Talk:A Rose for Emily

message: Yes, that this entry should be rewritten to confirm to normal copyright specs.
Huh wha...? To say "A Rose for Emily" is "strongly referenced" in that MCR song seems like more than a little stretch. "To The End" may have similiar themes but unless someone can show me where the band makes this connection, it seems pretty forced to me. Pariah23 21:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright?

message: The Google link at the bottom is broken (or unhelpful) at least on Firefox.
--threedimes
but anyone knows why the witter use non-chrolonogical skill? what is his purpose?
I think it was out of order as the people wer back nostalgically about her. the sections were different people. (hey, its plausible as the narrator is unknown). 71.42.124.91 23:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cache 

message: The plot summary mentions Homer poisoning Emily's purple rosebushes. I cannot find a single reference to anything purple or any rosebush in the story. Where the heck is it supposed to come from?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.70.104.169 (talk) 02:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. WP:BOLD :D Hardtofindaname 09:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Purple Rosebuses?

message: ------
My college professor also said that Homer was gay.  She mentioned that in the book that he also liked to wear white and pink gloves, which was considered odd at that time, as it would be also be today.  Can anyone confirm?
yes he was  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celtsfan999 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree unless there's something published that can be cited to back up the claim it can't be taken as reliableRgree1 (talk) 16:41, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Homer's sexuality

message: I have several issues with this article.
1
2) If this article is to include the spolier (and I think it should, due to the fact that the main dispute over A Rose For Emily is in regard to the ending), the arguments and ideas about what actually happened should be included, as well as the generally accepted ideas.  For example:
-It is accepted (even though it is not explicitly stated in the writing) that Emily poisoned Homer Barron.
-It is also therefore conjectured, especially because he is described as "not the marrying type," that he would not marry her, which supplies her motive for the poisoning (keeping in mind that her family had a history of insanity, and that she wanted Homer to stay with her as her husband, whether he was alive or not).
-Hto it, as if he were still alive.
-One very rare opinion is that she only lay with the corpse at death/shortly after death.  This opinion is supported by the fact that they had to break into the room, and that it appeared as though it had not been disturbed for 40 years.  However, there is some dispute as to whether she had gray hair at the time of his death or not.
--Two for joy 20:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: She died at age 74. Gray hair at 34 would be a rare condition (though not impossible, cf. Steve Martin in The Jerk), so I doubt seriously Faulkner had that in mind. ―AoV² 10:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  for the above comment more investigation would need to be done to back up this claim C.kamansky (talk) 14:58, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues 

message: I've just removed this: "Yet Homer's at all, but rather that of Emily's long-deceased father. Daughters of domineering fathers may find it hard or even impossible to part from the paternal figure, and Emily may have wanted to preserve him, and not Homer, forever."
The story clearly states that her father was buried.
yea that quote is bs
--Rairun 03:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the story it does reference that she had kept her father's body after he had died before burying him, long enough for it to smell, just as she did with Homer's body HChab14 (talk) 02:28, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Body 

message: I'm a bit worried about the Civil War allegory given.  It claims that Homer can be viewed as the North and Emily as the South, but then does not offer an explanation for why Homer was portrayed as a Northerner and Emily as a Southerner, which would contradict the allegory.  Without any citation for the allegory, it's highly unbelievable.  Citations for the other points in the article would also be nice.
129.2.194.197 03:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that there is a potential to have Miss Emily represent the South while Homer represents the North; it puts an interesting perspective on the story if it is true. However, there is not enough research into it to say if it is true or not. Even the above paragraph says it could be but is not concrete that Faulkner meant it to be that way. Mbigo2 (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civil War Allegory 

message: There is definitely no concrete evidence stating that homer is gay, so it should not be stated as if fact. I will edit this statement.
: This Talk page already has a section (above) about Homer's sexual orientation. Please post your comments in the appropriate place.Dumas1110 (talk) 21:20, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: No concrete evidence for homer's homosexuality

message: The song "To the End" by My Chemical Romance seems to be related to or based on this book. 71.3.45.182 (talk) 00:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see why the song "To the End" by My Chemical Romance can be related to the short story and after some quick research, other people seem to think so as well. It interesting to read what people have said. But without any citations or evidence from reliable sources, the comparison is more of a personal opinion of both the song and the story. There was another person who also related a song to the story but without multiple sources to back it up, the situation is the same.Esierra12 (talk) 22:02, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Song based on this book

message: There is a song by The Zombies called "A Rose for Emily" which is about an old woman who is destined to die alone.  Seems related, but I haven't been able to find a reliable source that asserts such a connection.  Cahofd?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.195.122 (talk) 01:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Zombies song 

message: Necrophelia is the "sexual attraction" to dead bodies. Can we really say she was sexually attracted to Homer (who by the way is not gay)? It seemed more to me that she just liked sleeping with him, not having sex with him. Evaunit♥666♥ 03:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Necrophelia?

message: I removed the sentence claiming that the Colonel Sartoris mentioned in "A Rose for Emily" also appears in "Barn Burning."  That is untrue; the character in "Barn Burning" is merely named after Colonel Sartoris, who by that point in the history of Yoknapatawpha county is likely dead or near death (not a young boy).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.81.50.169 (talk) 16:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colonel Sartoris 

message: I searched through the book, no mention of Miss Temple. However, she is referenced twice:
"Miss Temple, her only remaining childhood friend"
"Emily and Homer strike up a conversation after an accident with the sidewalk leaves Miss Temple paralyzed." (which, by the way, didn't happen either)
Andrewmin (talk) 13:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miss Temple 

message: Note: I've removed these references as they aren't actually in the story. (I have the story here in front of me.) Hardtofindaname 09:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to Miss Temple/purple rosebushes 

message: Checking over this article on "A Rose for Emily", the article does not seem biased, only paraphrasing the events in the story. Yet in the plot summary section, there are no citations to William Faulkner who wrote the story. This seems highly unreliable. The themes section also give a brief overview of some common motifs found in Faulkner's story, yet the information found here is incomplete and could be expounded on. A few necessary citations are missing on this page. MDuyenHa (talk) 21:02, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree there were entire sections that had no citations which could make it seem unreliable to people Rgree1 (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I noticed in the plot summary that exact words were taken from the story - Homer liked men and claimed that he was not a marrying man - but not quoted. I added the appropriate citation. Kyacrichton (talk) 17:10, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations and Theme  

message: Do you think the plot summary should have some mention of Emily's butler who had been there for many years. It would be important to add that after Emily's death he had let the townspeople in and then disappeared immediately after. This could have been because he knew of the wrong doings Emily had committed and did not want any part of it anymore. Emily's death was a signal of his freedom as well. DylanAponte (talk) 16:54, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess adding the butler to the plot summary is important since he is mentioned quite a bit in the story. But as for the second part of the statement where his disappearance and her death were a signal for both of what he knew that Emily did and his freedom. That is more of an interpretation of what events could mean. Unless there are reliable sources that back up what his disappearance and Emily's death could mean the second part should be left out for now. It is an interesting interpretation that you had, though. On a different topic, I noticed that the plot summary also needed to be shortened a bit and include some citations.Esierra12 (talk) 22:50, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

text: I disagree, I feel that while that the butler is a part of the story, he did not provide enough of an impact on the story to warrant a place in the plot summary. Evangc (talk) 07:41, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

text: I disagree because the butler is a character in the story but not an important one. He is mentioned only a little and not on crucial parts of the story. Kimcaaa (talk) 20:53, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

text: The fact that she has a butler at all seems significant just in the sense that it tells us something about Emily's social status. I agree that his existence should be mentioned. Dumas1110 (talk) 21:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

text: Although the butler does provide the hint of her social status, I think that there is another way that could be brought up without mentioning the butler because he doesn't really seem like an important character. Alang22 (talk) 23:41, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

text: I agree that the butler should be added into the plot summary because he was the only one who truly knew Emily and was the only one allowed into the house when she shut herself out to the rest of the world. Rgree1 (talk) 17:11, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

text: I agree. I think there should have been more mentioned about Emily and her father seeing as he contributes to her being isolated and afraid of being left alone. This is important because this fear is what then leads her to kill Homer Barron. Emily's father was her only companion for thirty years of her life and should be mentioned. Abbeyflonc (talk) 18:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

text: I agree with your note of the missing details in the plot summary. It is very misleading that there is no mention of how or why Emily killed Homer. Personally, I find the contents of the plot summary to be poorly written. I would remove "And" from the second sentence, and just start it with "As". There is also inconsistency with the form of the word "rose", sometimes being "Rose" (Caps, quotes), and sometimes just rose (lowercase, no quotes). The flow of this section is awkward and does not seem to reflect all of what is truly important in the plot summary of "A Rose For Emily." Ecarpe3 (talk) 17:03, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

text: I believe that in the sentence "Despite these turnabouts in her social status, Emily continues to behave mysterious, as she had before her father died." It would be better to write mysteriously instead of mysterious.Agard6 (talk) 05:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot Summary

message: ::Floyd C. Watkins wrote about the structure of "A Rose for Emily" in "Modern Language Notes". Watkins claims that this is Faulkner's best story and is among the best American writers of this time period. Faulkner had to carefully dissect his sections, bringing importance to every aspect of Miss Emily's life, but Watkins see's this as a "structural problem" but later goes on to rave about the symmetry of this short story. Watkins enjoys this story in its entirety, and is impressed by Faulkner's ordering, as building suspense was an important aspect in the response. Watkins, Floyd C. "Structure of "A Rose for Emily"." Modern Language Notes 7th ser. 69 (1954): 508-10. JSTOR. Web. 5 Apr. 2017.
Since there is no current critical response section in this article, I will add one to the actual page but want feedback from other users before I post. C.kamansky (talk) 16:31, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: This critical response by John Skinner explores the interpretations of Faulkner’s short story in detail... (currently editing wording for opening sentence)
William Faulkner published this story in the 1930’s, Skinner had published his critical response in 1985. More than 30 years has passed and people are still ignoring his claim; “A Rose for Emily” should not be interpreted any further. The characters and theme of this tale have been scruitinized by many scholars, students, and literary enthusiasts-- hundreds of papers have been written just on these two topics alone. There have been numerous interpretations for what Miss Emily stands for; Skinner gives examples of scholars including S.W. M. Johnson “Emily represented ‘a refusal to submit to, or even concede, the inevitability of change”. Whereas William Going pictures Emily as a rose, “the treasured memory of the of confederate veterans”. The point of view according to Skinner, is of immediate relevance to the story as the chief character, the narrator tells the chronology of the story. This narrator gives approximately “round figures” for the important events of the accounts. Yet the exact chronology is of little relevance to the overall importance of the story itself. John Skinner states that Faulkner should be taken literally, appreciate his formal subtlety in his works. Skinner, John L. ""A Rose for Emily": Against Interpretation." The Journal of Narrative Technique 15.1 (1985): 42-51. JSTOR. Web. 19 Apr. 2017. 
adding more credible critical repossess to improve verifiability C.kamansky (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Critical Response

message: In this section on the Article page there is only a small post about the meaning of the word Rose in the title. There are many more meanings to the word, so I will be adding more information to this section. In an article I found written by Laura Getty, she discusses other possible meanings. In one of the meanings, it is discussed that Homer may be the rose. HChab14 (talk) 14:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that there are more meanings needed to be added to the description of the rose from the title. However, I believe this section is a great addition to the article in general. Being able to read a deeper meaning of the title to a story gives greater insight into the story itself. ErickahM0607 (talk) 12:56, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that this section gives good insight to the whole story. When reading and discussing this story in class we did not really look at how the title has a deeper meaning for the story. Having someone interpret it allows for better understanding of the story. Mbigo2 (talk) 17:03, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree I have learned throughout my English experience that a title is never chosen randomly and that there is usually some deeper meaning to it. Having this talk section I think is a good idea to explore this idea further.Rgree1 (talk) 17:12, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title  

message: I noticed that this article doesn't have a criticism section. I feel like it would be good to add into the article to hear what others think about the short story. If we were able to see what other people think of the story we would be able to use this website as a resource. Also if someone was writing a book report or criticism of this short story then this website would become a reliable resource for readers to use.Natepeduzzi123 (talk) 12:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: I thought that I would add a section into the themes category, tying all of the themes together in the story making it all come together. This would have the reader understand the story more if they were all linked up.Natepeduzzi123 (talk) 05:07, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Themes 

message: I have a recommendation for the characters' names to be bolded. Another recommendation I have for this section would be to improve the descriptions of the characters. 
Grace05110430 (talk) 23:37, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It may be worth listing Emily's father as a character. I think it is important to acknowledge the effect he had on her, and the fact that he was her only parental influence. Ecarpe3 (talk) 16:55, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Characters 

message: The current section on structure in my opinion is kind of confusing. The reference to mathematics does not seem to relate to the story and I believe the structural choices of the author contributed to the analysis of Miss Emily's character as well as the POV for the story. I have edited an added some things to this section and have put it into the article. Any feedback is welcome & appreciated (: Obiss1 (talk) 23:00, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this section is confusing. It would be much easier to understand if the it was spit into two paragraphs, which were the two methods brought up; "a series of flashbacks in which the events are told with subjectivity and detail" and "from an objective perspective in which the narrator fades into a plural pronoun 'we' to demonstrate a linear causality of events".Kjoyc1 (talk) 20:13, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure  

message: Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?The article itself isn't bad but there are things that can definitely be added. There are things that are unnecessary, but at the same time there can definitely be some things that can be added.
Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing? There are a couple view left out but that is okay because we can add some.
Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view? no it does not.
Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)?
yes the sections are organized well. 
Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? Ye sir I believe i can.
Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y." There are a few but it isn't to bad.
Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..." Ye maa'am they do.
Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic. nope.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helena12435 (talk • contribs) 04:21, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jolie's peer review  

message: I believe it would be interesting if there was a section where we would analyze the story. In that section we could talk about her reasons to kill Homer Barron. Could it be pride, fear of abandonment or another reason? There could be more details about her relation with her father also in that section.Agard6 (talk) 05:33, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Analysis of the story 

message: In the structure part, the following can be read:  However, this seems to advocate that mathematics somehow support presentism (a metaphysical position in philosophy of time). This seems very unlikely when relativistic physics seem to support rival positions: such as eternalism or the growing block theory. Thus, if there is no source for such a claim, it would perhaps be better to rewrite this part of the article. Bensl (talk) 14:20, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for a strong philosophical claim?