William Cuthbert Faulker was a writer that lived through the first half of the 20th century. He wrote many different kinds of things in his life, from short stories, to novels, to poems, and screenplays. He however is most famous for his novels and stories that take place in a fictional county which is based on the one where he grew up. Faulkner was awarded the 1949 Nobel Peace Prize for Literature due to some of his writings. The reason for this was, as quoted by the board that gives out the award. “...his powerful and artistically unique contribution to the modern American novel.” (Nobel Prize). When he received the award at the banquet he gave an acceptance speech as any other person would. Faulker speech is thought of by most to
In this work there is no appeal to anyone just yet, other then to the audience. He merely comments on the fact that he does not see tis award as a prize for himself, but a price for his writing. It is a humbling appeal to the audience and one which could lend what else he says later a lot of credibility. A humbled man is much easier to understand and listen to then a piety one that sees himself higher then everyone else. A man of that branding feels more like a know it all the someone who speaks with sincerity in his voice. With that said, a person could also see this as a logical point, how he would not have gotten this award at all had he not worked so hard on his writing to get it. The second paragraph of William Faulker 's speech requires some context to relies the magnitude of his words and truly determine what he was trying to convey to the crowd at the wards presentation. Faulker was presented his prize just as the United States and the Soviet Union were engaging in their Cold War Arm Race. Each nation was building up their weapon reserves of Nuclear boms and long range missiles ready to blow each other off the map with a single attack. With this in mind the population began to think
I find it to be a nice little wrap up to his speech as a whole. Faulker 's speech was actually pretty moving and I liked listening to the recording of him actually talking through his speech. It was a very well crafted work and commentary of the time that he was a live. I do not completely agree with all of his points but he crafted his argument well and spread out his three forms of persuasion well through out the work and I am very glad to have read
William Faulkner’s short story “Barn Burning” describes a typical relationship between wealthy people and poor people during the Civil War.
At the conclusion of his short story “Barn Burning,” William Faulkner strongly implies that Abner Snopes burns yet another barn, although whether he does or not is never made absolutely clear. In any case, his young son, Sarty, has run to warn the owner of the barn, Major De Spain, about his father’s intentions:
If you haven’t you’re missing out. Its about a boy that learns he’s part of a secret society of people called Transitioners that are able to go through a eight day of the week.
Michael Meyer suggests that the description of the de Spain mansion in paragraph 41 of "Barn Burning" reveals Sarty's conflict. What does this mansion represent in Sarty's mind? How does that symbolism conflict with Sarty's being loyal to his father?
The Strategies of Victims. Faulkner’s short story “Barn Burning,” captures the intensity and dynamics of a father and son relationship. The story is set in the Old South, where the dry farming grounds of the plantations are the only places that promise hardworking men a means to support their families. Though Faulkner presents these two man characters as vastly different, the father, Abner, and the son, Sarty, share a striking similarity. They both see themselves as victims and display the traits of a victim’s status.
While I was watching the documentary William Faulkner, a Life on Paper I found it striking how the different people that were interviewed talked about two different sides of the author William Faulkner. His daughters, Jill Faulkner Sommers and his stepdaughter, spoke mainly about his alcohol abuse and his moodiness whereas Faulkner’s contemporaries from Oxford underlined Faulkner’s generosity and kindness. The documentary shows Faulkner not only as father of Jill and his stepdaughter but also as a father figure for many others. He had to take care of several families at once. At one point Faulkner had seventeen dependents to provide for. Many of the people that were interviewed describe Faulkner as being very generous and always willing to help others even when he had almost nothing himself. One special example is his brother Dean who died in an airplane accident and because Faulkner had bought the plane he apparently felt guilty about the death of his brother for the rest of his life as his sister-in-law says in the interview.
In William Faulkner’s As I Lay Dying, Faulkner portrays the death of Addie Bundren and her family's quest to honor her dying wish to bury her in the town of Jefferson. Faulkner utilizes humor in the novel to lighten the mood of death and as an act of transgression against the orthodox Christian views of death as it relates to good souls dying and becoming angels. Addie Bundren’s son, Vardaman, relates to the orthodox Christian views of death, and the synonymous use of humor with these views ultimately creates an idea about humanity’s perception of death and how they should live, which is enhanced through John Morreal’s “Humor in the Holocaust: Its Coping, Criticizing, and Superiority” and “‘The Abject’- A Brief Definition.”
In the novel, A Light in August, William Faulkner introduces us to a wide range of characters of various backgrounds and personalities. Common to all of them is the fact that each is type cast into a certain role in the novel and in society. Lena is the poor, white trash southern girl who serves to weave the story together. Hightower is the fanatic preacher who is the dark, shameful secret of Jefferson. Joanna Burden is the middle-aged maiden from the north who is often accused of being a “nigger-lover”. And Joe Christmas is the epitome of an outsider. None of them are conventional, everyday people. They are all in some way disjointed from society; they do not fit in with the crowd. That is what makes them intriguing and that is why Faulkner documents their story.
Many tragedies have occurred during the last century. William Faulkner believes the greatest tragedy of the last century is that modern writers no longer write of the spirit. On the other hand, in his memoir, Angela’s Ashes, Frank McCourt asserts the Catholic Irish childhood is far worse. However, both tragedies are related as McCourt’s emotional account of his misfortunes exemplifies the profound influence of literature that Faulkner desires other writers to have. In his Nobel Prize acceptance speech, William Faulkner sets the standards of good literature that Frank McCourt adheres to through his writings of suffering and compassion.
On June 8, 1849 Fredrick Douglass, an African-American social reformer, abolitionist, orator, writer, and statesman was asked to speak to a delegation in Boston, Massachusetts, about the prejudice and bias argument of Clay Henry’s plans for gradual emancipation and forcible expatriation of African Americans in Kentucky back to Africa. In this speech, Douglass makes a larger argument that the expatriation of African Americans is quite jaded by political and church leaders prejudice and racist ideals in failing to see slaves as humans, but most importantly fellow American Citizens.
On September 25, 1897 in New Albany, Mississippi, a son was born to Murry Cuthbert and Maud Butler Faulkner. This baby, born into a proud, genteel Southern family, would become a mischievous boy, an indifferent student, and drop out of school; yet “his mother’s faith in him was absolutely unshakable. When so many others easily and confidently pronounced her son a failure, she insisted that he was a genius and that the world would come to recognize that fact” (Zane). And she was right. Her son would become one of the most exalted American writers of the 20th century, winning the Nobel Prize for Literature and two Pulitzers during his lifetime. Her son was William Faulkner.
Light in August - Point of View Most of Light in August's story is told by a third-person narrator. In some third-person novels the narrator is omniscient (all-knowing) and objective. In others he takes the point of view of the central character. In Light in August the narrator is often objective, as, for example, when reporting dialogue. But what is unusual about this novel is the way in which the narrator's point of view shifts frequently from one character to another.
Frederick Douglass was an African American who escaped from slavery in 1838. After buying his own freedom in 1847, Douglass created The North Star, an abolitionist newspaper, and also wrote an autobiography. Douglass became a well respected author, and in 1852 was asked to give a speech in Rochester, New York. In his speech, the The Meaning of July Fourth to the Negro, which was delivered in Rochester, New York on July 5, 1852. Douglass spoke of the nation's problems with hypocrisy, and mistreatment of African Americans.
In each of these stories, Faulkner communicates to the reader through very strange characters. In “Was”, we hear of a story that basically stems around a runaway slave. The two Uncles are very stereotypical. The other owner was also very stereotypical. Basically, in this story, the white men are trying to apprehend a slave that has run off to see his girl. However, the story then progresses into a standoff between the white owners. They bet each other on very arbitrary matters until finally, though the previous bets did hold some weight, the men turn to a deck of cards to settle their disputes. The ironic aspect of all of this is that they end up betting on the lives of the slaves. So, in order to prove their superiority over each other, they use their slaves as leverage. This was one of the times I felt that Faulkner was trying to illustrate the fact that these people seemed hopelessly lost in the old Southern way. What was also very interesting though is that they seemed to treat the slaves fairly humanely. First of all, if a slave had run off in early times, they probably would have beaten him or killed him. Here though, it is a kind of game. It’s a race to see who can get him first. Faulkner also throws into the story the woman who seems to be in love with one of the uncles. This too, was very clever because the new “southern Belle” was also being communicated to the reader. The Uncles though, are bachelors, perhaps signifying the dying southern gentleman, who is unable to deal with his past, and who will lead his genre of people to extinction. All in all, I liked this story. I didn’t see Faulkner as a racist and I didn’t see any of his charact...
got to learn to stick to your own blood or you ain’t going to have any