The Innocence of Thomas Sutpen

Chapter 7 marks a huge shift in the story because we finally hear from Sutpen's perspective. After listening to Sutpen, we view him not as the demon Rosa describes him as or the enigma General Compson thought he was, but as a very ignorant man whose life has been corrupted by fate. The narrative refers back to Sutpen's innocence several times( "Because he had not only not lost the innocence yet, he had not yet discovered that he possessed it"185), which brings up the question of nature vs. nurture. The chapter shows that Sutpen was not necessarily born evil, he just grew up in a very traumatic environment. There are several references to Sutpen's sister being pregnant without ever having been married (181), which could be read as allusion to Sutpen's father being incestuous and it’s evident that Sutpen grew up in a very poor, lower-class home. Chapter 7 makes it seem as though Sutpen is just a product of his environment where he learned that in order to make it in the world you have to be "unscrupulous"(201).  Instead of nurturing his moral instincts,  he goes to Haiti where he is consumed with completing his “design” and even abandons his wife when he realizes that she does not fit that design. He feels some remorse, but at this point he is already too far gone from his own humanity.

mystery

The novel overall has an overwhelming sense of mystery and intrigue. The characters and plot embody the theme of mystery. Like we discussed in class on Tuesday, the first chapter set a sort of outline for the remainder of the novel, which I found an interesting tactic. Each consequent chapter has fleshed out the outline and given us more information, but not enough to give away what the big secret is. I like how Faulkner does this - it not only keeps the novel interesting (unlike MD) and avoids slow sections, but it makes me want to read more. In addition, it provides leniency to speculate what is going to happen - which is also fun. Charcater development and plot are able to grow throughout the novel and I don't believe we will fully understand the characters until we find out what the big secret is - because obviously it has defined who the characters are.   

family theme

The theme of family is extremely important in the first 100 pages of AA. The entire novel is surrounded by family. The family includes Rosa, her sister Ellen, their father, his sister, Sutpen: Ellen’s husband, and their two children Henry and Judith. In the first couple chapters, the antagonist is definitely Sutpen. The different points of view all describe his character as intruding, and he eventually intrudes into the family. Rosa definitely expresses her discomfort with his actions and belonging in their family. Then, in the next couple chapter there are two others intruders on their family. The first and more obscure intruder is the Civil War. The father does not believe in the efforts of the civil war and instead goes upstairs and locks himself in his room. The Civil War ends up being the death of him. But, Rosa does not give up on him and continues to feed him until his death a couple years later. Then there is Henry’s best friend Bon, who ends up becoming engaged to Judith. Bon works as an antagonist to Henry because he puts false hope him and eventually causes him to denounce his family name. Also, he breaks Judith’s heart.

Faulkner's style

Faulker uses an interesting style of writing to start off the novel. The beginnings seem very jumbled and almost confused. At first I thought this was because Miss Rosa was telling the story, but I think his style of writing is almost to try and confuse the reader at first and then gradually explain more information as the novel progresses. His syntax is also to be noted because he seems to use adjectives in groups of threes. Some of the groups of three adjectives have commas but some do not. This creates confusion for me as a reader rather than description. While Miss Rosa is speaking she uses exaggerated words like “sweet and oversweet” and “distilled and hyper distilled.” Faulkner may have chosen these words to illustrate Miss Rosa’s personal bitterness about the situation. Faulkner also uses a lot of “non” things like “not-people,” “not-language,” “un-defeat,” and “un-regret.” This adds to the dramatic element of the stories by explain what Sutpen is not rather than what he is. I think this is also used to show that he is not certain good qualities, but rather negative ones. All of these elements combined seem to create confusion for the reader since the thoughts are not very clear. 

Rosa's Childhood

    Chapter 3 talks about Rosa’s childhood. This is interesting because it isn’t directly related to Sutpen’s story. It is however helpful to know in order to understand her bias against Sutpen. While it doesn’t give all of the details as to why she thinks he is evil, it does show some of the struggles she has had in and how she could have been given a prejudice against him.
    Her mother died during child birth so she was raised primarily by her father and aunt. Many of her views came from these two people. Her father was a very depressed man who could not forgive himself for his wife dying in childbirth and so Rosa hated him. Her aunt, who was the one who took her to see her to see her sister at Sutpen’s Hundred, disliked Sutpen and teaches Rosa to see nothing but an “ogre-face”. Her aunt tries to arrange visits only when Sutpen is gone and so it would seem Rosa hardly is able to form an opinion of her own. She only knows that he is why she can’t see her sister more and can give him the blame for everything else that is wrong in her life.
    This is particularly interesting considering the fact that in Rosa’s account, she provides a couple of occasions where Sutpen has disorderly conduct but she never provides evidence as to how he ruined her or her sister’s life. I think if we had read had these details before reading her story, we would have formed very different opinions of it. I find it interesting then that Faulkner would present these two points of view in the order that he does. I think this is to give us a bias (to emphasize that everyone has one) since even after reading the other side of the story I still have a feeling that Sutpen is bad even though I still lack firm evidence.

Narrating the South

               Faulkner’s choice of having the history of Thomas Sutpen related through several biased and unreliable narrators is interesting if one considers Sutpen’s behavior an allegory for the South’s actions during the Civil War.  I believe Faulkner is purposefully attempting to illustrate that history has two equally important parts: one side being empirical truth and the side the emotional responses of those who lived through the period to give meaning to the truth.  I also believe Faulkner is showing that the emotional side of history is more important to understand than the empirical side.

                Faulkner is demonstrating that generations born after the conflict could have difficulty understanding how the lack of morality in the South with regards to slavery affected their forefathers’ emotions and reactions on a personal level during that period.  One could easily follow a timeline of what had occurred during the Civil War, but Faulkner’s work is illustrating that the emotional side of history is more important and can paint a better picture of the nature of the past.  Quentin, two generations removed from the events of Thomas Sutpen’s life, is attempting to gain an understanding of the man and his effects on those around him through narrators which freely express their personal bias towards the man.  While Quentin could simply ask questions to guide the subject of his interviews away from personal bias and towards what just the hard facts, he instead chooses to listen to their entire stories to fully understand Sutpen.  In the same way, I believe Faulkner is saying to understand the South and to understand a war sparked by morality, one must research and know the emotions of the people of the period.

Elements of Gothic Fiction in Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

Having read Faulkner’s short story, “A Rose for Emily,” I had some idea of his writing style and subject matter going into Absalom, Absalom!, including a passing familiarity with his use of recurring characters. I felt that “A Rose for Emily” only very loosely adhered to the limitations of the canon of gothic fiction, so I have been quite shocked at how rigidly Absalom, Absalom! seems to stick to the archetypes of gothic literature. One aspect of gothic fiction is the emphasis on the psychological reaction to evil, which is most certainly evident in the novel. Faulkner’s purpose in introducing the reader to Sutpen through Rosa’s tinted lens is to show the reader how deeply Rosa has been traumatized by Sutpen’s acts. His use of words such as “demon” and “ogre” is to show us the unrealistic mental image of Sutpen that exists within Rosa’s mind.

                  Another aspect of Gothic literature is use of supernatural elements such as ghosts and apparitions in the action of the novel in order to illustrate decay. Faulkner most certainly utilizes this technique as well. As Quentin left for Harvard, he thought that the South had been “dead since 1865 and peopled with garrulous outraged baffled ghosts” in the first chapter. Quentin also speculates about ghosts and the dead repeatedly throughout the first two chapters.

                Sutpen embodies the core traits of the gothic villain. He is presented as explicitly evil, has a mysterious background, and above all displays complete apathy towards human emotion. Faulkner portrays Sutpen as almost separate from the rest of society, and therefore humanity. 

Power of Perspective

    Perception is a powerful tool that Faulkner uses throughout Absalom, Absalom! and many of his other literary works.  From the first couple of chapters alone, Faulkner’s narration becomes intermeshed with varying perspectives of the same event.  In the first chapter Rosa provides Quentin with a bitter and resentful overview of Thomas Supten’s arrival in Jefferson; however, the next chapter reveals a similar and less cynical version of this same story from Quentin’s father, Mr. Compson.  These varying perspectives offer the reader insight to different sides of this story, but also add confusion and ambiguity to the truth behind the actual events. 

                I believe that if this story was told from one perspective or and third person narrative it would be completely different experience.  Faulkner has a way of laying out the external or physical components of a story, while at the same time, uncovering how these outside events internally affect his characters.  The person who tells a story, whether they label it as fact or fiction, heavily influences how that story is depicted.  Faulkner’s book touches on the problem with looking back into history; it is not only confusing or ambiguous, but also extremely biased.  This book is powerful, because it presents life, as it really is, through varying subjective experiences.         

Thomas Sutpen: Demon, Capitalist, or Both?

The mystery of Thomas Sutpen is heavily emphasized in the first few chapters of the novel, with different perspectives varying in degrees of negativity that contribute to his ambiguity.  The first recount of Sutpen we receive is from Rosa, which as we have already stated in class, was largely off-putting, portraying the character as a demonic figure without elaborating on her rather vague opinion otherwise.  It is not until the second chapter that we receive an alternative view of Sutpen, this time from Quentin’s father.  He fills in many of the details Rosa left out regarding how Sutpen first established himself in Jefferson and Sutpen’s Hundred.  A mystery still exists about how he acquired his wealth and developed this respect over the course of time, most of the rumors being largely negative relating to raiding steamboats and other violent crimes.


Rosa’s demonic portrayal of Sutpen makes him seem as though he is motivated by pure evil, the first image that is implanted into the reader’s mind. While Quentin’s fathers portrayal of Sutpen brings him back down to earth with more human qualities, there is still the mention of Sutpen’s crimes and slave fights.  By no means does the man have clean hands, but his intentions and prior history are still unknown, while at the same time some desirable qualities do exist to a certain extent. He built something from nothing, and established himself in a town where he knew no one and had no influence, the essence of the capitalist spirit.  His intentions could very well be as bad as the results themselves, but perhaps Faulkner is using his character as a way to exemplify the darker side of greed and human nature, rather than just a common antagonist and plot device.   

Faulkner's Southern Style

    During Tuesday’s class we talked for a while about how Faulkner wrote this book to symbolize the rise and fall of antebellum South. We mainly discussed how Sutpen could be a personification of the South, due to his ruthless and seemingly immoral behavior. While he does prove to be a projection of the era, I think that Faulkner also wanted the style of the novel to seem southern. Because of Falkner’s southern background, I think there are at least two ways in which we can compare Faulkner’s style and plot to the South.
   As I’m reading this Absalom, Absalom! I feel that I am in the story itself because of how many times the same information is presented, just in different opinions. This aspect of the book reminds me of a small, southern town where everyone knows everything about everybody. In a place like Jefferson, Mississippi, you would be sure to have heard Sutpen’s tragic ending countless times. I think Faulkner wanted the reader to fell like he/she was actually walking through Jefferson while this gossip spread like wildfire (granted, Quentin is listening to the story many years later, but the information is coming at him very quickly and interruption).

Structure

I know half of the class discussed this on Tuesday, but I figured I would go ahead and post my thoughts on the way that Faulkner has structured Absolom, Absolom! Faulkner has written his novel to have many narrators to one story. This story kind of has to be pieced together by the reader, as each narrator seems to tell a slightly different piece of it. Through Rosa Coldfield's view, the reader (we), sees Sutpen as a bad person and a strongly negative influence. It is obvious (although we don't quite know why yet) that Rosa hates him. Mr. Coldfield, on the other hand, gives us a slightly more neutral view of Sutpen, although still understandably unreliable. By alternating narrators, Faulkner seems to be suggesting that both are unreliable in their own ways - both balancing the other out in certain ways. The additive "sum" of the two viewpoints seems to be more reliable than either of the two on their own. For example, we know that Rosa really hates Sutpen, but Mr. Coldfield's descriptions of Rosa in chapter 3 have an air of sympathy and pity as he describes the hardships she has had to endure. This plants in our minds that Rosa is more than just an angry old spinster.

Also, I think the way that Faulkner has structured this book is sort of his way of getting us to see the characters the way he wants us to see them. For example, Sutpen is initially introduced to us by Rosa, who hates him and is very suspicious of him. Thus, when we go on to read Mr. Coldfield's account of Sutpen's arrival in Jackson, we can't help but be suspicious of his actions and his motives. As another example, we are first introduced to Rosa as sort of an angry old spinster, but after we are provided with Mr. Coldfield's telling of the story in chapter 3, we begin to pity and sympathize with her.

FINALLY: in chapters 3 and 4, Ellen is repeatedly compared to a butterfly. Butterflies are generally a positive symbol of metamorphasis/change. We know that Ellen's story ends badly, and that it sort of goes down hill after she marries Sutpen, so why would she be compared to a butterfly?

Discussion Facilitation- Emily and Sarah

Discussion Facilitation- Sarah Munday and Emily Cude- 3/13

1.       Why does Faulkner summarize the entire plot of the novel in the first chapter?

a.       Gives vague accounts of an in-depth story, but doesn’t describe them really, just gives her opinion on the overall matter.

b.      Miss Coldfield is so bitter about the history so is she not accurate because it is told from her point of view? (makes everything out of proportion)

                                                               i.      She distorts the story to make it fit her perception of how the story went- uses words like demon and savage to describe Sutpen and what he was doing

                                                             ii.      She wants Quentin to tell her story so that people will see that Thomas Sutpen is a bad man is incapable of compassion.

                                                            iii.      Reliability of the narrators

c.       Quentin seems to be more of an objective character, not exactly forming much of an opinion of his own, merely gathering details and then relating to the South in general.

2.       Syntax- why does he use so many adjectives, clauses, and pairs of threes?

a.       Some of the groups of threes have commas and some do not- why?

                                                               i.      Thoughts seem to be jumbled and interposed between each other.

b.      Use of a lot of similes

c.       Sweet and oversweet (page 8), distilled and hyper distilled- use of over exaggeration; Miss Coldfield is so bitter about the situation personally that all of the actors in her story are more exaggerated also

d.      Demon, band of beasts

e.      Mentions of heat and dust

f.        “Non” things- “not-people” “not-language” “un-defeat” “un-regret”

g.       Ghosts

h.      Hyperbole

3.       Metaphor of the South as a ghost

a.       Post-Civil War the South no longer exists

b.      Sutpen’s story parallels the South’s story; downfall is brought about by the same reasons (because they didn’t have compassion)

4.       Sutpen

a.       Married Miss Coldfield’s older sister Ellen; mysterious because he was never around the townspeople (never drank at the bars)

b.      His mysterious and urgent personality creates at demonic perception in the locals’ mind

c.       Created this perception in their minds of how we was- relates again how history is told by the perception of others

d.      This description of him provides a more humanistic and realistic description of Sutpen and gives the readers another interpretation of him through Mr. Compson (more reliable narrator)

                                                               i.      Two skewed perspectives because people are relating their personal perspectives to Sutpen

e.      What do you think about Sutpen after hearing about him through these two different narrators of the past?

5.       Fate versus free will?

a.       Structure of the South was doomed to fail from the beginning because of the reliance on slavery.

2/28 Dickinson Discussion Notes

1. Literal Meanings
1. 1699- Doing noble things will make you happier, without doing them  you can't be happy.
2. 872-The tiger's hunger can't be satisfied after he has had flesh, the speaker is comparing themselves to a tiger.

2. 872
1. The diction is formal because the poem is noble, authoritative
2. Interpretations:
1. Rapture is possibly referring to religious themes
1. "Cost us existence once" might be referring to Adam and Eve or another biblical allusion
2. The speaker could be spurning rapture, or acceptance into Heaven, by not doing noble deeds
2. The poem is about empathy
1. Joy is personified as a him, Rapture is personified as her. This might be allusion to gender stereotypes since Rapture is a stronger emotion and women are seen as more emotional
2. The poem might also be about the need for empathy in a relationship as seen in the use of "herself" and "him"

3. 1699
1. Interpretations
1. Religious- the poem is about resisting temptation( "as the vultures teased") by fasting. Berry of Domingo is an allusion to Sunday and the berry is what god gives you.
2. Colonization/ America as a country- America as a ship in the Maelstrom
1. Food imagery represents a hunger/ desire for colonization
2. Domingo is an allusion to colonization of Haiti
3. Slavery- The tiger is a metaphor for a slave that has tasted freedom( "finer famine")
1. The speaker "I" is a slave, or someone sympathetic to abolitionist cause.
2. Slaves are referred to as parts ("veins and tissues") because at the time they weren't seen as people. It's possible she is being sarcastic and criticizing those who treated slaves as less than human.
3. Dickinson is comparing the slave's desires to a savage hunger to emphasize her point that the desire for freedom is a primal urge and necessary to humanity.

Dickinson Discussion Notes

Many of her poems deal with themes of death and immortality.  Dickinson was known as a very reclusive person.

-Theme of death as a release from vengeance

-237 "out of sight - in Heaven" is when she will be forgiven

-1172 includes a speaker that is fleeing from the vengeance of nature-man- by dying. 

-The dead are better off than the living.  Death as a release from vengeance.  Dickinson flips around the usual sadness of death and makes it more of a state of peace.

-Overtones suggest relation to the civil war.

-Possible irony: Dickinson maybe saying she hopes that she is "safe" in her tomb by the time we all destroy each other in a great war.

-1509 furthers the idea of retribution seeking as a matter of life and death -- "anger as soon as fed is dead"

-Life and death as the fulcrum of anger

-Holding hate inside throughout your life won't do any good after you are dead, and if anything will cause problems in afterlife.  This is why she advocates for forgiveness

Revenge as a burden

Structure:

-How does her unusual capitalization and italicization affect the meaning of her poems?

-1172: capitalizes "Cloud", "Forests", "Lightning", and "Thunder"--> example of personification.  Why??

 -In death, the body and more importantly the soul are immune to "Nature's Temper" as well as man's vengeance.

-Significantly more structure than Whitman's poems

-All stanzas are 4 lines with a clear pattern and rhythmic repetition

Role of Vocabulary

-Precision of word choice allows for writer to keep poems short and have strong messages. 

-"Mine enemy is growing old" -- "anger", "starving", "avenge", and "enemy" create feelings of disdain

-"I think just how my shape will rise"-- "rise", "forgiven" and "prayer" create religious context in beginning.  Next stanza, shift in vocabulary indicates a sense of moving away and "brokenness"

Dickinson's Choices

         I found Emily Dickinson’s use of excessive pronouns and abnormal punctuation and capitalization kind of intimidating when I first read these poems.  Some of these mechanics interfered with the way in which I was able to read the poems, especially poem 237.  It also made interpretation difficult.  Although I found the ambiguity of many connotations for singular words, such as “con,” “unshriven,” and the “sparrow” reference in 237 to be somewhat frustrating, it was really intriguing to determine the literal meaning of the poem and then attempt to interpret the deeper meaning behind her mechanics. 

         Initially, I had no idea what the first poem, 237, was talking about.  It seemed silly since it’s such a short poem, but the syntax that Dickinson uses is kind of overwhelming at first.  I thought it was especially interesting that she seemed to be speaking to God at first glance, but upon deeper investigation and some provided background information, it turns out that this may not be so clear-cut an assumption.  Rather, she seems to be talking to a man, made of flesh.

         I also found poem 1509 to be a little confusing, but after re-reading it a few times I found it really interesting that she characterized emotions such as revenge, hate, and anger as food, kind of tying in gluttony as another “deadly sin”. I felt like it gave the emotions a base, almost primal quality that was really interesting and more powerful than a generic interpretation of those emotions.

Forgiveness without penance

It occurred to me that the subject of the poem "237" is compared to a fallen angel through Dickinson's use of imagery. The first stanza gives the image of the speaker rising to heaven, and later she refers to herself as "the Sparrow of your care." When someone cares for a sparrow, we assume that it has been injured and can no longer fly. The last line of the poem also captured my interest. "I drop my Heart - unshriven." I found out that to shrive means "to impose penance on" or "to hear the confession of." This last line would suggest that the speaker's heart has not been penitent or has not confessed of its sins. The first line of the same stanza reads "and so I con that thing - forgiven." So maybe the speaker is trying to say that she is taking advantage of forgiveness by accepting it, but without any actual repentance for her sins. This is in contrast to poem "1509" which we read on the first day of class. It says that revenge is the only way to sate a starving anger. Forgive me if this post seems lacking in depth. Poetic analysis is a practice with which I have always struggled.

Weird Punctuation

     Throughout Dickenson's works she seems to create an innovative and original way to utilize punctuations. From the excessive need to end thoughts with a hyphen to her back and forth use of quotations around italicized words. Readers are made to wonder why exactly she felt compelled to use such obscure marks throughout her work.

     Like most other writers Dickenson has a personalized voice that she uses to enhance the message that she is attempting to convey. Her use of punctuation seems to be part of this. Instead of commas, She seems to enjoy using these breaking hyphens in both the first and third poems. You can almost imagine her taking a breath each time she comes to one. I attempted to find some reason in her use of quotations around certain italicized words, but I just couldn’t seem to understand. My initial thought was that she was trying to establish a distinction between certain words and others. Using this technique on the word forgiven seems to give it a condescending and sarcastic tone, but the other words sparrow, and Consider do not work as well in this context.
   One great advantage to poetry is the free reign to control the English language however you want, as long as it still can be somewhat understood by the reader. Dickenson surely pushes the extent of that with poems like these.