Identifying a single approach to decode the differencing of events and final happening in William Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily” proves to be useful in explanation however; a limitation of just one approach can be obstruct. In “Styles of Reading” by George L. Dillon we are presented with observation that readers critique and interpret publications based on perception of real life events and of people. In George L. Dillon critical essay “Styles of Reading”, he points out how focusing on event chains in a story is important to understand all aspects behind a stories comprehension. It was an interesting study in how people read, and how the way in which we read affects literary criticism. Dillon included multiple people’s responses to “A Rose for
…show more content…
For example in A Rose for Emily, by William Faulkner when Rose asks for arsenic it is hard to approach it in just one style. Although using the Anthropologist style to analyze this situation may seem important, it is not the only style that can be used. The Anthropologist style may be used when thinking how Emily got the Arsenic without giving a reason for it because she is a woman. Another style like the Digger for Secrets can also be used when thinking why she might need the Arsenic or why is she not giving a reason in wanting the Arsenic. This proves that readers can use multiple styles in approaching criticism. There is no possible way a reader when reading “A Rose for Emily” can just look at a single piece of text and just focus on only one specific style of writing. Dillon says, “Holland’s study strongly suggests that there are styles of reading stories, characteristic ways that readers interrogate texts, and that the approaches in the criticism are indeed rooted in the critics own styles of reading and appeal to like-minded readers” (Dillion 610). Dillon shows that the interpretation of the text depends on the readers past. For example, in the short story “A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner, the narrator reveals to us that Emily has been lying beside the dead body of Homer Baron. The Cam style suggests that this has happened because Homer was not the marrying kind, but it can also be interpreted as if Emily couldn’t have him, that she wouldn’t let anyone have him, leaning towards the Digger for Secrets. This shows that it can be interpreted in multiple ways despite the reader
For example in A Rose for Emily, by William Faulkner when Rose asks for arsenic it is hard to approach it in just one style. Although using the Anthropologist style to analyze this situation may seem important, it is not the only style that can be used. The Anthropologist style may be used when thinking how Emily got the Arsenic without giving a reason for it because she is a woman. Another style like the Digger for Secrets can also be used when thinking why she might need the Arsenic or why is she not giving a reason in wanting the Arsenic. This proves that readers can use multiple styles in approaching criticism. There is no possible way a reader when reading “A Rose for Emily” can just look at a single piece of text and just focus on only one specific style of writing. Dillon says, “Holland’s study strongly suggests that there are styles of reading stories, characteristic ways that readers interrogate texts, and that the approaches in the criticism are indeed rooted in the critics own styles of reading and appeal to like-minded readers” (Dillion 610). Dillon shows that the interpretation of the text depends on the readers past. For example, in the short story “A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner, the narrator reveals to us that Emily has been lying beside the dead body of Homer Baron. The Cam style suggests that this has happened because Homer was not the marrying kind, but it can also be interpreted as if Emily couldn’t have him, that she wouldn’t let anyone have him, leaning towards the Digger for Secrets. This shows that it can be interpreted in multiple ways despite the reader