1

Luu Nguyen Ha Vy

Le Thi Thanh, Ph.D.

Literature and Language Teaching

25 March 2013

A Rose for Emily – Meaning Created From the Structure

If good storytelling is to be defined as wittingly mixing up the reader’s mind by skillfully

mixing up the story’s shape, then William Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily” is undoubtedly a story

very well told. Cluttering things up, shuffling things about, yielding in a structure that “twists

chronology almost beyond recognition” (Sullivan 167), “A Rose for Emily” stirs up interest from

its reader in much the same way its main character Emily arouses curiosity from her fellow

townspeople. Its structure does more than what is normally expected of it – “simply a big

framework on which all the text’s details hang” (Marsh 37); rather, it engenders the feeling, and

it enlightens the meaning. This paper thus seeks to dwell on these contributions, attempting to

demonstrate that besides character, theme, and point of view, structure in “A Rose for Emily” is

just as crucial an element to add to the reader’s better appreciation and deeper understanding of

the story.

Attempts to pinpoint the exact chronological framework within which the story develops

abound, yet with much discrepancy between the results. Part of this discrepancy, according to

Moore (196), lies in the fact that most chronologists have to rely on both the “internal” and

“external” evidences (canonical, historical or biographical evidences) to carry out such task,

whilst opinions about the weights given to each kind of external evidence vary. Therefore, to
 2

avoid such issue, this paper will stay close to the text and determine the structure on the basis of

formal “internal” evidences alone.

In identifying the structure of a story, Marsh (38) proposed a basic framework with three

sections: (a) exposition (introducing the world of the text), (b) complication (exploring the

problems which build up the crisis) and (c) resolution (resolving the main crisis). The first

encounter with “A Rose for Emily” can flatly tell that a quick, clear-cut establishment of such

framework is not easy, if not impossible. Instead, one has to jot down all the major events, lay

out their possible relations, and string them together into a coherent, lucid structure. Here I

modify the organization given by Skinner (45) to propose a summary of the order in which the

narrator recounts major events in Emily’s life. My modification is for each event is to be tied in

with the time references the narrator uses to describe them.

Section I

 Emily’s funeral (“now”/ past perfect)

 Her house (“no one…had seen in at least ten years”)

 Colonel Sartoris and the remission of Emily’s taxes/ Emily’s father’s death (“in 1894”)

 Emily’s victory over the new generation’s attempts to collect her taxes (“next generation”, “on

the first of the year”, “February”, “a week later”)

 Emily’s china painting lessons (“eight or ten years earlier”)

Section II

 Emily’s victory over the former generation’s attempt to get rid of the obnoxious smell (“two

years after her father’s death”, “a short time after her sweetheart had deserted her”, “the next

day”, “that night”, “the next night”, “after midnight”, “after a week or two”)
 3

 Emily’s father’s death/ Emily’s resistance against the reality of her father’s death (“the day

after his death”, “for three days”)

Section III

 Emily was sick/ Emily’s hair was cut short (“for a long time”)

 Homer Barron’s arrival (“in the summer after her father’s death”)/ Emily’s relationship with

Homer (“Sunday afternoons”)

 Emily’s purchase of the poison (“over a year after they had begun to say “Poor Emily”, “while

the two female cousins were visiting her”, “over thirty then”)

Section IV

 Emily’s relationship with Homer Barron (“Sunday afternoon”, “the next Sunday”)

 Emily’s domestic arrangement for Homer (“at first”, “two days later”)/ Homer’s sudden

disappearance (“the streets had been finished some time since”, “by that time”, “within three

days”, “at dusk”, “one evening”)

 Emily’s seclusion from the public (“now and then”, “for almost sixth months”)/ Emily’s

mental and physical decline (“when we next saw”, “during the next year”, “up to the day of

her death”, “seventy-four”)

 Emily’s china painting lessons (“for a period of six or seven years”)/ Emily’s taxes remission

(“meanwhile”)

 The new generation’s attempt to collect her taxes (“each December”, “a week later”, “now

and then”)

 Emily’s death (simple past)

 4

Section V

 Emily’s funeral (“on the second day”, “a huge meadow which no winter ever quite touches”)/

The Negro’s last appearance

 The opening of the upstairs room (“no one had seen in forty years”)/ The discovery of

Homer’s body (“for a long while”, simple present)

Such is how the story is narrated, or what Skinner (42) called “suzhet” (in light of

traditional formalism), and Happel (154) “discourse time” (in light of structuralism). The

necessity arises for the readers, then, which constitutes the recognition of Faulkner’s exquisite

craftsmanship, is to reconstruct the real order of the story – “fabula”, or “story time”. A result of

this conversion process can be seen as below.

 The Grierson house was built

 Emily’s father died after “she got to be thirty”

 Emily met Homer Barron “the summer after her father’s death”

 Emily bought the arsenic “over a year after they had begun to say “Poor Emily”. She poisoned

Homer Barron, who disappears “two years after her father’s death”. A stench was detected “a

short time after”

 Emily gave lessons in china painting “for a period of six or seven years”. “Meanwhile”, her

taxes were remitted by Colonel Sartoris.

 Emily was visited by the city council aldermen “eight or ten years” after she “ceased giving

china painting lessons”

 Emily dies “at least ten years” since the last time someone saw “the inside of her house” – the

visit of the city aldermen. After her funeral, the upstairs room where Homer’s body lay was

opened.
 5

That the reconstruction of a lucid order out of a purposely puzzling sequence is not a

straightforward task has much to say about Faulkner’s masterly technique and how such

technique can affect his readers’ engagement to the story. On the one hand, not all the time

references used to unfold Emily’s life events are closely associated with her. Some of them,

instead, seem to pertain to certain people and events around: “next generation”, “over a year after

they had begun to say “Poor Emily”, “while the two female cousins were visiting her”, “when we

next saw”, “no one had seen in forty years”, “no one save an old man servant…had seen in at

least ten years”, “their fathers thirty years ago”, “the streets had been finished some time since”.

While it might potentially bring out a justification for the story’s main conflicts – a point which

shall be dealt with later – this lack of one internal consistent time referent through which all the

events in Emily’s life can relate might leave a perplexing puzzle for the readers to solve. On the

other hand, such a confusing case might also instil in them a need to look for the unifying thread

that binds everything together. And Faulkner, with much wit and skill, weaves in enough clues –

subtle, yet identifiable – to make it possible for them to do that. A brief analysis of the number of

times an event appears in the “fabula” version indicates that most of the major events occur at

least two times throughout the story, arguably serving certain different functions.

Number of times
Event
of appearing
Emily’s death 3
Emily’s father’s death 3
Emily’s taxes remission 2
Emily’s rout of the aldermen over the matter of her taxes 1
Emily’s china painting lessons 2
Emily’s rout of the aldermen over the matter of the smell 1
Homer’s arrival 1
 6

Homer’s leaving 2
Emily’s physical change 1
Emily’s meeting with Homer 2
Emily’s purchase of the poison 1

Here, based on the second analysis of the structure proposed by Skinner (46), I suggest

that part of the clues slipped in by Faulkner can be identified through the order and the number

of times an event appears in the “fabula” version. In section two, for instance, a mention of her

father’s death and a description of how she reacted to his death are given. It is described that

after her father died, (1) Emily withdrew from the public for some time (“she did that for three

days”) and (2) her physical condition was more or less affected (“she was sick for a long time”).

In section four, a similar pattern of reaction is found, this time with the disappearance of Homer:

(1) Emily withdrew from the public for some time (“for almost six months she did not appear on

the streets”) and (2) her physical condition was more or less affected (“grown fat”, “hair was

turning grey”. From such similarity, an observant reader would venture to reckon an awaiting

fate for Emily’s lover: death, just like her father’s. This hypothesis can be reinforced, should that

reader glances back at the number of time the mentions of her father and her lover are

juxtaposed: first, in the beginning of section two (“that was two years after her father’s death and

a short time after her sweetheart had deserted her”; “after her father’s death she went out very

little; after her sweetheart went away, people hardly saw her at all”) and second, in the beginning

of section three (“in the summer after her father’s death”, “the construction company came

with…a foreman named Homer Barron”). Thus, by relying on the order and the number of times

an event appears – what Faulkner intended to mix up with – a reader, through “glancing back and
 7

reflecting anew” (Happel 158), can come to grips with the real order within which the story

unfolds – what Faulkner presumably wanted us to venture to find out.

Another point worth noting is the similarity between the response elicited from the

readers upon reading the story and the attitude disclosed by the townspeople when Emily’s life is

exposed before their eyes. This proposition started out with my belief that any reading process of

“A Rose for Emily” comprises, at least, two stages: the unconscious stage and the conscious

stage. Just as the townspeople “daily, monthly, yearly” watch each and every detail of Emily’s

appearance, conduct, family, life, and environment, we – as readers – remarkably do the same.

And curiosity might be just the one motive for the two cases: theirs, probably because of the

difference between Emily and themselves, the one they were once fully aware of (“only Miss

Emily’s house was left, lifting its stubborn…above the cotton wagons”, “an eyesore among

eyesore”); and ours, probably when we realize the difference, if not a great divide, between how

a normal story is constructed and how a Faulkner’s story is constructed. Such, is the first one

unconscious step that we and the townspeople take towards Emily’s house, her own isolated

world: without really much knowing what happens behind the front door, and thus we never

resist a chance to peek at that motionless “upright torso” behind that downstairs window. The

next stage – the second conscious step that leads us right into Emily’s house – now that we know

what is kept behind the front door, is utterly appalling. Now each and every detail of Emily’s life

holds a significantly different meaning, we thus feel pressed to reconstruct and rethink what we

have seen before. It is this curiosity in the first step that carries us forward and onward through

the text; and it is this feeling of dismay that pulls us back whole through.

It follows, then, that by offering his reader an active role very much similar to that of the

townspeople to play, Faulkner has given him a chance to walk his own way around the story.
 8

And it is only through this voluntary process that his reader’s emotion, devotion and engagement

to a story can best be developed.

The discussion so far has centered on finding how the structure of “A Rose for Emily”

adds to the emotional engagement of the readers. Similar concern arises with reference to the

understanding of the story: whether such structure indicate how the story is intended to be

received.

I suggest that there are four possible ways in which the structure of “A Rose for Emily”

can contribute to signify its intended meaning.

The first way, proposed by Davis (18), indicates that the five successive sections of the

story in fact signifies the five “metaphorical characterization” of the different stages through

which the townspeople disclose their attitude and judgment towards Emily, the five

characterizations being expressed through the five adjectives : “dear”, “inescapable”,

“impervious”, “tranquil”, and “perverse”. A reading of expressions used to signify the

townspeople’s attitude to Emily and their interpretation of the main events listed in each section

can show that such a choice and arrangement of word order might not be haphazard at all.

Section I (“dear”): The men went to her funeral through “a sort of respectful affection”,

When she was alive, she “had been a tradition, a duty, and a care”.

Section II (“inescapable”): “feel really sorry for her” “we did not say she was crazy then…she

would have to cling to that which had robbed her, as people will”

Section III (“impervious”): “she carried her head high enough – even when we believed that she

was fallen”, “it was as if she…her imperviousness”

Section IV (“tranquil”): “was still that vigorous iron-grey, like the hair of an active man”
 9

Section V (“perverse”): “but now the long sleep that outlasts love, that conquers even the

grimace of love, had cuckolded him”

Sullivan (166), however, emphasizes that such judgment expressed through the five

adjectives should only be understood as made by the narrator and that whether their credibility is

established is still a matter under debate.

In a story where the main subject is “man’s relation to time” (qtd. in Moore 195), any

connection between time references can be critical in contribution to a proper understanding of

the character, or the theme. The fact that not all the time references used to unfold Emily’s life

events are closely associated with her therefore should be considered. A coherent sequence of

her life, it seems, cannot be separately constructed without taking into accounts the involvement

of certain people and certain events around her, who and which, apparently, represent what she

has struggled to resist her whole life: the forces of time (“next generation”, “when we next saw”,

“their fathers thirty years ago”), change (“the streets had been finished some time since”), and

intrusion: (“over a year after they had begun to say “Poor Emily”, “no one save an old man

servant…had seen in at least ten years”, “no one had seen in forty years”, “while the two female

cousins were visiting her”). That a full account of her life cannot be given should these

references be left out suggests that however much she desires, she cannot detach herself from

them, and thus all her struggles against them have become utterly vain in the end.

Closely linked to the matter of time references connection are the concerns of the order

and the number of time an event appears. That Emily’s death appears first, middle, and last and

that it is six times that the mentions of death are given (hers and her father’s), indicate no growth

or change in her seeing and responding to forces of time, change and death. Rather, they signify
 10

a sense of repetition – her same old stubborn, impervious refusal to submit to “the inevitability of

time” (Skinner 42). Emily, it turns out, has never really left her house – that preserve isolated

world of her – even though we, the townspeople, and Faulkner has swept across her entire life

and even though, that door that seems to separate hers and the world outside has actually been

opened for her six times.

The final temporal aspect to be considered is the delay of resolution or explanation to the

conflicts in the story. Representing the resistance to forces of time and change, Emily’s repetitive

behaviour, or method, when pressed to face any kind of change is to delay it (Emily’s delay in

response to the aldermen; Emily’s resistance to appear in the public after the death of Homer and

her farther, etc.), probably deluding herself that such a resolution might help her to “stop time”

and “to freeze the flux of life.” (Davis 37). Thus the technique of delaying resolution,

particularly in the main crisis at the end of the story is consistent with the world of Emily. It is at

this point of time that her ultimate attempt to resist the passage of time was doomed to failure.

Thus is the use of the simple present tense in the last section: “but now the long sleep that

outlasts love, that conquers even the grimace of love, had cuckolded him.” a notion I found,

rather surprisingly, had not been very much a centre of concern for critics. The sudden shift of

tense from past perfect to simple present, the only time when simple present is used throughout

the whole story, I assume, signifies strongly the contrast between “past” and “present” in the

setting of Emily’s. Now that Emily is dead and what she has hidden for years has just been

revealed, “present” is railing its victorious existence, for the first time, right in the place where it

has, for ever and always, been resisted and defeated.

This paper attempts to demonstrate that structure in “A Rose for Emily” has more

magnitude than just a summary of what happens in the story. It is arguably “a perfect vehicle for
 11

the content” (qtd. in Skinner 43). Together with characterization, theme and point of view, it

contributes to the appreciation and understanding of what the story is intended to convey. The

paper at hand, however, does not take into account the role of place and spatial relationship in

reflecting the structure of the story. A further examination which takes on the two components,

time and place, to add to the understanding of the story thus is strongly recommended in the

future.

REFERENCES

Carter, R. & McRae, J. Language, Literature and the Learner: Creative Classroom Practice.
London: Longman. 1999. Print.

Happel, Nikolaus. William Faulkners 'A Rose for Emily.' 1962. Print.

Moore, G., M. Of Time and its Mathematical Progression. Studies in Short Fictions. 1992: 195 –
205.
http://studentserv.mvcc.edu/labsw/HUMN/EN%20102/Rose%20for%20Emily/Of%20Time%20
and%20its%20Mathematical%20Progression.doc

Marsh, N. How To Begin Studying English Literature. London: The Macmillan Press. 1997.
Print.
Sullivan, R. The Narrator in “A Rose for Emily”. The Journal of Narrative Technique. 1971:
159-178. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30224976

Skinner, J., L. “A Rose for Emily”: Against Interpretation. The Journal of Narrative Technique.
1985: 42-51.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30225110

William, V., D. “Another Flower for Faulkner’s Bouquet: Theme and Structure in ‘A Rose for
Emily’”. Notes on Mississippi Writers. 1974: 34-38.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3039622