Of Ambiguity In 'Barn Burning And A Rose For Emily'

The novel “Crime and Punishment” by Fyodor Dostoyevsky centers around the character Raskolnikov, his murder of two women, and the subsequent consequences he faces. William Faulkner’s short stories “Barn Burning” and “A Rose for Emily” deal with similar topics, such as the nature of what can be considered immoral, and the overall effect that these immoral actions can have on a person. The protagonists of each story deals with the consequences of moral transgressions, but it is shown that the true nature of their character extends beyond what is quantifiable by their actions alone. By using ambiguity, conflict, and characterization, “Crime and Punishment”, “Barn Burning”, and “A Rose for Emily” provide a commentary on the uncertainty that can
In “Crime and Punishment”, Raskolnikov clearly has a desire to do something, but it is only ever referred to as “that” (page 2). Although “that” can be implied to mean his plan to kill the old pawnbroker, it is never clearly expressed. This allows the reader to fill in the blanks and become, in a way, complicit in their awareness of the crime. This is also seen in “A Rose for Emily” when Emily buys the poison “For rats.” (page 4) Later in the story, when the townsmen break into the room, they note that “The man himself lay in the bed.” (page 5) It is never explicitly stated that Faulkner is referring to Homer, that Emily killed Homer with the poison, or even that he is dead. However, those are exactly the conclusions that can be drawn based on the ambiguous nature of the text and the tendency to assume that, as a “rat”, Emily would have been justified in poisoning him. Again, in “Barn Burning” when Sarty’s father tries to set the second barn on fire, one is only assuming that he is, in fact, going to set another barn on fire. That is where both Sarty and the reader’s minds are directed to go despite definitive proof that this is what is happening. In each case, it can be assumed that a crime will be or has been committed because this seems like the only
Raskolnikov, for example, faces internal conflict before and after committing the murder because he struggles to remain emotionally detached enough to feel no guilt for his actions. Additionally, as a “poor, sick student” who is “crushed by poverty” (page 97) Raskolnikov faces the conflict of social classes. This social conflict is one of his primary motivations for killing the pawnbroker, who had wealth that Raskolnikov was otherwise incapable of achieving. A similar set conflicts can be found in “A Rose for Emily” as Emily obviously faced internal conflict because she was incapable of moving on from the past while also facing external conflict from society. As a woman, Emily also suffered from the gendered expectations placed on her by the town, and this is likely what drove her to her isolated and unstable state of being, and thus, her murder of Homer. In “Barn Burning”, as well, Sarty struggles against society because he must endure the stigma placed on him by his father’s crimes, being called a “barn burner” (page 2) despite not being the one to burn down the barn. Meanwhile, Sarty’s internal conflict stems from his conflicting desires. Although he knows burning the barn is wrong, he still believes he should be loyal to his family. With all of the characters facing both internal and external conflicts that highlight he inconsistent line between what is right and