Response to A Rose for Emily

I believe that in the story, "A Rose for Emily" having the story out of se
quence helped to build the suspense of the story. There were so many different things happening in such a short story that at first I had quite a hard time following, but I also believe that if the events were listed in the order in which they happened, the story would seem dull. The way William Faulkner has the story set up goes along with the saying, "Save the best for last." All the events in the story and the way that they were ordered led up to the conclusion.

As far as the narration of the story, I believe that it was someone in the town that Emily resided in that told the story. There were several different examples that support my theory. Any time that the narrator referred to a situation or an event that happened the narrator would refer to it as, "We," such as saying in the fourth paragraph of page 211, "We didn't even know she was sick," It implies to me that it was a very close knit community, one where everybody knows everybody. I also wonder if the narrator of the story wasn't on the city board in some way. I will refer to another example on page 211, in paragraph 3, "Each December we sent her a tax notice, which would be returned by the post office a week later, unclaimed."

I really was surprised at the end when the townspeople found Homer's body upstairs in the room with the items that Emily had purchased for him so long ago. Even with the foreshadowing of her buying the arsenic, that was one part that I didn't see coming. Emily poisoned Homer with the arsenic. I believe that she did it so he would never leave her. I think that being robbed of the normal life of a woman by her father had that effect on her. I don't think that Emily realized it, as we sometimes don't. In the end, she didn't want to be alone, so she killed.