William Faulkner's A Rose for Emily
I. Implied author of the story
„A Rose for Emily”, a story of horror first published in 1930, is considered by many scholars one of the most authentic and the best narratives ever written by William Faulkner. It is a story of a woman, Emily Grierson, and her relationships with her father, the man she was in love with and the community of Jefferson, the town she lived in.
While discussing any narrative text it is crucial to mention the implied author of a text. As Wayne C. Booth, the most famous follower of the Chicago School believed, it is possible and acceptable to “interpret and criticize the narrative worlds of literary works without stepping beyond the limits of the text and falling victim to a ‘fallacy’” , without confusing the narrator with the implied author. Even though the plot or characters may be clearly described in literary works, only by interpretation can their “intended nature” be determined and the concept of an implied author is the one to bring together both: description and interpretation. There are many variations of the concept of an implied author, however most of them usually come down to two suggestions: first, that the implied author is a nexus of values and norms in the textual world and second, that he selects and orders the elements of narrative texts . Thus, it may be said that through the mentioned selection (of, for example, the narrator, the title, the symbols or the language of events) and ordering the implied author passes on the information which the implied reader needs for the interpretation of the text. In this way, every literary text, as in this case “A Rose for Emily”, becomes a form of communication between the writer and the reader. The aforementioned information may be passed in various ways, two of them being the structure of the narrative text and its title.
The title of “A Rose for Emily” is ambiguous. As there are no roses in the story, it may be safely assumed that the title is purely symbolic, however the meaning of this particular symbol remains unclear for readers. The word “rose” brings to mind a flower of a deep red colour, beautiful, but always surrounded by thorns. Red colour may symbolize love and passion, but it is also the colour of hate and revenge. Therefore, the rose may be the symbol of Emily’s feelings, her passion towards Homer, her desperat...
... middle of paper ...
...follow in her future life. Trying desperately to keep Homer by her side, she turned to the only effective method she could think of, murder.
Unable to let go of the past, Emily could not accept any changes in her life and disregarded them with pride and confidence. For some people her defiance was the reason why they admired her, for others the reason to pity “the fallen monument”. Eventually, Miss Emily’s unshakeable insistence to live her life solely on her own terms, led to tragic consequences. Tragic, not only for Homer Barron, but for Miss Grierson’s psyche as well.
To sum up, it need to be concluded that “A Rose for Emily” belongs to those fascinating narrative works, which offer the readers detailed studies of characters without providing them with all the necessary information in a too easy way. It is the readers task to discover subtle relations within the story, to link together certain circumstances and to create one, vivid picture of a woman and the society she lives in. In this way, “A Rose for Emily” indisputably becomes an exquisite feast for the mind, without any doubt deserving to be considered the best of the short stories ever written by William Faulkner.
In William Faulkner's "A Rose for Emily," Miss Emily Grierson is a lonely old woman, living a life void of all love and affection; although the rose only directly appears in the title, the rose surfaces throughout the story as a symbol. In contemporary times, the rose also symbolizes emotions like love and friendship. The rose symbolizes dreams of romances and lovers. These dreams belong to women, who like Emily Grierson, have yet to experience true love for themselves.
Although the Divine Command Theory assumes that the existence of God is necessary for the existence of morality, Arthur points out the possibility for the existence of good to be completely independent from the existence of God. He believes that the conscience, as a result of social forces, acts as a person’s moral motivation and moral guidance if not religion. Arthur also says that language is necessary for morality. Morality is social as it is an entity that "governs relationships between people.” It is used by individuals to justify their actions to others. Morality, through the consciousness of a person, serves as the voice and perspective of others within the individual—upholding Dewey’s
Broadly, the divine command theory is a religious moral code in which God’s commands determine what human beings should or should not do. As such, it is expected for theists to subscribe to the divine command theory of morality. The deontological interpretation of the divine command theory separates actions into one of the following categories: mandatory for human beings to perform, prohibited for human beings to perform, or optional for human beings to perform. Those actions that are mandatory to perform are ones which have been expressly commanded by God. Failing to commit a mandatory action would be defying God’s commands, and thus, according to the divine command theory of morality, immoral. Actions that are prohibited are ones that God expressly commands human beings do not perform. Consequently, to perform a prohibited action would be immoral. Finally, those actions that God does not expressly command that human beings should perform or should avoid performing are optional; there are no moral implications to performing or not performing such acts. The rightness or wrongness of an action is inherently and wholly dependent upon th...
The belief systems of Hinduism and Buddhism have been around for centuries, and play a pivotal role in many countries around the world. Both Hinduism and Buddhism derive from the same source and area, which naturally gives them similarities, but they differ in many ways as well. These similarities and differences can clearly be seen when looking at how both belief systems approach spiritual fulfillment and the dilemma of how this fulfillment can be achieved.
If (1), then the content of morality is solely dependent on God’s whim; rendering morality nothing more than blind obedience to divine arbitration. If (2), then the action is evil independently of God, in which case God is simply redundant. Moreover, if the theist claims that morality is not arbitrary then God must recognize a moral code superior to Himself – in this case, God’s sovereignty devolves into subordination. Therefore, recognizing that humans have the agency of freewill, it must be the case that our motivations to be moral are independent of God’s
Faulkner uses symbolism to help bring out the main points in the story itself and also uses this symbolism to show how Emily is an allegory for the changes in the South during the time of the Civil War. By using the symbols of the rose meaning love or silence, or the hair meaning that over time things change, or even the house, being set back in the old times of the Civil War, symbolism is shown many ways throughout this short story. William Faulkner wrote "A Rose for Emily," in a way where the reader is able to comprehend and interpret the main points in the story in a different way as to where they will be able to look deeper within the meaning of each part of the story rather than having a dull meaning behind everything.
In order to critique the Divine Command Theory, it is important to first understand it. According to the theory, morality is defined solely by the will of God and no moral standards exist independent of His will. It is simple and unambiguous; once accepted, issues such as moral relati...
The Divine Command theory of ethics is a theory that states that an act is right or wrong and good or bad based on whether or not God commands or prohibits us from doing it. This means that the only thing that makes an action morally wrong is because God says it is. There are two sides to this theory; the restricted and the unrestricted. The restricted theory basically says that an action is obligatory if and only if it is good and God commanded it; the unrestricted theory states that an act is only obligatory if it is commanded by God, it is not obligatory if it is prohibited by God and it is optional if and only if God has not commanded nor prohibited it.
Cultural Relativism and the Divine Command Theory both had a tough time explaining why culture and God had the rights to state what is considered moral behavior. Especially when you lay your trust on God to guide you on what is moral or not, you face dangerous risks because there is a possibility that God is just a make-believe person up in the sky. Hence, humans who follow God’s words can misinterpret his meanings and cause immoral behavior in society. On the other hand, Ethical Relativism appeals to an authority that is present on this in this world, society and cultures. Nevertheless, society and cultures should not be relied on to indicate moral and immoral behavior because it is questionable to believe that our actions become moral just for the reason that our culture or society accepts them as normal. Despite the differences between The Divine Command Theory and Cultural Relativism, they both are theories that just fall short of their
The purpose of this paper is to argue for the idea that even without a God, there can be a basis for morality. The structure of my argument will proceed as follows. I will begin my paper with the background information of the idea that without a God, specifically the Christian God, there is no moral basis. After detailing this false belief, I will go on to explain why it is indeed untrue due to various reasons. I will bring forth the conflicting views of St. Thomas Aquinas and the natural law theory before countering the arguments brought up by them.
Divine command ethics is a theory that states, that an action's moral content is equivalent to if it was commanded by God. It states that if God is all powerful, then he must also be all good. It then follows that if God is all good, everything He commands must be moral. It uses God as the only basis of determining if a particular action is moral. Moreover it states that an action cannot be moral if, God did not expressly command the action to be performed, this theory also does not allow an atheist to be able to perform a moral action even by mistake. Since the morality of the action depends entirely on if God would have commande...
Upon reading about the historical and religious background of Ancient India, one can clearly assume that the country was strongly influenced by three main religious teachings: Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism. These three sects in religious thinking have many similarities as all recognize the life-cycle and the need of liberation, they worship one central deity that used to be a human who gained enlightenment and they all recognize the existence of the eternal soul and after-death re-incarnation. However, they also share a lot of differences that mark the underlying principles of practicing them. I will identify the scope of differences and similarities in these ancient religions in an attempt to understand why each attracted followers, why each was shaped a certain way and how they preserved the interest of followers on into the modern times as well.
First we will start with the historical example of the execution of Jesus. Pontius Pilate was put into a situation where a large crowd had attempted to persuade him that Jesus should be killed instead of a convicted murderer, even though Jesus had done nothing wrong. The majority won and he was killed. The Utilitarians can justify this action because the majority gained happiness from this. On the other hand, those who support Kant’s theory will argue that Jesus had done nothing wrong and his right were clearly violated making the action
Let's take this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion. If the Divine Command Theory were true, then the ...
To fully understand the overview of divine command theory six key categories outline the basic principles of this ethical theory. The six key categories are source, selection, definition of good, scope, objective or subjective, and principle of right action. The source of core morality for divine command theory is God's commands. The selection of this moral principle can be done by consulting a religious text, religious leaders, or through prayer. Goodness under this given theory is what God orients us towards through his commands because God represents goodness. The scope, or the range to which divine command theory applies, is objective because those who believe in this theory believe that it is objectively correct. An action under divine command theory is right if and only if the action is consistent with what God commands.