It is very clear when reading the article that while at times it really seems that Faukner just threw together this story, that was not the case and he really did know which direction he was taking it. At times the audience isn’t aware of what is going on but every action provides foreshadowing for things to come later in the novel. Things that would seem inconsequential at first, have a new meaning after Faulkner is finished with them. One example is when Quentin breaks the watch, this sets up for the structure and narrative description of the novel. In The Sound and the Fury, the past, present, and future all meld together to create one entity and the when doesn’t really matter anymore. But the breaking of the watch also is told in the past form, which could also symbolize that the watch is in the past, that the reader must leave behind the sense of time in the book in order to fully understand both the story and its symbols.
I definitely agree with Jordan about Faulkner creating this discontinuous stream of conscience in order to have just one gigantic entity where time doens't matter anymore. But Faulkner puts so much emphasize on time that the readers can't help but think "is this in the past, present or future?". With the strong influence of time, the readers are preoccupied with it. Even with the naming of the sections, giving a date rather than a chapter title or just simply calling it "Quentin's Section", the reader is preoccupied trying to fit the sections into a logical progression. I think to this extent, Faulkner really does prove "our suffocation and [living in] a world dying of old age"- one obsessed with time and how our lives fit into this sense of 'time'. I think trying to put the watch into a past, present or future defeats the point. It goes along with the "Fui. Non Sum" (I was. I am not); by trying to pinpoint a specific point in time or even time itself, we lose sight of the actual concepts Faulkner's trying to relay to us (which include the concept about time).
ReplyDeleteTime is clearly one of the primary manipulations in Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury. One line in Jean-Paul Sartre's article really struck me: "In order to arrive at real time, we must abandon this invented measure which is not a measure of anything." Faulkner really takes this principle to heart in his novel. He clearly has no respect for time - evident in Benjy's section in which time has no meaning. Instead, Faulkner focuses on the stories as the important aspects, and not their chronological order. Time is of no importance in Benjy's world particularly because his interpretation of every situation he is in relies heavily on his memories of past experiences. The entire opening scene in which Benjy feels like he is losing Caddy ultimately takes place in two different "time" periods: one of Benjy's youth, and one of his present.
ReplyDeleteFaulkner's stance on time may stem from his belief in the old Southern society. Sartre explains that, in The Sound and the Fury, "the future does not exist. The present rises us from sources unknown to us and drives away another present." Generally, belief in the future is an indication of optimism. Faulkner's firm stance that the future is a man-made entity, which actually is just a "later" present, displays his inability to approve of mobility in Southern society. He is a strict advocate for the old South, and to him, as is evident in his novel, the future cannot exist because society cannot change to such a great extent.
I agree with Leah and Jordan. While reading this book tonight, I was just about ready to pull my hair out because the chronology of events was so messy and disorganized. It was almost as if Faulkner took the whole entire family history of the Compsons, shredded it into a million pieces, and miscellaneously scattered them all throughout his book. For instance, while reading Quentin's section, I noticed that he often stopped mid-sentence and transitioned to a whole other memory or episode. This is why I thought this section was more confusing than Benjy's section.
ReplyDelete"Man's misfortune lies in being time-bound....such is the real subject of the book. And if the technique Faulkner has adopted seems at first a negation of temporality, the reason is that we confuse temporality with chronology. It was a man who invented dates and clocks"
I thought this quote was one of the most interesting from the article because it put in plain words, why I was so frustrated while reading this book. Instead of wasting time trying to put the events of this book in chronological order, I have realized it is better to just ignore the whole entire concept of time all together and just focus on the importance of the experiences of the characters.
Like Rebecca said, time is what is being manipulated and is focused on in The Sound and the Fury. After reading the article a few things stuck out to me. One, that there is no sense of time in any sense of the world in the book. Faulkner breaks down what time is, what we consider time and he creates a world where the past is the present. Since we read in the past doesn’t that become our present-that is what we are reading now in the present, even though the book is all in the past. Another thing that caught my eye was who is the narrator of the book. At first, before reading I figured that each section was narrated by whom the section is about; it was certainly true for Benji's section. However, once understanding Faulkner's manipulation of time (or lack there of) and the meaning of the quote which inspired the title, I decided that maybe the quote was not just about the title but about the entire book, and therefore Benji is the narrator for the entire novel. Because he is retarded, but does have a sense of the world not of time, he is able to recount things-memories, emotions, events- that someone who is experiencing all the things might not be able to look into the past and recount perfectly. Also, the sound and the fury- benji cannot speak, but he can make sounds, he cries, wails, maybe grunts occasionally and it would make sense if he was angry with his life- not being able to communicate with his family and not being treated fairly. So connection up all my dots benji has sounds and is furious and is therefore narrating his family's life through those eyes and through the only way he know- the past- bring it back to the concept that there is no time in the novel.
ReplyDeleteMy final though about the article in relation to the novel is that Faulkner is commenting on the way of the old south, and its decay. And maybe everything is in the past to demonstrate to all the readers how bad things were, there is no room for the present or the future because to move on to those "worlds" people- the Compson family must escape their old ways and until they do that they will forever be stuck in the past.
I agree with many of the previous comments so I am going to introduce two new topics that I found particularly interesting in this article. (Overall, I think this article is very well organized and impressive - it illuminates the entire meaning of the book).
ReplyDeleteFirst: I think the concept that the entire section narrated by Quentin is the "infinitesimal instant of his death" is so symbolic and ingenious on Faulkner's part. Quentin is describing the present events of one day, but what Faulkner is saying with this entire novel is that there is no concrete present - there is only a past - and there is no future. So Quentin's present is therefore his past. The ENTIRE section is in past tense even though it is happening to him that day in those moments. And then the reason for his suicide essentially is because he has no future - "time, like an acid, eats away at man, eats him away from himself and prevents him from fulfilling his human character." Quentin is consumed by his past - specifically the emotionally charged and significant moments of his past that he cannot move past - these moments invade his present and "close" his future. In this entire section he is dead because time has won - everything is merely the past.
Second: I really enjoyed Sarte's comments at the end of this article about what he thinks of Fualkner's metaphysics (his conception of time). Sarte admires Faulkner's work of conveying his message about the absurdity of time, but he does not believe it. I think he makes a very good point that even a "closed future is still a future." Something is always being anticipated - even the demise or destruction of the Old South's morals, in Faulkner's case, is still a future even if it is bleak and an unlivable circumstance for him.
I think we should discuss our opinions on the validity of Faulkner's metaphysics tomorrow in class. Maybe some people agree with Faulkner or maybe others agree with Sarte/Heidegger?
Before I blog, I want to mention that the author is French. Best line of the article "Proust is a Frenchman and a classicist. The French lose themselves only a little at a time and always manage to find themselves again. Eloquence, intellectuality and a liking for clear ideas were responsible for Proust's retaining at least the semblance of chronology." Screw his inability to lose himself, I think that says greater things about the French than being able to lose yourself...
ReplyDeleteAnyways... I was unable to find the article, and so I looked up the man and the book based on what Rebecca said, so I hope this is right. This man blew me away with his analysis, some things flew over me and some things I understood. What I was really impressed with is when Sartre argued that this book is concrete fact because it is in the past. There is no variation, no falsities in the past while there is no certain future and the present is full of holes. I don't necessarily agree with this because of the idea that there is bias and other things that leak onto the past, but that is pretty much filtered out in Benjy's section (making it the most important). I like Danielle's comment on Faulkner's commentating on the decaying old south which he was so apparently proud of. I think the fact that the youngest child is retarded, the brightest child commits suicide, the angry Jason who in a way symbolizes the South, and we have Caddy who is the center of this issue all lead us to understand that.
Haley, I am a Sartres fan all the way for reasons which I am sure you can discern. I am a person who likes to see order out of disorder, even if I may in myself seem a little disorderly. I am impressed with Faulkner in being able to create such a complicated scheme and keeping up with himself as he wrote it, but overall, I do feel like this concept of time is absolutely ridiculous, because even if it is a human construct, it is still necessary because it does create that order that distinguishes our days from Benjy's days (which would drive me absolutely insane, especially if they were all so negative like his memories were). As much as I might enjoy reflecting on myself, this is a bit much...
ReplyDeleteI really like Becca's post about time being used as a means of criticizing Southern society. However, I don't necessarily agree that Faulkner doesn't have any respect for time. One of the quotes from the article that really stuck with me was "time is dead as long as it is being clicked off by little wheels; only when the clock stops does time come to life." I think this shows that Faulker respected time, since by stopping the clock he essentially allowed real time to come to life.
ReplyDeleteWhat I found interesting was the way Faulkner uses time to characterize the Comptons. There is an evident difference between the way Benjy and Quentin deal with time. Benjy does not try to understand time-he is completely oblivious to it. His experiences are defined by his senses rather than the time context. On the other hand, Quentin seems to be determined to understand time. When Quentin breaks the watch, he seems to be making a futile attempt at experiencing timelessness. Quentin shows interest in the way the past can affect the future. I think his suicide was in a way a result of complex relationship with time.
Like Haley I also think it would be interesting to discuss the end of the article even though it confused me a little. Is Sarte saying that Faulker was depressed and could not see any future for himself or others and therefore did not consider "the silent force of the possible" in his metaphysics? If that is correct, then it seems like the article portrays Faulkner in a very pessimistic light especially when Sarte writes "Faulkner uses his extraordinary art to describe our suffocation and a world dying of old age." I think it would be interesting to discuss if Faulker really did have such a pessimistic view of the future or if he believed the future could be saved.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading, "Time in the Work of Faulkner", I have come up with a theory regarding how Faulkner depicts time in "The Sound and the Fury". Time, in a world without clocks or any influence from society's preconception of time, exists completely in the present for an individual. While we are living, there is no barometer for how much time passed or when a stretch of time becomes significant. If something happened to us a second ago, it might as well have happened at the same time as an event that occurred a year ago if we have no understanding of the concept of seconds and years. When we watched George Carlin's commentary on time, the general consensus of the class after viewing it was that there is no present, only near past or near future. But we are seeing this backwards. There is only the present which encompasses all that has happened to us and all that will happen to us.
ReplyDeleteThis theory is supported by Benjy's narration during his section. Benjy refers to all events in his life as occurring in the present because he has no perception of time. Seconds, minutes, hours, and years mean nothing to Benjy, he simply sees events as a collective that have affected his present self.
The reason that Quentin narrates in the past tense, however, is because, by Faulkner's model time, he is already dead. Quentin can speak in the past tense because his present does not exist anymore. Time has stopped for Quentin and this creates the only natural marker for his perception of chronology.
I am sure that this theory is filled with holes, though, so feel free to rip it apart, or, if you want to continue this trippy line of reasoning, vindicate it.
While reading "Time in the Work of Faulkner" the quote that stuck out to me most vividly was Sartre's comment on Faulkner himself: "...Faulkner is a lost man, and it is because he feels lost that he takes risks and pursues his thought to its uttermost consequences." I thought this quote was especially intriguing because it reminded me of the emotions that Benjy has and the mood of the entire first section of the novel. I feel as if Benjy is lost in the past, present, and future, and only recalls or lives in the memories that he most cherishes or feels the most connection to. I feel as if this is similar to what Sartre is saying about Faulkner, in that Faulkner says what he wants because he doesn't feel bound to anything, he is just lost. As much as Benjy is regarded as stupid, I think he just says how he truly feels and what he truly believes, which even the most educated sometimes have a hard time doing.
ReplyDeleteOn a different note, while reading section one, I was shocked by the way Faulkner strangely equated Benjy to a pet, or more specifically a dog. Throughout the entire section during which Benjy's mother and caretakers are discussing whether to let him go outside it reminded me of discussing whether to let a dog run in the backyard, or keep him chained up in the house. I felt as if they treated him inhumanly, much like an owner would treat his or her pet. This is only further supported by Benjy's castration.
In my opinion, the article accurately states one key element of the novel, which is a clear lack of time. This lack of time becomes apparent right off the bat with Benjy's section where the reader is thrown into different events that take place at different times. However, the reason for this lack of time is to prove that time is all relative. The reader has no concept of the present because, as the article mentioned, the reader does not have any true concept of past. Each event in the past just blends into another event in the past. This blending continues until the reader cannot distinguish the inciting incident from an unimportant event. Time is all relative.
ReplyDeleteIt seemed to me like tonights article had a sound premise and a useless conclusion.
ReplyDeleteOf course "the present" can't be quantified by any universal standard, but we use it as a reference point for a reason. And of course "man has no present that doesn't lead to a future" but that doesn't really tell us anything at all. I will openly admit that I might be missing every nuance imaginable in this article in the book itself, but I think that a story worth telling is worth telling simply. That way, we can grasp the characters along a linear timeline because that linear path is what guides their developments and their decision-making, what else matters?
By smashing his watch, Quentin, like Faulkner, presents the reader with a world without time. As Sartre states, "Beyond this present time there is nothing, since the future does not exist. The present rises from sources unbeknowst to us...it is forever beginning anew" (2). The narration exists in terms of perception, so that everything occurs in streams of sensory input. Factors such as flashbacks, smells, sounds and vision all occur in the same stream of consciousness. Perhaps this is Faulkner's key message: everything exists as the present, in a jumbled mess of information. Faulkner's characters ignore time, because they constantly create their experiences, whether through their five senses or through their memories. As readers, we may naturally try to separate and order these characters' perceptions, but, like Faulkner, we too must forget about time. Arguably, the emphasis is less about when the events occur and more about the meanings of these events.
ReplyDeleteI found Corbins idea actually pretty similar to mine. Besides just agreeing to what he stated, i would also like to add that with this loss of track of time, all past or previous events share a 'time', being that their chronology is lost. To Benjy, stating and ordering them is just a matter of importance and relevance to him. It is like a trail of thought, of how one word can lead to another, where to you there is a definite correlation, but to say the person following that trail, the thoughts would be unconnected. Sarte describes time as non-existent to Faulkner, but I disagree with that statement, on the contrary, I believe time is relevant to Faulkner, or else there would not be such an emphasis on it. Using a date to name the parts, and removing it from the narrative attracts the attention of the reader and forces them to struggle in understanding the novel.
ReplyDeleteI also liked Sarte point on the watch. The shattering of the glass/ time represents the symbol for the loss of time reference in the novel. Benjy voluntarily takes it off, which could mirror his belief of removing time from life as a whole, which then results in the chaotic jumble of events we have to decipher.
oh and Cedric, I liked Sarte's comment on the French too, it made me happy to have our country finally be recognized for its intellectual greatness :)
Wow, it's underrated how difficult it is to be the last person to post. I agree with all that was said. I really enjoyed reading this article, not just because it helped me understand Faulkner's reasoning behind his mad writing, but also because of the valuable insight Sartre presented. I underline almost everything as I read, but the points that really resonated with me were "Man's misfortune lies in being time-bound" and "For Faulkner, on the contrary, the past is never lost, unfortunately; it's always there, it is an obsession. One escapes from the temporal world only through mystic ecstasies. A mystic is always a man who wishes to forget something, his self, or more often, language or objective representations. For Faulkner, time must be forgotten." The reason why these 2 points resonated with me were because of how applicable they were to my life and to life in general. It's all a mind game when it comes down to it because in the end, all that's known is that time- or at least the construct of it- does not exist. Everything that happens has already happened or will soon happen. I tried describing it to my friends today at lunch and everyone got frustrated because of how real and valid Sartre's comments are. It was so hard to believe that nothing is "the present."
ReplyDeleteFor Quentin, time is this ever-going mechanism that he cannot control. I think it is important to understand this confinement that Quentin sees within time, and how it relates to other events within his life. Quentin is constantly cognizant to the symbols of time around him, such as his watch that he cannot get to stop ticking, his uncertainty of what the "true" time is within the clock shop, and his feelings of being caged within his shadow (which represents time through the sun's movement). Even from a young age, he was unable to count correctly and could not tell exactly when the bell would ring for class to end. As the packet describes, "Man spends his life struggling against time, and time, like an acid, eats away at man, eats him away from himself and prevents him from fulfilling his human character." Quentin's frustration with time relates to his lack of control within his life. He is frustrated with time just as he is frustrated by not being able to make Caddy love him, marry him, or run away with him. He doesn't act on these fantasies and daydreams for Caddy that he keeps inside, and the reader can easily detect this impatient, frustrated tone that Quentin acquires due to his lack of action within the section. Quentin takes out this frustration on his inability to administer time by shattering his watch-glass and having dark thoughts of drowning; also, he continuously interjects the act of shooting within his thoughts, foreshadowing his imminent death. Because of his aggravation, Quentin tries to monitor time through the "density and the dramatic meaning of...life" rather than the "invented measure which is not a measure of anything." However, Quentin realizes that this man-made, invented measure of time is always around him, just as his feelings for Caddy will always be inside of him. Because he cannot control either situation, he decides to abandon both problems through suicide.
ReplyDeleteI like the quote Saranya picked about the clock stopping and I think it relates to Haley's comment about Quentin's whole story taking place in the moments before he commits suicide. The thought process is very scattered and looks hurried which gives the sense that it is almost like his life flashing before his eyes. It's kind of like the phenomenon that time basically stands still before you are about to die but it is really just your brain working extra fast.
ReplyDeleteI also think that this concept of having no future causes the Compsons to live in the moment. They only think about what they are doing in each particular instant and cannot see the reprecussions of their actions. This causes Quentin to commit suicide and Caddy to become pregnant with an illegitimate child. They can only feel what they are feeling in the moment and do not predict the consequences of their actions which I think is what causes the downfall of this family.