Introduction In his examination of the story “A Rose for Emily,” Garrison (1979) presents an entirely different method of examination as compared to previous critiques of the story wherein he focuses on the way in which the narrator tells the story and the implications of the method by which it was done. Garrison (1979) presents the notion that the story is a “ critique of the kind of narrative art that naively assumes the possibility of an omniscient presentation of the truth and, in that naiveté, fails to see the encroaching contours of its bias ” (Garrison, 1979). In other words, the main purpose of the story was to reveal how concepts related to truth and time can never be fully understood in truly objective terms resulting in a certain degree of observational bias and error in the retelling of the story. The inherent problem though is that the argument of Jones centers around the story being a critique against the attitudes of the omniscient presentation of truth, but it ignores the setting, the characters and the society in which the events take place and as such is an inherently flawed and limited method of examination. Summary Garrison (1979) begins his argument by first presenting one of the initial scenes within the short story involving the death of Ms. Emily and the arrival of the various townsfolk to her house. He points out the way in which the narrator utilizes a method of external categorization to refer to the citizenry (i.e., “the men” and “the women”) while at the same time implying a certain degree of deficiency in their response to the death of Ms. Emily. Garrison (1979) mentions that the narrator’s apparent aloofness, wherein he grants himself a special status among those present, indicates a thought process that believes that he is above the deficiencies that others display. In this initial examination, the author of the article even goes so far as to mention that the various references to time that are scattered throughout certain points in the story are stated in such a way by the narrator that it shows that he is comfortably orientation in his concept of time and that he is free from making any uncertainties about his ability to recount and elaborate on what has happened within the story. Garrison (1979) states that this is indicative of the narrator’s confidence that the memories he possesses are not affected by the passage of time. It is at this point that Garrison presents the notion that the narrator plays a more central role in the story than initially realized. It could be that the story of Ms. Emily is, in fact, a story about that narrator and what he does or does not learn throughout several points in the story until it finally culminates in the last part of the story explaining the presence of the “long strand of gray hair.” Thus, from this perspective, Garrison makes the assumption that the narrator is an individual who thinks that the way in which he tells the story is in no way different from the way other people would have said it. This point of view by the narrator, unfortunately, does not take into consideration the prolific amount of assumptions that are seen throughout the story. When looking at the ending, it becomes immediately apparent that the full story was not known to the narrator at all, with many of the ass