Karl Zender explained that Faulkner’s story has a clear realism. However the modernist twist throughout the story is symbolism of irony, which allows the reader escape from realism for deeper meanings. The reader is left to determine what deeper meaning the characters and plot have. It is true. I believe this is true. Zender believes literature should be understood as a social function. William Faulkner’s Barn Burning by Zender is a good example. Sarty is a character that shows loyalty and maturation.
Zender depicts Faulkner as the climax in which Sarty kills his father. This is Sarty’s maturation and knowing that he must go on. Zender mentions the three-way engagement that propels Sarty forward in the story. First, Ab takes Sarty first to the de Spain House. Second, he takes Sarty second. Third, he refuses Sarty’s request to be tied to his bed by his other son before he goes to Spain to burn Spains barn. Zender describes these questions to Sarty’s loyalty as well as the pull of different values with his father’s defense of burning barns. Sarty and his father are conflicted because of the blood ties they have been taught. Zender explained that the story’s significance was reduced by simply viewing these conflicts and questions as developmental. We see the character often, but we don’t always see beyond his predicability. We, the readers, are not to be limited to the development and predictiment of the character. The story also includes the values and meanings for today’s world as a classic text.
Zender explained that Zender took his son to the large De Spain home to show his son that even the most pure of things can become contaminated. Ab is a fast-footed man who tracks feces onto the rug. This symbolizes the point. It is crucial to understand the relationship between Ab and Sarty. It is a relationship that continues to heal from Sarty’s mistakes at the beginning of the story. Ab has complete control over the relationship, as Sarty’s misstep in the beginning of the story with the Justice of the Court. Ab struck his son, and instructed him to be loyal as he had taught his son.
Zender mentions that Faulkner’s stories often feature a parental-child relationship. These relationships can be personal and complex. Zender clarifies that Ab’s actions were infused with symbolism. Zender advised that we look at this story in terms of Sarty’s maturation and that we should also consider the meaning and symbolism. Zender demonstrates that the psychological structure of instruction in a teacher/student manner, as it is illustrated by Faulkner with Ab & Sarty, are a critical part of this story. Zender also shows that Zender’s analysis that The Burning Barn is about Psychological function is true.
While I agree with the statement that the relationship played a major role in his life, it is not true that Zender’s father considered him a mentor or student. Zender does an excellent job of explaining the larger picture. He often uses examples from other texts to support his points of emphasis. Zender’s analysis was not the only source of textual evidence.
Comments are closed.