Talk:A Rose for Emily

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): HChab14, Amancini, Dboyn1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2019 and 30 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): J.O'Kelley.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2019 and 15 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): UndercoverWinger. Peer reviewers: Kiannajade.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Copyright?
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)

"A Rose for Emily" is under copyright in the US through 2025 (copyright 1930, renewed 1957), and in Europe and other life+70 regimes through 2032 (since Faulkner died in 1962). Bootlegs have been posted in some of those countries for quite some time; I have removed links to them from this article. (Note that besides the COPYVIO issue, the most common bootleg copies also have bad text: "cuss the riggers", for instance, is not what the original says near the start of section III.)

Faulkner's works are out of copyright in life+50 years countries (which currently includes countries like Canada and New Zealand.) I don't offhand know of any copies posted there, and am not sure what Wikipedia's policy is for linking to such copies when copyrights are still in force in much of the world. JohnMarkOckerbloom (talk) 14:32, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

THIS SHORT STORY WAS NEVER RENEWED AND THE COPYRIGHT FOR IT LAPSED IN 1958 WHEN IT ENTERED INTO THE pd DUE TO LACK OF REQUIRED COPYRIGHT RENEWAL IN THE 28TH YEAR. 66.195.42.6 (talk) 18:32, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Cache
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) people were nostalgic

Purple Rosebuses?
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)

Ditto. Andrewmin (talk) 13:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Fixed. WP:BOLD :D Hardtofindaname 09:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Homer's sexuality
-- 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)

-- The phrase "he liked men, and it was known that he drank with the younger men in the Elks' Club" is very similar to contemporary characterizations of Walt Whitman. In that context, the statement was meant to imply (accurately) that Whitman was romantically attracted to men. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.73.199.100 (talk) 03:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

he didn't wear pink and white gloves. they were yellow. that probably would've been normal for the period.

It doesn't matter if your college professor says that Homer is gay. However, if your college professor has published a scholarly article on the subject, then please bring the article forward. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.192.147.123 (talk) 03:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 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)

Issues
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)
 * 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)

-Some say that Emily was killed by Homer and not Homer killed Emily because Homer can change and copy their figure from another. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.202.18.117 (talk) 04:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * 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)

-One issue I had with this article was the paraphrasing of a particular sentence from the story. The sentence was the one regarding the description of Emily and her father on the porch. The sentence that was put into the article was a pretty close paraphrase of the actual sentence, just reordering it and changing some words. It was so close that I had to check with the story to make sure it wasn't a direct quote. I would consider rephrasing the sentence if possible. Mbigo2 (talk) 17:09, 3 April 2018 (UTC)Maria

There are no inaccuracies in the plot summary that I could find. I did find a sentence were someone used close paraphrasing. They wrote "going in and out with a market basket", which is very similar to "going in and out with the market basket" written in the story. Quotations are integrated well and don't sound out of place. From the title heading to the structure heading there is not a lot of quotation, but after that quotation use starts getting heavier. The structure of the article is organized in an effective way that makes sense. The information in the article is relevant to the story and does not distract. In the article, it says that Emily thought that her father "would never leave her" but that felt like an interpretation to me. Personally, I would like to see more written about Emily's house and the conflicts between the new generation and the old one. Yoselin Marin (talk) 23:56, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Homosexuality
"Homer Barron is most certainly not gay, and was never suspected to be. The language used is simply an expression that can be taken the wrong way in today's society. The statement in the is only ment to say that he liked to drink with the guys and wanted to remain a bachelor in order to continue his partying. In fact, many picture him as being manly (or at least not feminine) due to his involvement in construction and his position as foreman." Homor barron is a good person
 * I believe that Homer Barron was just very sure of himself and wanted to always look 100%. I agree with how he is very masculine because of his history with working in construction. Ehewe1 (talk) 20:12, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I personally don't believe that Homer Barron's sexuality has anything to do with the meaning of this story. Miss Emily couldn't have him either way because he was a "bachelor" but I do find it interesting that Faulkner does include the piece of evidence that Homer had been wearing yellow gloves. He could have said that they were any color, I wonder why he specifically chose yellow-but at this time period, men wearing yellow gloves were considered to be gay. C.kamansky (talk) 14:50, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This is a topic that is mentioned it multiple sections so I think there should just be one spot that talks about Homer's sexuality. Going off that I haven't seen anyone crediting any reliable sources to back up their claims and I feel that, that would help people better come to a conclusion about this topic.Rgree1 (talk) 17:12, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree, theres no need for multiple sections on this topic, its too broad as it is without a scholarly resource to back it up. The yellow gloves could have been part of the style of the time period.

The Body
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)


 * 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)

Civil War Allegory
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)

Kudos, whoever you are. I was about to say the exact same thing, but you had beat me to it.

Faulkner himself (in "Faulkner in the University" edited by Frederick Gwynn and Joseph Blotner contained in "The Bedford Introduction to Literature" 5th ed. by Michael Meyer; Bedford/St Martin's; Boston; 1999) says in response to an interview question about the story being an allegory for the North and South, "Now that I don't know, because I was simply trying to write about people. The writer uses environment- ehat he knows- and if theres a symbolism in which the lover represented the North and the woman who murdered him represents the South, I don't say that's not valid and not there, but it was not the intention of the writer to say, Now let's see, I'm going to write a piece in which I will use symbolism for the North, and another symbol for the South, that he was simply writing about people, a story which he thought was tragic and true, because it came out of the human heart...It was a conflict not between the North and the South so much as between, well you might say, God and Satan."
 * 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)Maria

No concrete evidence for homer's homosexuality
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)

Song based on this book
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)
 * 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)

The Zombies song
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)

Necrophelia?
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)

Colonel Sartoris
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)


 * That was probably meant to refer to Colonel Saunders, who was mentioned as having remitted Emily's taxes. USN1977 (talk) 19:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Colonel Sartoris is mentioned in Barn Burning. Sarty states that his dad was in Colonel Sartoris confederate army. 74.96.123.45 (talk) 00:28, 7 December 2011 (UTC)ODU student

Miss Temple
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)

References to Miss Temple/purple rosebushes
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)

Citations and Theme
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)
 * 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)
 * 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)

Plot Summary
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)
 * 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)
 * 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)

The grammar can be changed a bit to make it seem easier to read. "behavior written off by the community as part of her grieving process" this should be rewritten as her behavior was written off by the community as part of her grieving process.Caitlin1198 (talk) 19:53, 3 April 2017 (UTC)


 * 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)


 * 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)
 * 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)


 * 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)

The plot summary includes a lot of unnecessary points in the story. A plot story is only supposed to include the main points contributing to the theme and overall message of the story. This plot summary should include the bond Emily and her father share and the actions she has committed. Alang22 (talk) 23:39, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * 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)

While the plot summary indicates that this is a "first-person account," I think it should be mentioned that it is first-person plural. Oeparker1 (talk) 19:32, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

There are several important details from the plot summary that are missing. I think that the plot summary should include Miss Emily's relationship with the community and describe why the discovery of Homer's body was so surprising. Miss Emily never opened up her home to anyone from the community, especially after her father's death. The only person that routinely entered her house was her personal butler. However, Miss Emily did give art lessons to young children in her community. This fact is what made many community members surprised to find a corpse in her bedroom because they had sent their children to that very house. Esatk1 (talk) 23:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


 * 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)

In the plot summary it states that the town pitied Emily for her father not allowing her to marry, however it is more than that. The depths of her father's grasp on her life is very complex and in order to understand why the town pitied her so much and why she was considered to be so strange, that needs to be discussed more.Jfitz2 (talk) 21:34, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

I think there needs to be more detail on the gift that Emily bought for Homer, that were found next to his body. In the plot summary there was just a brief mentioning of gifts next to his body. However, the gifts are important to the story because they give insight to how Emily viewed their relationship. Mbigo2 (talk) 16:55, 3 April 2018 (UTC)Maria

I feel like there is no need for the section of this article entitled "Plot Structure". Instead, the bits about how the flashbacks and time jumps within the story can be integrated into the Plot Summary section. I think it will help with the cohesion of the plot as well as mention the point of view from the townspeople. Obiss1 (talk) 18:39, 11 April 2018 (UTC)


 * 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)

Critical Response

 * 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.

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)


 * 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.

adding more credible critical repossess to improve verifiability C.kamansky (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

I will be adding to this section, introducing the critical response of the type of language that Faulkner uses in "A Rose For Emily". Specifically I will focus on a certain sentence from the short story, "Thus she passed from generation to generation-dear, inescapable, impervious, tranquil, and perverse". HChab14 (talk) 12:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I think that the people introduced in this section, such as John Skinner, should be described in this section. Whether they are scholars or random people should be included. Grace05110430 (talk) 23:21, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

It is good that there is more than one critical review of the story, except both are now rather dated. I would suggest trying to find a more current critical review of the story if possible. Mbigo2 (talk) 16:59, 3 April 2018 (UTC)Maria

I added another critical review, Jack Sherting. He has a different explanation for Emily's mental illness. I discussed his claim and cite his work. Abbeyflonc (talk) 19:28, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Theme
I'm going to add a section to theme because Emily is isolated from her town because her father was the same way. Even though her father had passed away, he is still controlling her in his after life. Jmont6 (talk) 20:44, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that isolation is a theme in the story but the focus should stay on this and not move towards her father's control over her. They should each be their own theme. Abbeyflonc (talk) 17:41, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Im going to add more to the theme of control because the little blurb at the end could use some more information added to help the reader understand better. DylanAponte (talk) 20:49, 5 April 2017 (UTC)


 * In this section there should be more credible sources. The only sources cited were from spark notes and enotes, this should be looked into. C.kamansky (talk) 17:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

added credible source for theme currently looking for ways to get rid of spark notes and enotes from this section. First theme about death was a good addition but needs to be cited. C.kamansky (talk) 15:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Coreykennedy07 (talk) 12:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)== Title ==

There is a lot more reasoning for the title than is what already mentioned. Faulkner implied in an interview that Emily deserves a rose because of the events that happened to her. Coreykennedy07 (talk) 12:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC) I suggest that there be a longer explanation talking about the significance of the title and how it relates to the story. The rose can mean many different things and I think that more information should be provided on it.

I will be adding a new theme, the theme of time. This theme is represented by both Homer and Miss Emily. Homer, who is from the North, representing the present and Miss Emily, from the South, is representing the past.HChab14 (talk) 15:09, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I added one example and re-used citation number 5 to both the theme of resistance and the theme of time. Marye.hoban (talk) 21:01, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I think that it could be included that one of the repercussions of control was that Emily had a fear of being alone. Her father had kept her from others so he was the only person she ever had and after he dies, she doesn't want to let him go. When Homer comes into her life and she sees the possibility that he will leave, she decides to kill him so she will not have to be alone any longer. Aross9 (talk) 14:12, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I am going to add in a theme about the power of death. I think that death is important throughout the entire plot. While Emily is alive, she is described as her "skeleton" being "small and spare" and this is representative of the fact that she was encapsulated by death. She also was in denial when it came to death and a lot of it had to do with loneliness. She kept her father's corpse for three days after he had died and refused to admit he was dead until her breakdown. She had inflicted death upon Homer Barron so that she would not have to live alone the rest of her life because she was afraid he would leave her. This was an action to fuse both life and death, but it is shown that the power of death triumphs everything, including "poor Emily." Jchud2 (talk) 14:46, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * This would be a great insight into the story.

Title
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)


 * 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)


 * 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)Maria


 * 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)

Criticism
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)

Themes
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)

Characters
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)


 * 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)

I don't think Colonel Sartoris is an important character that needs to be mentioned. He doesn't have a big impact in the story or on Emily's life. Abbeyflonc (talk) 17:37, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Structure
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)
 * 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)

Jolie's peer review
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)

Analysis of the story
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)

Source for a strong philosophical claim?
In the structure part, the following can be read: "In terms of mathematical precision, time moves on and what exists is only the present." 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)