makes the plot more easily comprehensible, and it helps clarify the function of time in the story”.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Problems of Chronology
2.1 Part I
2.2 Part II
2.3 Part III
2.4 Part IV
2.5 Part V
3. Conclusion
4. Appendix
5. Bibliography
Primary Literature:
Secondary Literature:
Objectives and Topics
This academic paper aims to reconstruct the internal chronology of William Faulkner's short story "A Rose for Emily" by analyzing textual fragments and narrative hints. Since the story is told in a non-linear, fragmented manner characteristic of modernist literature, the author examines various internal evidence to sort out the complex timeline of the protagonist's life.
- Analysis of modernist narrative techniques and the use of temporal fragments.
- Evaluation of conflicting chronological evidence within the story's five parts.
- Examination of character aging and specific timeline markers (e.g., tax exemptions, china-painting lessons).
- Assessment of the reliability of the narrator and the community point of view.
- Development of a consistent chronological table for the events in the story.
Excerpt from the Book
2. Problems of Chronology
“A Rose for Emily” is an assemblage of fragments representing the flow of associations of an anonymous narrator. The story is written in the first person plural indicating a community point of view. The narrator (he or she?) can be specified as a citizen of Jefferson who has in fact observed parts of the events in person and has acquired others through gossip, speculations, or legends of the town.
The narration is divided into five parts. It starts and ends with the death of Miss Emily, the other sections in between consist of flashbacks concerning her life time that are recollected by the narrator. Even though the last three parts assume a more or less forward chronological movement, they are presented in the stream of consciousness. They record the random flow of memories through the narrator’s mind. Since there is no objective chronometry, it is the subjectively experienced mind time of the narrating inhabitant that determines the story and that scatters the chronological data the reader has to analyze.
“Faulkner gives the story a chronology, but as with so many of his stories, we have to sort it out” (McGlynn 461); we have to date the major events of Miss Emily’s life “by means of internal or external evidence” (Going, cited in Moore 196).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter outlines the modernist context of the story and establishes the necessity of reconstructing the fragmented chronology for better plot comprehension.
2. Problems of Chronology: This central section dissects the story's five parts, evaluating textual clues against established literary interpretations to resolve discrepancies in the timeline.
3. Conclusion: The author summarizes the inherent difficulty in achieving a fully consistent timeline and discusses whether the fragmented chronology was a deliberate aesthetic choice by Faulkner.
4. Appendix: This section presents a detailed, year-by-year reconstruction of Miss Emily’s life based on the evidence collected throughout the paper.
5. Bibliography: Lists the primary and secondary sources used for this analysis, including key academic studies on Faulkner’s work.
Keywords
William Faulkner, A Rose for Emily, Chronology, Modernist literature, Narrative technique, Fragmented narrative, Miss Emily Grierson, Jefferson, Literary analysis, Stream of consciousness, Internal evidence, Temporal markers, Short story, Time structure, Literary criticism.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper focuses on reconstructing the non-linear, fragmented timeline of events in William Faulkner's "A Rose for Emily" by analyzing internal textual evidence.
What are the main thematic areas covered?
Key areas include the interpretation of modernist narrative techniques, the reliability of an anonymous communal narrator, and the mathematical reconstruction of the protagonist's life events.
What is the central research question?
The study asks how the fragmented, non-linear chronology of the story can be logically reconstructed and whether a single, consistent timeline is even intended by the author.
Which scientific methodology is used?
The author employs close reading and text-based analysis, focusing exclusively on internal evidence within the story to deduce dates and the sequence of major life events.
What is addressed in the main body of the text?
The main body systematically analyzes each of the five parts of the story, highlighting contradictions in the narrator’s timeline regarding Miss Emily's age and local history.
Which keywords best describe this work?
Essential keywords include William Faulkner, chronology, modernist literature, fragmented narrative, narrative technique, and literary analysis.
How does the author treat the conflict between different chronologies suggested by other critics?
The author critically examines conflicting interpretations, such as those of McGlynn and Nebeker, and justifies their own refined timeline by pointing out logical inconsistencies in previous scholarly assumptions.
What significance is attributed to the narrator’s reliability?
The narrator is identified as an unreliable citizen of Jefferson; the author suggests that the fragmented nature of the story mirrors this subjectivity, making precise chronological pinning difficult.
- Citation du texte
- Davina Ruthmann (Auteur), 2005, The Chronology in William Faulkner's "A Rose for Emily", Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/74363
