Two Responses, Reaction Paper Example

One. I very much like that you understand how conflict is the core of the story, and is also based on Emily’s various kinds of it. You go further and connect the “conflict dots,” seeing how Emily’s inability to face reality ties in with her relationship with her father. This is real understanding, as the story itself allows for different perspectives: “She told them that her father was not dead. She did that for three days” (Faulkner). In other words, it could be argued that Emily has a sane agenda here, but you see the greater reality. At the same time, I wonder about how much intent you give to Emily, especially as you note how conflicted she is. For example, you say that she is unaware of her own actions in killing Homer and keeping his body, but I am not sure why you believe this. It seems to me that she certainly understands on a conscious level what she is planning and doing, and the buying of the poison is evidence of this. She is not sane but she is aware, in my eyes. I also think it is not reasonable to claim, as you do, that she murdered Homer because she hated how the town judged her relationship with him. For me, as with other elements of Emily’s life, it’s a choice made for purely personal reasons and which go to her refusal to face reality.

Two. I also like how you see Faulkner’s view of Emily as a fallen monument, in that you correctly understand all that she represents to the town, and how modern life is bringing her down. This ties into the sympathy Faulkner has for her, as he expresses that a writer often must go where he would rather not (Gwynn, Blotner 852). My problem with your response here, however, is that it stays too limited. For me, while Emily is certainly a fallen monument, there are others. Her father and her house are definitely fallen monuments, although it is fair to say that Emily is symbolic of the whole. I would add that the town is falling with her because it is letting go of a part of itself in her decline, just as it could be said it is falling by allowing Emily to get away with her defiance of its laws. This is debatable, however, and your main point is very solid. The only other problem here, and which is also in the first part, is that your grammar goes wrongs sometimes.

Works Cited

Faulkner, W. “A Rose for Emily” Web. 9 Nov. 2013. <http://www.wwnorton.com/college/english/litweb05/workshops/fiction/faulkner1.asp>

Gwynn, F. L., & Blotner, J. Faulkner in the University. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1995. Print.