Sign in with Facebook
Ryan's Reviews > The Sound and the Fury
The Sound and the Fury
by
by
The first thing that comes to mind in regard to 篓The Sound and the Fury篓 is Eliot麓s 篓a heap of broken images.篓 Deciphering TSTF is like reassembling a shattered mirror; difficult, and likely to end in pain.
On the other hand, it麓s hard to deny that it麓s a great book, if only from the standpoint of workmanship. The skill it took to create this piece, composed of so many seperate perspectives, confined to such a narrow and specific moments of time, makes me think of interlocking puzzles carved from a single piece of wood or stone. Whether you like it or not, you have to admire the workmanship.
That being said, I believe that this book is so highly regarded for exactly the qualities that make it inaccessible to the majority of readers. If you have the patience to finish it, and the tools to decipher it, you become one of the select few, the literati elite. It麓s regarded because it excludes. Unfortunately, many lovers of literature want writing to need decoding; they want layers of meaning inaccessible to the uninitiated. I am not one of those readers.
After all, once you do decode the book, once you麓ve assembled the shattered mirror, is the image you see there really that unique or fascinating? I admit that I do have a certain sympathy for the characters in TSTF; I believe them. They feel real for me. However, it麓s hard not to care about the characters after you麓ve worked so hard to understand exactly what the hell is going on with them. You麓ve already invested so much time with them that they麓re practically family. It vaguely smacks of manipulation for an author to use such a device to get his readers invested with his characters.
Finally, I guess that my issue is not with Faulkner, a master of his craft who managed what is nearly impossible, to do some thing new in the field of writing. My issue is with the literature community, who chose to so highly esteem such a difficult nut to crack.
The Sound and the Fury; a masterpiece of form, and one of the most inaccessible books I麓ve ever picked up. Again, it麓s hard to argue with the quality of the book; I would recommend the book to very few readers, but I麓ve still been moved to write a couple of hundred words about it.
On the other hand, it麓s hard to deny that it麓s a great book, if only from the standpoint of workmanship. The skill it took to create this piece, composed of so many seperate perspectives, confined to such a narrow and specific moments of time, makes me think of interlocking puzzles carved from a single piece of wood or stone. Whether you like it or not, you have to admire the workmanship.
That being said, I believe that this book is so highly regarded for exactly the qualities that make it inaccessible to the majority of readers. If you have the patience to finish it, and the tools to decipher it, you become one of the select few, the literati elite. It麓s regarded because it excludes. Unfortunately, many lovers of literature want writing to need decoding; they want layers of meaning inaccessible to the uninitiated. I am not one of those readers.
After all, once you do decode the book, once you麓ve assembled the shattered mirror, is the image you see there really that unique or fascinating? I admit that I do have a certain sympathy for the characters in TSTF; I believe them. They feel real for me. However, it麓s hard not to care about the characters after you麓ve worked so hard to understand exactly what the hell is going on with them. You麓ve already invested so much time with them that they麓re practically family. It vaguely smacks of manipulation for an author to use such a device to get his readers invested with his characters.
Finally, I guess that my issue is not with Faulkner, a master of his craft who managed what is nearly impossible, to do some thing new in the field of writing. My issue is with the literature community, who chose to so highly esteem such a difficult nut to crack.
The Sound and the Fury; a masterpiece of form, and one of the most inaccessible books I麓ve ever picked up. Again, it麓s hard to argue with the quality of the book; I would recommend the book to very few readers, but I麓ve still been moved to write a couple of hundred words about it.
Sign into 欧宝娱乐 to see if any of your friends have read
The Sound and the Fury.
Sign In 禄
Reading Progress
Finished Reading
January 6, 2008
– Shelved
Comments Showing 1-14 of 14 (14 new)
date
newest »
newest »
I agree with much of what you say--a master work that is beyond most readers. I appreciate the skill for sure, but hated every minute I spent reading it. I thought it would get easier and more enjoyable after Benjy's section, but his part actually ended up being my favorite part of the entire book. Unlike you, I did NOT find the characters appealing--with the exception of Benjy. I found them selfish and annoying. This is my least favorite book by Faulkner, and I gave it two stars purely for the author's talent.
I strongly disagree with what you say about TSATF being so highly regarded strictly because of its inaccessibility and sense of accomplishment one gets from finishing it. Faulkner doesn't ask you to "decode" his book 鈥� if he were that superficial then it would clearly show through once the pieces had been put together. He wrote the book like he did because it couldn't have been written any other way. I mean, the Benji section is so intentionally disorienting and difficult to read because Faulkner wanted to approximate the experience of living with a debilitating mental condition and, not only that, give the reader a fractured portrayal of a fractured family through a personally involved yet completely non-judgmental narrator. Understanding what is going on and constructing a cohesive plot is not the point here 鈥� it's reveling in his mastery of language and characterisation, his humour, and his heart wrenching empathy.
You nailed it. Thanks for saying it.
I would argue with your conclusion. It is not particularly difficult if you read it again, and yes he is manipulating you. The bad taste the book left in your mouth is testament to how well it worked. You aren't supposed to feel sympathy for any of these wing-nuts. I guess what I'm really saying (and yes I am a literature student) is that the writing's supposed inaccessibility is a result of the decreased emphasis on reading as a source of entertainment. Faulkner was a product of a highly literate society...we do not live in such a society. There's nothing wrong with that per se, but its just not that hard. You want hard, grab a copy of Finnegan's Wake.
You aren't supposed to feel sympathy for Benjy? The "wing nut", as you refer to him. Really?? Part of Faulkners appeal is his ability to completely let the reader in on a mentally challenged man's thoughts in a heartbreaking , eloquent way. No manipulating here.
I think you nailed exactly why I hated literature in school. I am half-way through this book now and I struggle with enjoying it. Benjy's section was actually easier to decipher for me than Quentin's. The problem I am having is that after figuring out what is going on I am not sure I care.
The summary line of whom you recommended this book for makes me smile. Thank you!
I agree with the deleted user. I don't think any writer "plans" for their novel to be inaccessible, that's just bad marketing. But they choose the art over readership and that's ballsy and should be commended. That said, this "is" a difficult read, but as a writer I really don't think Faulkner would intentionally require readers to decode, that's just how the story is, or at least appears to be.
The only narrator I found unlikable was Jason, characters there were more. Your review is great, I just feel that the book is so perfectly written and assembled that I gave it 5 stars. But I do agree with most of your review anyway. Crazy how that can work :)
Very useful review, thanks
I'm no literary snob, and I didn't have any problems "getting" this book. There is a bit of a trick, though, and that is -- you have to let go. You can't read expecting every word or sentence to make perfect, precise sense. Set yourself free to inhabit the prose. Stop trying to analyze and just experience. Most of what makes the book hard to read for many -- when you let go, you stop even noticing it.Let the words be triggers for your senses and emotions, instead of trying to perfectly grasp the events from one sentence to the next. It's not about the plot anyways -- it's about the portrayal of a time, an emotion -- which is best accomplished when you drop your need to analyze and just experience.
Perfectly agree. There are so frequent associative time-jumps (especially at the 1st part), that you can barely get even part of what the author try to say. Even at 2nd read. And frankly - it doesn't worth the effort. This book is a remarkable and brave attempt, but not a successful one.
I am reading it now and just finished the 3rd part, Jason, which was easy to follow. It read like Steinbeck's The Winter of Our Discontent to me. I accept it as an attempt to write how the brain thinks - disconnected thoughts interfering with our main focus.
It doesn't need to be so difficult if you just read it for beauty. If you get frustrated looking for some ostensible meaning, something signified, ask someone to tell you what the basic events are, read Faulkner's introduction, and then get back to slowly sifting through the words.