The previous quotations reveal how little Miss Rosa knows about Thomas Sutpen. They actually summarize Miss Rosa’s story which she is trying to understand by telling it. This is also an epistemological fact. She is trying to make sense of a man who comes to Jefferson, Yoknapatawpha, on “Sunday morning in June in 1833 when he first rode into town out of no discernible past and acquired his land no one knew how and built his house” (Faulkner, Absalom, Absalom!, 7). However, the more she talks, the more she finds herself not progressing. She keeps talking about the same thing. Rosa’s narration is
restricted to five key situations: (a) her description of Sutpen’s first arrival in Jefferson;
(b) her sister Ellen and her death; (c) Henry’s …show more content…
It darkens the meaning of the story and the sense making instead. This does not mean that her narration is unreliable, as some critics suggest, rather it darkens the illocutionary act. Faulkner seems to suggest that it is not true that the more words you use, the greater access you have to the truth.
To sum up, let us reiterate the point: The prose of Absalom, Absalom!, is a postponing prose. The novel always wants to say something, but it is unable to say it in spite of using a number of words. Narrators use a profusion of words, overcrowded with locutionary force. The use of a profusion of words has nothing to do with the truth, rather it darkens the meaning of the story and the sense-making instead. Faulkner has overcrowded the prose of Absalom, Absalom!, with a heavy cargo of words in order to darken the illocutionary act.
By the end of Rosa’s narration, it is concluded, in a nutshell, that when Sutpen comes back from the war, he finds his plantation had been destroyed: his wife is dead; his son kills the suitor of his sister and vanished; and his slaves were all gone. Nevertheless, he tries to rebuild his dynasty. He proposes to Miss Rosa who accepts the engagement, because “most of the young men were dead and all the living ones either old or
restricted to five key situations: (a) her description of Sutpen’s first arrival in Jefferson;
(b) her sister Ellen and her death; (c) Henry’s …show more content…
It darkens the meaning of the story and the sense making instead. This does not mean that her narration is unreliable, as some critics suggest, rather it darkens the illocutionary act. Faulkner seems to suggest that it is not true that the more words you use, the greater access you have to the truth.
To sum up, let us reiterate the point: The prose of Absalom, Absalom!, is a postponing prose. The novel always wants to say something, but it is unable to say it in spite of using a number of words. Narrators use a profusion of words, overcrowded with locutionary force. The use of a profusion of words has nothing to do with the truth, rather it darkens the meaning of the story and the sense-making instead. Faulkner has overcrowded the prose of Absalom, Absalom!, with a heavy cargo of words in order to darken the illocutionary act.
By the end of Rosa’s narration, it is concluded, in a nutshell, that when Sutpen comes back from the war, he finds his plantation had been destroyed: his wife is dead; his son kills the suitor of his sister and vanished; and his slaves were all gone. Nevertheless, he tries to rebuild his dynasty. He proposes to Miss Rosa who accepts the engagement, because “most of the young men were dead and all the living ones either old or