Pannell 1

Charles Pannell
Dr. Comas
English 3000
29 October 2009
“A Rose for Emily.”

The Curious, the Sympathetic, the Stalker, the Gossip, and the Inquirer

“A Rose for Emily” is Faulkner’s first published short story in a major magazine. It details the
life of an eccentric woman by the name of Miss Emily, a descendent to the house of Grierson: a
southern, traditional and wealthy upper-class family that is both locally recognized and
respected. The tale itself is divided into five chapters, each depicting either a conversation or an
observation of an encounter involving Miss Grierson. Faulkner goes out of his way to indicate
that there is a not a solitary narrator, but rather a group of narrators. It’s widely recognized that
the “we” in the story is identified as a single voice representing the community as a whole, their
combined opinions and perspective forming one, centralized point of view. There is evidence in
the text however that depicts a non-unionized opinion. Through passages within Faulkner’s
work, several instances of dissent exist, indicated primarily by pronoun shifts. These indications
show that there are in fact several different, individual narrators, each one contributing to the
meaning of the story in various ways.
An important aspect to recognizing the existence of separate narrators is the recognition
of chronology within the story. It would be a hastily made conclusion to claim that the story has
no defined chronology when the text is very clear in showing the perceptions of Miss Emily from
the townspeople’s point of view. The structure, plot, and perspectives towards Emily are
evidence that the story has two phases in chronology. Each segment is an extended anamnesis,
including the fifth and final segment. It’s crucial to note that to the townspeople’s current
knowledge, the door leading to Homer’s corpse has not been opened prior to segments one
through four. This is clear by the regard of Miss Emily to each narrator, that she is held within a
range of neutral to positive regard. Had the door been opened prior to the collection of each
anamnesis, then the testimonials of each townsperson would have been radically different, sure
to include the shock and horror introduced by what Miss Emily had done. It could be said that
there is a short interval of time, most likely in the period of a few hours or a day at the most
between each segment, and that they are represented in terms of deliverance unto the receiving
party in exact, chronological order.
A narrator must have someone to narrate to, and typically it is assumed by the reader that
the narrator of any story will be telling their tale to the reader as an audience. There is evidence
however that the narrators are initially speaking to an inquirer of sorts- most likely a reporter
rather than a detective. It is also likely that the reporter is not from the area, as each narrator
assumes that the person they are talking to knows nothing of the town’s history or people, a
device that Faulkner uses to give information to his readers in an efficient manner. There is but a
single shift in the story, in terms of both the audience and narrator, and that is in the final
segment after all the necessary information had been gathered to warrant investigation within
Miss Emily’s home.
The inquiry begins with the narrator of the first segment. As stated before, each segment
is embodied entirely by an anamnesis, most likely evoked by a question of an inquirer. Framed
within this particular anamnesis is an instance of topographia, a description of the house by the
narrator. Faulkner only uses topographia in two areas of the story: one to describe the house as
this narrator is seeing it, and another to describe the undiscovered room that the group in
segment five intrudes upon to find the deceased body. It would be consistent to say that Faulkner
would only use topographia from a narrator’s point of view to describe a place they were seeing
for the first time. That is, this is the recollection of the narrator’s first time within Miss Emily’s
residence. It’s also made clear that the narrator is not a part of the deputation sent to Emily’s
household. This is revealed by a shift in pronoun usage at the beginning of paragraph five after
the deputation is sent, when the first person plural “we,” becomes “they,” in reference to the
deputation. This elevates a question of logic as to who the narrator in this segment could be. He
is most likely a younger, curious carriage driver for the members of the deputation itself, who
followed them in to get a look at the prestigious Grierson household.
The following anamnesis within the second segment is told from the perspective of a narrator,
who is somehow involved in judiciary affairs, as they are retelling the various conversations
between Judge Stevens and select townspeople in regards to the smell within the Grierson estate.
Judge Stevens is definitively eighty years old in this recollection, no doubt deceased at the time
of the deliverance of the anamnesis thirty years later and thus making him unavailable for the
testimony himself. The judge is reluctant in issuing these complaints of smell to Miss Emily, as
he’s most likely living in the old traditions of respecting the upper echelon of society that was
known as Grierson. Once again a pronoun shift occurs, detailing how four men went onto the
residence and sprinkled lime about to counter the smell, indicating that the narrator was not
directly involved with the act, but witnessed it. An important aspect of this narrator to note is the
vocabulary they use: “Vanquished;” “her sweetheart;” “A few of the ladies had the ‘temerity’ to
call;” and “slunk about the house like burglars.” This particular narrator saw Emily as a woman
with power, and looked upon her relationship with Homer Baron as favorably romantic. The
narrator considered the treatment towards Emily of an audacious sort, especially when intruding
on her property, which could attribute to the pronoun shift and lack of direct involvement in
trespassing on her property. As a narrator truly sympathetic to Emily and her tragic upbringing,
Faulkner closes this narrator’s anamnesis with a powerful justification in regard to Miss Emily’s
withering sanity at the time of her father’s death.
A completely new type of narrator emerges from segment three. Immediately the narrator
introduces their perception of Emily, regarding her appearance to resemble “angels in colored
church windows-- sort of tragic and serene” (470). The narrator then describes Miss Emily once
more as she’s buying the arsenic, making the narrator’s attention to the physical details of Miss
Emily’s body and facial features a consistent occurrence within his anamnesis. The narrator also
has a tendency to attribute states of mind to Emily from his own observations. “It was as if she
demanded more than ever the recognition of her dignity as the last Grierson; as if it had wanted
that touch of earthiness to reaffirm her imperviousness” (471). The narrator attributes a different
kind of personal vulnerability concerning Emily that none of the other narrators present, making
the narrator possibly a man who had once pursued her courtship, but was denied access to the
girl by her father. Emily’s interest in the narrator was likely diminished or limited as well, as
portrayed by the narrator’s perception of Homer, the only physical description of the foreman
given within the text. He’s described as “a big, dark, ready man, with a big voice and eyes lighter
than his face” (470). Rather than give an accurate, vivid description of Homer, the inquirer is
given a comparison, presumably of the narrator himself. The narrator sees these comparisons of
himself as the dividing line in his own abilities to gain Miss Emily’s affections.
It could also be said that the narrator of segment three has given up his infatuation over
Miss Emily, but has reserved his obsession in its place and is satisfied with observation. The
obsession would develop into the qualities of a stalker during period of time within the
anamnesis. One justification for this is that this narrator presents the only representation of any
conversation involving Emily outside of her home. Emily was rarely to be seen out, and even
rarer would she engage in conversation with another townsperson. Another fact that leads to this
conclusion is that the narrator follows Emily and her servant back home, and is able to discern
when Emily has opened the box of arsenic, indicating at least one instance of this narrator
shadowing Miss Grierson. Yet another consistency within his delivery of anamnesis is the
following, “She was over thirty then, still a slight woman, though thinner than usual…” (471).
This denotes that the narrator has kept track of Emily’s physical disposition, even throughout her
self isolation after her father’s death and especially while in the relationship with Homer.
The last representation of narrators within the townsfolk is perhaps the most obvious of narrator
shifting. Within the fourth segment, the anamnesis is separated from the others in the sense that it
is the longest of all the testimonies, but it also produces the least amount of direct information
and direct interaction with Emily. All of the information that is provided by this narrator was
received from the observations of their own meddling through third parties, thus introducing the
possibility of a mostly unreliable narrator. Right away, this narrator asserts the Miss Emily
intends to kill herself, and that “it would be the best thing” (471). None of the previous segments,
individual narrator or not, believed that Miss. Emily would be better off dead. The narrator then
implies that Homer is keener on the idea of associating with men, implying vague, sexual
undertones within manner in delivery of the fact. After the narrator discovered that they are still
courting one another, the meddling begans. The first, obvious sign of dissent within the
townsfolk’s views starts at, “The men did not want to interfere, but at last the ladies forced the
Baptist minister … to call upon her” (472). The method in which this sentence is structured and
worded indicates that the current narrator identifies their position to be aligned with the ladies,
most likely making the narrator a woman herself. Once again, after talking with the minister,
Homer and Miss Grierson are seen riding about the town again the next day. The true nature of
this particular narrator is revealed shortly after when word is sent to Emily’s cousins, “So she
had blood-kin under her roof again and we sat back to watch developments” (472). This develops
the persona of this narrator to be that of a gossip. It is common knowledge within the town that
the Grierson family had fallen out with their cousins; the actions of this narrator devious, and
definitely harmful to the relationship of Homer and Miss Emily.
In the closing chapter the narrator can now be identified as the inquirer himself, and after the
door has been forced open the “we” of the narrators have changed. That is, the general townsfolk
are not privy to what the inquirer and his group are about to reveal. For the first time, “we” as a
pronoun has been used to identify a select group of people rather than a community as a whole.
This is further demonstrated as Faulkner writes, “One of us lifted something from it, and leaning
forward, that faint and invisible dust dry and acrid in the nostrils, we saw a long strand of iron-
gray hair” (474). When referring to the actions of other townsfolk from the inquirer or current
narrator’s point of view, Faulkner would use the pronoun, “they.” The final use of the pronoun
“they” occurs as the group breaks the door down, and within the same narration, the pronoun use
shifts to “we,” indicating that the inquirer is now a part of the group investigating the premises
rather than just a spectator and reporter, and as he refers to his fellow investigator as “one of us,”
it shows a distinction between the townspeople and the current group intruding in on this room.
 These various narrators contribute to the meaning of the story in several different ways.
One contribution to the meaning is to support the setting and motif that Faulkner has devised
within his work: the new generation vs. the old. The first narrator, the curious, could be said to
represent the new generation. He describes Emily and her household from the perspective of
seeing it for the first time, regarding Miss Emily and her residence as a thing of the past, as
indicated by his input of the changes that happened around the house as well. The sympathetic
narrator is representation of a citizen stuck in the transition of the old generation into the new. At
that point in the anamnesis, they are old enough to recognize and respect the power and Miss
Emily’s heritage. The judge within this segment is an example of the male representation of the
old generation, especially shown within his attitude towards giving Emily the notice for the
smell. He didn’t necessarily show sympathy to the woman, but he did show an outright desire to
avoid any direct association with her. The transitional generation representative is
knowledgeable enough in both old customs and new ideas to recognize that there is a mortal
woman behind Emily’s family name, thus becoming thankful when she later becomes
“humanized” to the perspective of the other townspeople as well.
The third segment’s narrator represents the generation that shared the same phases of life
with Emily, or is of the same generation and similar age as Miss Grier. This narrator is the only
one who makes a direct, empathetic link with Emily, and this character is used to further
humanize Emily and demonstrate her desire to be attractive. He notes various physical changes
within her, such as losing weight and cutting her hair, in an attempt to make herself look young
and girlish to attract the attentions of Homer Baron. Adversely, the narrator within segment four
does just the opposite. She demonizes Emily. She does her best to convince the inquirer that
Emily was the shameful sort, most likely just as she had told several other townsfolk, such as the
minister and Emily’s relatives. The gossip is most likely an older woman, representing the older
generation, attempting to uphold the legacy of Grier by prying into her relationship and enjoying
doing so.
After Emily is freed from her father’s expectations and is no longer bound by his physical,
restricting presence, she finally found a romantic interest. However, her father’s will is
represented by the gossiping narrator and her circle of traditionalists, and Emily feels the a
repellant force driving yet another relationship apart which she had experienced so many times
before under her father’s care. Juxtaposition between this narrator’s force of will and her father’s
will occurs within the Grierson, frantically causing Emily to feel the dire necessity of an
immediate marriage, resulting in the tragic conclusion of the tale.
It goes further to serve the fact that there are shifts in narration as the inquirer as a narrator can
not identify the body as Homer Baron. Being a stranger to the town’s people and history, he does
not make the direct conclusion that he knows the identity of the corpse, and it isn’t unlikely that
everyone in his group are unable to recognize it as well, given forty years have passed since his
disappearance. Only the readers of the story can draw this conclusion, that is to say, not only
does the narration shift to the inquirer in the final passages of the story, but the audience shifts as
well- from the inquirer to the reader. The pronoun shifts are an important feature within “A Rose
for Emily,” and the distinctions that they create should not be so casually overlooked. If the story
is viewed from the sole perspective and anamnesis of only the townspeople as a group, the
individual responsibility that they had in driving Emily’s sanity past the limit will be lost to the
reader, as the narrators do not want to feel directly responsible for her actions. Rather than take
responsibility for the madness they have driven in Emily Grier, they attribute her insanity to a
trait passed down within the family, unwilling to accept their involvement in diminishing her
capacity to live sanely as they meddle and gossip their way to her murderous actions.

Works Cited
Faulkner, William.“A Rose for Emily.” The Norton Introduction to Literature. Booth,
Allison.W W Norton & Co Inc, 2005. 467-474.