Motivation for “A Rose for Emily”
Inspiration for “A Rose for Emily” It remains in the human nature to wish to have a sense of belonging and to be a part of something bigger, making it difficult to preserve moral decisions. The primary character in William Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily” deals with moral obstacles produced by the pressure of wanting to comply with the town’s expectations while still attempting to preserve a sense of independence, which ultimately leads up to the motivation to murder of Homer Barron.
By holding high expectations, directly interfering in Emily’s life and relationship, and the consistent extensive gossip from the Townspeople of Jefferson are the primary inspiration for the murder of Homer Barron. Emily Grierson, being the last Southern woman of the Antebellum South was held at a high expectation by the townspeople of Jefferson (Faulkner 160). As Thomas Dilworth mentions, the townspeople had wanted to protect the worths of the old south through the embodiment of Emily (252 ).
Faulkner even says that, “Alive, Miss Emily had actually been a tradition, a duty, and a care: a sort of hereditary responsibility upon the town (156 ).” He is suggesting that the town’s individuals see that Emily has this hereditary duty to the town. These high expectations were rollovered into Miss Emily’s personal sexual needs where she is expected to keep the look of a pure southern woman that can be compared to that of Eve from the Garden of Eden (Dilworth 253).
Although Emily does rebel against the town for 2 years by dating a blue-collar building worker and Yankee Homer Barron in effort to not conform to the Jefferson townspeople’s expectations of a southern girl (Dilworth 251). The town’s hard to live up to standards belong of the motivational reasoning that leads up to Emily killing Homer and keeping his body in a necrophiliac relationship. Being raised by her father, Emily has actually always known about the expectations that were to be satisfied, due to the fact that of who her family is; nevertheless, this means that Emily’s personal life has actually always had interference.
When her dad was still alive Emily was not to be with any man because, “None of the young men were quite good enough for Miss Emily and such (Faulkner 158),” and when her daddy finally died the towns individuals started to take his place in interfering in Emily’s life. After Emily has actually been dating Homer for a little over a year the town begins to presume the couple’s relationship to be scandalous, presuming grownups in their thirties would engage in sexual acts, and leads the town to act into their own hands by sending out the town’s Baptist priest to talk with Episcopal Emily about her actions.
The talk with Emily was unsuccessful, triggering the town to then call in Emily’s out of state cousins to watch over her. Emily in turn responds by heading out into town to purchase guys’s clothing and toiletries, which in turn leads the town and Emily’s cousins that she is wed or is going to soon marry Homer (Faulkner 161-162). The direct disturbance in Emily’s life is the townspeople blatantly displaying that they no longer have a tolerance for her relationship with Homer, and reveal a blind eye when Emily purchases arsenic when out in town buying the guys’s toiletries and clothes.
Once the cousins think that Emily is to wed Homer they leave, however that does not change the reality that the townspeople directly disrupted Emily’s personal affairs and still hold Emily in high requirements. This means that even if Emily were to marry Homer the townspeople would still gossip on how Homer is a bad moral example for the Jefferson youth. Chatter was a continuous suggestion to Emily of the expectations required of her and the interference to remind her of this. Gossip is also consistently revealed throughout Faulkner’s story.
A direct referral of chatter comes from Faulkner’s story, “When her daddy passed away, it got about that your home was all that was left to her” (Faulkner 159). “It got about” is a specific recommendation to chatter. Likewise critic James M. Wallace implies that the chatter throughout the story informed by the storyteller’s had a large understanding of occasions that went on in the story (106 ). the narrator relates three separate conversations in between Judge Stevens and one lady and 2 guys concerning the smell originating from Emily’s property. The narrator knows the information of the discussions all right to quote Judge Stevens’s directly. ‘Dammit sir,’ Judge Stevens said, ‘will you implicate a woman to her face of smelling bad? ‘” (Faulkner 158). Also earlier when Emily bought arsenic, “So the next day all of us said, “‘She will eliminate herself’; and we stated it would be the very best thing” (Faulkner 161). “and we stated it would be for the very best thing,” shows how the town is judgmental and takes Emily’s “falling” as poor ethical to the town. The chatter constantly being a continuous factor to Emily is the primary reason how the town was able to motivate Emily to inspire Homer.
She knew that she would not be able to have her personal requirements above the town’s expectations to hold her on a pedestal to protect the south. The expectations, interference and insistent chatter from the town were the main motivation for Emily to eliminate Homer. Emily was not able to keep up the exterior of being the Southern girl that the town of Jefferson desired while still supporting her own sexual requirements of a grown lady. This leads her to the ultimate decision to murder Homer Barron and keep his body for her own necrophiliac relationship to be able to put the town at ease and calm her own conscience.
The murder and necrophilia is a direct outcome of the town’s expectation, disturbance, and chatter and are the encouraging factors needed for Emily to finally snap.? Works Cited Dilworth, Thomas. “A Love to Eliminate For: Homicidal Complicity in Faulkner’s ‘A Rose for Emily. ‘” Research Studies simply put Fiction 36 (1999 ): 251-62. Academic Browse Premier. Web. 30 Dec. 2012. Faulkner, William. “A Rose for Emily.” The Seagull Reader. Second ed. Ed. Joseph Kelly. New York City: Norton, 2007. 155-164. Print. Wallace, James M. “Faulkner’s ‘A Rose for Emily. ‘” Explicator 67. 4 (1992 ): 105-07. Academic Search Premier. Web. 30 Dec. 2012.