Talk:The Sound and the Fury

Caddy's Age
The article says "At the time the children were aged 7 (Quentin), 6 (Caddy), 4 (Jason) and 3 (Benjy)" at the time of their grandmother's death but Caddy says directly here that she is seven. I don't know how the ages were worked out so I don't want to edit it, but I noticed this just now.

Benjy is also said at one point in the book to be thirteen when Candace is fourteen (but he is later said to be five when his name is changed-- in 1900?) so the chronology is a little confusing.

Accessibility
I deleted this section. It sounds like a bitter high school kid wrote it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.92.176.11 (talk) 14:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

"Literary significance and criticism"
Who wrote this section? have they even read the book? "Faulkner was very much preoccupied with the question of how the ideals of the old South could be maintained or preserved in the post-Civil War era"- not exactly how I would phrase his intense criticism of southern ideals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannah Angelove (talk • contribs) 08:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Hannah, I would completely agree with your comment on first glance, but though the quoted sentence is much flawed and ambiguous it does have a point. Faulkner was occupied (not preoccupied) with how the "honour" (not ideals, which borders on a play-school reading of Faulkner) could be maintained through the degradation of their own realisation of the complete wrongness of their system in post-Civil War South. Read Absalom for his immaculate phrasing of this exact sentiment of mixed reluvsion and love for his homeland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.232.66.242 (talk) 19:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with Hannah. Every single thing in that section needs to be either sourced or deleted. Softlavender (talk) 09:08, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Easter
I need to seriosuly expand upon this subject when I have more time.

Oprah?
The Sound and the Fury is generally regarded as one of the seminal masterpieces in American and world literary modernism. It is one of the key texts of the twentieth century. It is perhaps Faulkner's greatest work... I don't see why an increase in sales due to Oprah Winfrey's inclusion of the novel in her book club should be regarded as 'curious', but more importantly I don't see any reason why Oprah should be mentioned, of all places, the introductory section of this article. At best, Oprah's endorsement of Faulkner could be mentioned as trivia. (Otherwise we should revise the introductory sentences to East of Eden, and Elie Wiesel's Night, to update Oprah's centrality to these texts accordingly.) I suggest this sentence be moved, or excised alltogether.

first sentence

 * The Sound and the Fury is a well-known novel written by American author William Faulkner.

This is a pretty vapid sentence; it could apply to any of Faulkner's books (and "well-known" is in the eye of the beholder, i.e. POV). Could someone rewrite it to briefly summarize the unique points of "The Sound and the Fury"? I can't because I've never read it, and I don't trust Wikipedia plot synopses. 71.235.238.180 00:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I second the motion. From general intelligent public —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.232.66.242 (talk) 19:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

High school reading?
Is this really a standard book for high school kids to read?? That would amaze me. This is a very difficult book to get one's mind around. Frankly, I think most of it would be lost on most high-school students. Seems more college level. I'm a 31 year old college grad, just read it, am re-reading it, and I'm still grappling with it (eschewing Cliff Notes or any devices that'd help me "get" it, including this article.) (Love it, by the way). And I don't think I'm particularly slow either. I just think this is a book that is very difficult to grok. Went to a pretty good private high school, never read anything half as challenging as this.-C.M.67.170.176.203 19:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I am in high school and we are currently studing this book.

It is a requirement to read this book to graduate High School.

-It is more common for college students to read it. While you may be very lucky that your high school allows you to "stud" it ("studing"[sic]), most high schools won't even go near this novel because of the more controversial aspects (racism, incest, cursing, etc.)

I just want to say that I am also reading in high school, and while I am aware that it is much more widely read at the university level than the secondary school level, I think enough high schools read it for the article to be justified in describing it as a part of high school curricula. However, removing the reference would also make plenty sense. It'd work either way. On the other hand, I have a different issue with the article -- Jason as "unappealing but competently pragmatic"? I would say "unappealing and incompetently pragmatic" would be far more accurate. That Jason is left "to maintain the status quo," as the article points out, is one of the most significant indicators of the Compsons' downfall in the novel; if he was competent, that would not be the case. 75.28.47.74 (talk) 03:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

These kids have awful grammar and spelling. I'm sure Faulkner wouldnt mind though. I've read four different spellings of Faulkner's "aint" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.232.66.242 (talk) 19:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Southern Gothic
I really disagree with calling SOTF a "gothic" novel. Not only does it not really fit the bill (hardly any supernatural stuff, no creepy imagery, little violence unless you count Quentin's suicide, which is not described). Not to mention, the claim is a little reductive. The phrase "Southern Gothic" brings to mind a certain quaint regionalism which I think the book, being one of America's recognized masterpieces, has transcended, both in terms of quality, and in terms of its canonization.

-You are confusing Southern Gothic with Romanticism/Gothic. -Yes, you are. It very much fits southern gothic; see Flannery O'Connor. Little supernatural imagery is involved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.189.3.10 (talk) 03:16, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Flannery O'Connor has a priest-without-christ blinding himself and another man dressed as a priest-without-christ and a boy with "wise blood" dressed as a gorilla for half a novel. That strikes me as imagery gone quite supernatural. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.232.66.242 (talk) 19:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Citation needed
Article does not cite sparknotes.com

Copied directly:

Sparknotes

Time Faulkner’s treatment and representation of time in this novel was hailed as revolutionary. Faulkner suggests that time is not a constant or objectively understandable entity, and that humans can interact with it in a variety of ways. Benjy has no concept of time and cannot distinguish between past and present. His disability enables him to draw connections between the past and present that others might not see, and it allows him to escape the other Compsons’ obsessions with the past greatness of their name. Quentin, in contrast, is trapped by time, unable and unwilling to move beyond his memories of the past. He attempts to escape time’s grasp by breaking his watch, but its ticking continues to haunt him afterward, and he sees no solution but suicide. Unlike his brother Quentin, Jason has no use for the past. He focuses completely on the present and the immediate future. To Jason, time exists only for personal gain and cannot be wasted. Dilsey is perhaps the only character at peace with time. Unlike the Compsons, who try to escape time or manipulate it to their advantage, Dilsey understands that her life is a small sliver in the boundless range of time and history.

Wikipedia Another major theme is Time. Faulkner’s treatment and representation of time in this novel was hailed as revolutionary. Faulkner suggests that time is not a constant or objectively understandable entity, and that humans can interact with it in a variety of ways. Benjy has no concept of time and cannot distinguish between past and present. His disability enables him to draw connections between the past and present that others might not see, and it allows him to escape the other Compsons’ obsessions with the past greatness of their name. Quentin, in contrast, is trapped by time, unable and unwilling to move beyond his memories of the past. He attempts to escape time’s grasp by breaking his watch, but its ticking continues to haunt him afterward, and he sees no solution but suicide. Unlike his brother Quentin, Jason has no use for the past. He focuses completely on the present and the immediate future. To Jason, time exists only for personal gain and cannot be wasted. Dilsey is perhaps the only character at peace with time. Unlike the Compsons, who try to escape time or manipulate it to their advantage, Dilsey understands that her life is a small sliver in the boundless range of time and history.

Please avoid plagiarism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.237.216.211 (talk) 01:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

Epilogue
There should be a discussion of the Epilogue to S&F. Although the Epilogue Compson:1699-1945 does not appear in the most popular Vinatge International Edition (ala Oprah), Faulkner did write it when creating the Portable Faulkner. Faulkner claimed that it was the key to understading the whole novel, and he was disappointed that he had not written it when he had first published the novel. Further, it tells the story of what happens to the Compsons after the novel ends. I believe it should be discussed in some way, shape, or form. Agreed?--65.37.61.81 20:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

It must be our place to respect the author's wishes, but the epilogue, for me, destroys the fragile beauty of the novel and its relationship with time. He wrote it much too far after TSATF was published. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.232.66.242 (talk) 19:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Mental Retardation/Autism
Benji's section uses the phrase: "mental retardation and/or autism (never explicitly identified as either)". In fact, autism wasn't first described until 1938, nine years after the publication of the novel. Therefore, I don't feel that saying "never explicitly identified as either" is entirely proper. It would have been impossible for Faulkner to provide that description. I can't really think of how to correct it, and am not totally sure it needs a change, but it's something to think about. Tetyl (talk) 04:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree discussion of autism seems anachronistic, but similarly, the term 'mental retardation' has been largely recognized as offensive. In light of these facts and because the novel is unconcerned with exact terminology, I edited the page to refer to his mental capacity as 'intellectual disability' suggesting a 'neurodevelopmental disorder' that are both more general and appropriate descriptors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.176.156 (talk) 07:01, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

"Drawers"? Just call it what it is! Underwere! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.23.124 (talk) 21:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Faulkner would be laughing himself silly at you people. Benjy was retarded.210.22.142.82 (talk) 11:47, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Quentin's year of birth
The page gives Quentin Compson III's year of birth as 1890 in the 'Characters in "The Sound and the Fury"' section. But the Quentin Compson page, and the plaque shown, both use 1891. Presumably the latter is correct? Terrycojones (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

and he did you
Is "and he did you" an accurate direct quotation?Unfree (talk) 22:26, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Collaboration
Okay, let's get this thing going. What do we need to do to make this better? Who might be willing to... (Feel free to add to the 'to-do' list if you see things that need to be done.) 1 - Get the references into in-line citations. 2 - 'Literary significance and criticism' should be expanded 3 - Reformat to conform to the 'Pattern template' 4 - Fill in areas on the 'Pattern template' that are currently hidden - go to 'edit screen to see what's currently blank.

Sabiona (talk) 15:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Benjy's year of birth

The "family tree" lists Benjy's year of birth as 1985. This is obviously a typo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.143.77.236 (talk) 18:18, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Discussion of Title's Meaning
I find the discussion of the title's meaning (as of this version) to be... problematic. I'm worried it misrepresents Faulkner's acceptance speech in order to misinterpret the title of the work. Here's a copy of the speech, though I'm not sure how relevant it should be.


 * The last line is, perhaps, the most meaningful; Faulkner said in [his Nobel acceptance speech] that people must write about things that come from the heart, "universal truths". Otherwise they signify nothing.

The Shakespearian quote is primarily about mortality being inevitable, and implying ultimate meaninglessness. Faulkner's book is about the demise of a Southern family and raises questions of its original significance. Faulkner's acceptance speech was about human perseverance and triumph in an unrelated context. This bit of the article makes it sound like Faulkner is issuing a direct rebuttal to Shakespeare, which is not clearly the case. Even if I'm wrong, there are still major citation/original research issues here.

I didn't want to jump in on such a widely edited article though, so these are my two cents, I'll leave it to the regulars on this page to make the call. --Thomas B&#9816; talk 04:01, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Compson family tree
The image shows Benjy's year of birth as 1985. I believe it should read 1895. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.202.31.95 (talk) 08:10, 22 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You're absolutely right. Thanks for pointing this out. I have removed the image and notified the creator of it. It may be replaced into the article when it is corrected. Softlavender (talk) 09:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Jason III narrating Absalom, Absalom!
Jason appears in Absalom, Absalom! only as a figure in Quentin's memory, not as a narrator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midwinterdreams (talk • contribs) 20:49, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Demonstration of technique
I have not read this, so it seems odd that so much is made of Faulkner's technique, but there are hardly any examples on the page, compared to, say, Finnegans Wake. MonoTrouble (talk) 00:59, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Source of shame
Is Benjy a source of shame to his family because he is severely mentally disabled, or because he was castrated after raping a girl? Surely the latter is as good a reason as the former.Royalcourtier (talk) 06:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Reception needs more sources
First off, starting off the section with the only source being critical of the book is disingenuous when it is, as told earlier in the article, one of the most highly regarded novels of all time. What there needs to be is more sources for the following section that detail the influence of the novel and critical praise to balance this out. The goal for wikipedia is to be as representative of consensus as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:1100:6026:185F:2E1F:3E7E:A91B (talk) 18:45, 28 May 2022 (UTC)