Tuesday, November 8, 2011

A Rose for Emily

"We did not say she was crazy then. We believed she had to do that. We remembered all the young men her father had driven away, and we knew that with nothing left, she would have to cling to that which had robbed her, as people will." page 285


What are the advantages of first-person plural point of view in this story? What would be lost if it were told in first-person singular, by one of the townspeople, or in third-person limited point of view?


I think the advantages of using first-person plural point of view in this story is that it makes the narrator more reliable and makes the reader side with the narrator. Using the word "we" automatically makes the narrator seem reliable because it means that multiple people feel the same way. If the entire town thinks the same things about Miss Emily, then the reader believes they are true. Using the word "we" also put's the reader on the town's side. The reader usually wants to associate themselves with the majority, not the lady that everyone thinks is weird. I think the story would lose a part of Miss Emily if the story were told by only one townsperson. The entire town is characterizing Miss Emily and all believe the same things about her. If only one person thought Miss Emily was crazy, then the reader could have doubts that the narrator's opinions were legitimate. Also, having the story told by the townspeople means that the reader does not know what Miss Emily is thinking. This makes Miss Emily's character more mysterious and adds to the suspense of the story.

No comments:

Post a Comment