Saturday, June 27, 2009
Week 2: Whitman and Faulkner
As we discussed last week, Whitman is writing during the era identified as the American Renaissance. Leaves of Grass, from which comes "Song of Myself," was first published in 1855 (only a few years before the civil war). Faulkner, on the other hand, is considered a writer of the Southern Renaissance, a movement which occurred during the modern period (between WWI and WWII, almost a century later). What do you make of the work of these two American artists? Some questions to consider in developing your reflection: What American themes and issues do they address in their work and how? What similarities and differences do you observe in their narrative and style? What differences? What cultural and historical circumstances seem important in contextualizing these authors and their work?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I recall hearing an anecdote once about Toni Morrison, concerning the fate of one of her early manuscripts. Apparently, she sent a copy of it to William Faulkner, asked him to critique, and he sent back a letter that in essence said, “Some parts of it were good, but it was not how I would have written it.” This is essentially the legacy of Faulkner on Southern Literature, and to a lesser extent on literature in general. Toni Morrison, for example, is quite often compared to Faulkner in her use of colloquial language, long sentences, and a variety of narrators. Cormac McCarthy and Gabriel Garcia Marquez have also acknowledged their debt to his writing. As it so happens, his stories deal with a similar theme of debt and the influence of the past on the present, as is undoubtedly the case with Barn Burning. The idea of the past having a palpable presence in the present is a theme familiar to most Modernist Lit, as Faulkner famously proclaimed, “The past ain’t dead, it’s not even passed yet.” This idea is touched upon by James Joyce, “History is the nightmare I’m trying to escape,” and F. Scott Fitzgerald explicitly having a character say, “You can’t repeat the past.”
ReplyDeleteIn Barn Burning, the characters are all more or less confined and identified by the past. Abner is referred to as “the boy,” or “his son,” and rarely by his name, just as Snopes is “his father,” or “the father.” Abner is identified then only in his relation to his father, except when his mother calls him by his name. When his father is incriminated, he is likewise guilty, so long as he is his father’s son. As his father’s son, his one source of pride is his father’s service in the Civil War, which provides the reader with a dramatic irony when it’s off-handedly revealed his father was a no-account opportunist. In the story’s conclusion, it’s only when his family likely die that he is able to have his own unique identity, but this comes at the cost of losing what he held dear.
The identity and (tragic) freedom Abner is granted at the conclusion of Barn Burning is similar to the individuality celebrated in Whitman’s Song of Myself. Whitman’s neglecting of the tragic sense though would win him many enemies in the time of Modernism, but would bring him popularity after WWII. Ezra Pound wrote of him “I will make a pact with you, Walt Whitman/ I have detested you long enough/…It was you that broke new wood/now is a time for carving.” Others, such as Allen Ginsberg, William Carlos Williams, and Bob Dylan would rediscover Leaves of Grass, and come to it as if it were a tradition from the past, that was also optimistic about the future.
As we look at the works of Whitman and Faulkner, there seems to be many different issues which stand out to give these works their historical setting and style. One thing that I noticed reading about the authors was the difference in formal education that the authors received. While Whitman attended higher education for a number of years, Faulkner was a high school drop out. Such differences in education reflect in their writings by the types of stories that they strive to pen.
ReplyDeleteUpon my initial read of Barn Burning I was left confused and frustrated. It seemed difficult to follow and to keep the characters and the setting strait. Much of this was clarified during my second read. One thing that stood out to me during the piece was that slavery was still very much an issue during that time in history. But in addition, Faulkner almost exaggerates the way that poor whites were treated. I remember questioning more than once the race of the Snopes family because of the way that they were treated. They seemed as though they were black slaves, constantly in bondage or servitude to the rich white folks.
Another thing that sets this piece in time is the way that women were treated (or even described). They were described as hulking, big, having heavy thighs, etc. They were also frequently commanded to do things and rarely asked. One reason for this is due to the fact that this writing took place long before the civil rights movements and women’s rights activists gained national attention and power. It was very clear that men held power and prestige in society.
A final element of Faulkner’s writing that really stood out to me in Faulkner’s piece was how frequently he made reference to the war. Barn Burning specifically illustrated that Mr. Snopes was injured in the war. The author frequently referenced this injury in many of the things that Snopes did. It appears that war references are frequent in his works due to his early experiences with war. In fact, in Faulkner’s bio it discusses an injury that left his friend limping, much as he describes the limping of Mr. Snopes. Thus, he applied some of his own life experiences into his works.
" Indubitably, these names are far too heterogeneous to form a movement, paradigm, or school. Still, they may evoke a number of related cultural tendencies, a constellation of values, a repertoire of procedures and attitudes. These we call postmodernism" (Hassan 586-7).
ReplyDeleteThis quotation from our theory reading for the week seems easily applied to the Whitman/Faulkner comparison. The authors do seem to "evoke a number of related cultural tendencies." The most obvious of these is the focus on the individual. In "Songs of Myself," one need only count the references to "I" to feel the importance of the solitary man. "Barn Burning" ends with the solitary (young) man walking into the woods alone and at night, never to "look back." In both cases, there seems value in separating oneself from the larger group--the poem's speaker repeatedly describes being alone in nature, away from society, and the boy in the story turns away from family by "ratting" on his own father. Both "speakers" also display a hyper-self-awareness--in almost every stanza of the poem and in the interior monologue sections of the story--and reveal the idea of private obsessions. The speaker in the poem reveals much in his sensuous description of his own body and desires; while the boy lets slip his longings while waiting during the court cases (longing for justice) and upon seeing the lush house of De Spain for the first time (believing that nothing so beautiful could be corrupted).
Further, their procedures seem similar in that they provide "snapshots" of a variety of common people. In "Barn Burning," we see the commonest of people in the thief's family. (In the historical notes on Faulkner, we are told this is only one of many families/generations he chooses to zoom in on.) In "Song of Myself," Whitman focuses on a collection of the people of his day: carpenter, pilot, duck shooter, and deacon, for example (all of these taken just from Stanza 15). This multiplicity of players seems to fit into our emerging definition of postmodernism.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteUpon reading “Song of Myself” and “Barn Burning”, initially I was offset by the stark differences from one reading to the next. Both seemed somewhat difficult to follow, however, leaving only particular moments that I could latch onto. I found both to have a similar style in using long, descriptive sentences that seemed to carry on and on. Themes related to war and slavery, as well as, the roles that people obtain and carry throughout there lives were present in each reading.
ReplyDeleteOf the two readings, I felt more inclined to respond to Whitman, having had more difficulty fleshing out the Faulkner piece. Whitman compares and relates himself to others throughout the poem, showing his observations of people in various social roles, and how people are not one thing or the other. He shows that one can have many roles, and that things are not just black and white, but can be black and white at the same time. He states that he is old and young, maternal and paternal, a Southerner and a Northerner, and goes on to ask the questions, “What is man? What am I? What are you?”, as if to challenge someone to even be able to clearly define what that may be. Whitman is able to point out the complexities of people and the variety and similarities that exist in all of us through his ability of seeing others' perspectives. One enjoyable line towards the end of the poem says, “Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself, (I am large, I contain multitudes.)” What I take away from this line relates to the idea of people being diverse within themselves, and at times even taking on beliefs or roles that may contradict one another. Whitman seems to be comfortable in his contradiction, and rightly so, as it seems we all contradict ourselves at some point or another.
"Song of Myself" and "Barn Burning" portray different sides of individualism.
ReplyDeleteIn "Barn Burning," the younger son is mostly alone in his family. He is struck and beaten many times by his father throughout the selection. It also shows his resistence to the continued suppression of his father, mostly through his thoughts. While he even stops his thoughts thinking that "Maybe he's done satisfied now, now that he has..." after his father had just beaten him. Yet the thoughts are still there, whether he chooses to finish them or not. He later flees from his "home" finally cutting the decaying ties to his blood family. In the end, his own individual strength would cure cold of the night, as well as the stiffness he felt. He knew he would be hungry by morning, but he must now take it as it comes displaying his complete aloneness now in the world; his new sense of self reliance thrust upon him by himself.
In "Song of Myself" it is almost a celebration of oneself, looking upon themselves from different angles and perspectives individually, and in relation to others. He reveals a multitude of ideas and questions that make a person. He is aware of this intricate complexity within himself, continually sorting through himself to better understand his being. The reasons for his actions and thoughts takes him in circles around himself chipping more and more at the block each time around to reveal his individuality; his being.
The differences in illustration of two peoples' individuality. Both allow for my own relation to each person's circumstances and ideologies. Each takes a look into the author's mind giving a little insight on their thoughts on their own place in this world. It is what means to be human. Putting meaning to oneself in relation to others and the universe as a whole.
S.A. Hoyt
In response to Shayne's post, I also agree that there is a very different feel to the two pieces that were offered. As I look at the two pieces, I tend to lean toward the Faulkner piece because the story line, the narration and the fact that there is a plot I can follow is nice. There were times when Faulkner's intellect left me wondering what I was reading about but for the most part I was able to comprehend what mood and what kind of feeling Faulkner was trying to evoke. Whitman also does well at this but I prefer the style of Faulkner. I also find that the Faulkner piece points out a lot of societal topics that many people enjoy reading about. As you mentioned, the issue of domestic violence is raised in this piece. We also read about major issues such as war and slavery. I also had the thought that if this piece continues as it is (in the entire work) it could also serve as a coming of age story.
ReplyDeleteResponse to Heidi’s post:
ReplyDeleteI like how you brought up the overarching idea of the individual. In Barn Burning it is clear that there is a large push for the individual to emerge. Frequently throughout the piece there was tension and abuse and it was nice to see how things unraveled. It felt like the boy was becoming a man (perhaps despite his desire to) and he went off alone. Also, throughout the story seemed to me like the narrator wanted so badly to be an active character in the story. It almost felt like I understood the narrator more as a character than I did the main characters at times. It was pleasant to hear the narrator’s voice as an active participant.
In addition to the factors displaying pomo that you discussed, another thing that hit me regarding the Faulkner piece was the way that the setting of the story was so fragmented and diverse. Faulkner changed the setting of the scenes frequently. At times it was confusing but it also helped to keep me attentive.
In response to Jeff's post, I think it is the contradictions in pomo that often make it so unsettling. One of the topics I frequently discuss with my students is the idea of the author's "world view." Of course, one can never know for sure what an author intended--or if there was an intent--but it is interesting to me to look at how an author concludes his/her piece and question what it reveals about his/her attitude towards life, the world. For instance, after reading 1984, my students are often saddened by the realization that Winston Smith has been completely "re-educated." I ask them what this conclusion reveals about George Orwell's attitude about the average citizen's ability to overthrow an unjust government. They all agree that he is really trying to say something. When we read A HANDMAID'S TALE, where the fate of the protagonist is uncertain, it is less clear to them what Margaret Atwood is trying to say. Perhaps I AM stuck in the mindset that literature should have a "moral to the story." And, perhaps, with pomo, Marshall McLuhan is correct: "the medium is the message."
ReplyDeleteIn an effort to poke fun at myself, here is what Billy Collins has to say about teachers who insist that students try to figure out "what poets are trying to say":
The Effort
by Billy Collins
Would anyone care to join me
in flicking a few pebbles in the direction
of teachers who are fond of asking the question:
"What is the poet trying to say?"
as if Thomas Hardy and Emily Dickinson
had struggled but ultimately failed in their efforts—
inarticulate wretches that they were,
biting their pens and staring out the window for a clue.
Yes, it seems that Whitman, Amy Lowell
and the rest could only try and fail
but we in Mrs. Parker's third-period English class
here at Springfield High will succeed
with the help of these study questions
in saying what the poor poet could not,
and we will get all this done before
that orgy of egg salad and tuna fish known as lunch.
Tonight, however, I am the one trying
to say what it is this absence means,
the two of us sleeping and waking under different roofs.
The image of this vase of cut flowers,
not from our garden, is no help.
And the same goes for the single plate,
the solitary lamp, and the weather that presses its face
against these new windows--the drizzle and the
morning frost.
So I will leave it up to Mrs. Parker,
who is tapping a piece of chalk against the blackboard,
and her students—a few with their hands up,
others slouching with their caps on backwards—
to figure out what it is I am trying to say
about this place where I find myself
and to do it before the noon bell rings
and that whirlwind of meatloaf is unleashed.
"The Effort" by Billy Collins, from Ballistics. © Random House, 2008
In response to Brent's posting, I was completely baffled by the characterization of the boy's sisters.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of them being twins interested me. The Modernists liked Greek mythology, and twins are significant in Greek mythology. Is there deeper meaning here? Since neither girl is given a name, perhaps them being twins simply indicates that they are interchangeable and without distinct identities.
The twins are desribed as "hulking," "broad" and "heavy," and I wonder if the boy feels emasculated by the sheer size of his sisters. Perhaps they represent yet another force that he must escape.
The sisters are also repeatedly referred to in animalistic terms: for instance when the father tells them "you will hog it" (referring to the house) and they are twice called "bovine." Faulker seems to suggest that in this family a girl is no more than a hog or cow.
Lastly, the sisters' posessions are referred to as "cheap" and "tawdry" and at one point, they sit with "spread heavy thighs." To me, these descriptions suggest a cheapness about girls' character. What on earth is Faulkner saying with this? (Perhaps he's saying nothing; see my previous post . . .)
Response to Brent:
ReplyDeleteI agree the Faulkner piece could be confusing at times. I had trouble with it as well. It took a while to catch up with the story and figure out what was going on, and Faulkner's style of writing confused things as well (I think it was Heidi who mentioned in class about Faulkner referring to multiple "he's" in the same sentence). I enjoyed "Barn Burning" overall, but it could be, as you said, frustrating at times.
As for your point about Faulkner's depiction of women, I would argue that this story doesn't really prove a bias. These women were just a few of the many women Faulkner must have written about in his career. It is very possible that he just had a low opinion of these particular characters, and not of women in general.
Response to Corey
ReplyDeleteI thought you were able to provide some great insight on the readings. I especially liked the idea of the past having influence on the present. Although it is common to notice the world around you in the now, the past undoubtedly has a great affect on beliefs and perspectives of the future. As you pointed out, it is something that you just can't get away from. Even as the boy in "Barn Burning" finds himself through his beliefs, his newly shaped past may haunt him for the rest of his days.
A common theme that comes up in responses to the readings is the idea of individuality. I find it interesting how people find this feeling of self, and how they are able to describe it, as with Whitman, or how to demonstrate it through their actions, as in “Barn Burning.” The ironic thing about individuality is that one usually finds it in comparison to others. Not until we find differences in ourselves from others can we be set apart from those same people. It's funny that we need other people in our lives to find the one person inside us. This feeling of the individual is constantly changing as we continue to grow and learn more about ourselves, and the circumstances of our lives determine whether we choose to be aware of such feelings or acknowledge them at all.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Brent's post:
ReplyDeleteI related to your post quite a bit when reading it. Especially in regards to the comparison of the Snopes to a black family of slavery. The only way we really know they are a white family was because the Justice was giving them an on-site trial. A black family in this time period would not have gotten one. I also enjoyed the relation between Snopes' war injury and Faulkner's friend who was injured in the war. All writer's have ties to their own lives in their works and to be able to see what the choose to pen, gives insight to what they are present to at the time, throughout their lives, and works.
In response to Jeff's post:
The way Jeff's post illustrated the multitudes of Whitman's piece within the individual struck me immediately. When I read "Song of Myself" I compared myself and individuality to the piece. I believe that everyone has different sides. A side that they show to others, a side shown only to friends and family, and what they keep suppressed etc. I agree that Whitman is also comfortable in his contradiction of himself, realizing that the conflict of ideas are his "wholeness" in his thought process. He is able to look upon himself from all different angles, the differing angles being the basis of his contradictions.
S.A. Hoyt
Whitman uses detail down to the smell of the air; his timing of prior to the civil war is evident through his writing. In the piece “Song of Myself”, Whitman’s education level goes as far as a traditional farmer. In Faulkner’s story (which from the handout was hard to read due to most of the pages having missing writing), racism is still apparent. The story which was written after the Civil War, was about the Civil War. Both writings were very traditional to how North American culture has been led. Both seem to have a less advanced writing style, but Faulkner seems to be a more educated writer dimming the wits to make the writing more in place of the time. To further my experience of the readings, Whitman writes in first person, while the other is in third person narrative style.
ReplyDeleteI thought i had posted my original write up for these readings but apparently i have not, so i am doing so now.
ReplyDeleteI found both pieces very good reads with similarities in the themes used. The way they both use their stories to illustrate how over and over history will repeat itself if we continue to do the same thing. Hmmm kinda seems like common sense to me. But i found the writers use of telling the story from different perspectives and also with their narratives gave the telling more depth and substance.
The Barn burning, with the perspective from the young boys view i though was very enlightening. It seemed as if it was the child who was teaching the adults what was right and wrong and what was just and moral. And the fact that the fathers character in this stoy never changed his actions is pretty much the standard text book documentation on the theory that history will and does repeat itself if you go about life as if the past doesn't matter.