Syrian Arab Republic University of Aleppo Faculty of Arts and Humanities Department of English
Essence and Existence in
William Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily” and The Sound and the Fury
and in Margaret Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind
By Nour E. Dawalibi
Supervisor Prof. Dr. Muhammad Al-Taha
Submitted to the University of Aleppo in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of English 2016
Essence and Existence in
William Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily” and The Sound and the Fury
and in Margaret Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind
By Nour E. Dawalibi
Supervisor Prof. Dr. Muhammad Al-Taha
Dawalibi i
Table of Contents
Dedication ii Acknowledgments iii Abstract iv Introduction 1
Chapter One Essence and Existence: Humanism and Existentialism 11
Chapter Two Essence and Existence in William Faulkner’s
“A Rose for Emily” 39
Chapter Three Essence and Existence in William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury 60
Chapter Four Essence and Existence in Margret Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind 84
Conclusion 105
Works Cited 111
Works Consulted 125 Dawalibi ii
Dedication
For my loving, caring and compassionate parents and for my
sweet heart Dania
Dawalibi iii
Acknowledgments
In the process of doing the research and the writing of this dissertation, I have accumulated many debts that can never be repaid. No one deserves more credit for this study than Professor Muhammad Al-Taha and Professor Iman Lababidi who have given me great motivation and were always ready to give help and support whenever needed. They were more than generous in their expertise and their precious time. Being highly educated, liberal and open minded they gave me the true sense of literature and theory. I would also like to thank Professor Munzer Absi and Professor Bashar Akili who taught us the principles of academic research.
A word of appreciation for my parents should also be expressed for their encouragement while I have been working on this dissertation. Despite all of the bad circumstances that we experience, there must be resolution to improve and be improved. Finally, I should thank all the staff of Aleppo University Library for their help, cooperation and continuous assistance with the research.
Dawalibi iv
Abstract
This dissertation deals with the theory of essentialism as portrayed in William Faulkner‟s “A Rose for Emily” and The Sound and the Fury and existentialism theory as portrayed in Margret Mitchell‟s Gone with the Wind. This study is an attempt to investigate the existentialist and essentialist values and traits in the above mentioned works. It investigates each writer‟s approach and vision towards his/her characters, the civil war and the south.
This work discusses how „fixed properties‟ is a common dominating motif in Faulkner‟s works because each character possesses certain features without being able to change them. The metaphysical essentialism in Faulkner‟s works stands diametrically opposed to existential realism in that finite existence is only differentiated appearance, whereas “ultimate reality” is held to be absolute essence. Tracing the notion of essence and existence provide a good understanding of how the terms emerged and applied to literature.
Margaret Mitchell as a feminist writer committed herself to both existentialism and feminism; therefore, her approach certainly turns out to be a feminist one. William Faulkner, on the other hand, is considered an essentialist and a humanist writer; thus, his approach is essential and humanistic.
The study outlines the problematic notion essence and existence building up on previous assumptions and theories including the related scientific theories. It is an attempt to investigate the possibility of the influence of the ideology of feminism and existentialism on Margret Mitchell‟s Gone with the Wind and the ideology of humanism and essentialism on William Faulkner‟s “A Rose for Emily” and The Sound and the Fury.
Dawalibi 1
Introduction
What manifests the major differences between Margret Mitchell and William
Faulkner is the notion of essence and existence. Though both writers wrote about the
American Civil War and The American South, major differences are embedded in core between the two writers varying between characterization, approach, style and content.
Each writer adopts certain philosophical doctrine that is clearly reflected in his work.
William Faulkner as a humanist writer 1 is affected by essentialism as a philosophical doctrine and this is because the majority of his characters do not change with incidents and keep certain predetermined characteristics and features from the very beginning until the very end. “Classical humanism has an essentialist conception of the human being, which means that it believes in an eternal and unchangeable human nature. The idea of an unchangeable human nature has been criticized by Kierkegaard, Marx,
Heidegger, Sartre, and many other existential thinkers” (Mastin). While, on the other hand, Margret Mitchell’s characters – especially the protagonists - are more interactive and dynamic, they are like a chameleon that changes color in order to fit and adapt any situation. They masterfully interact and adjust with any new situation to progress and benefit. For this reason, Margaret Mitchell was affected by existentialism as a philosophical doctrine which insists upon freedom, choice and responsibility as major notions. This philosophical doctrine is reflected in her characters as they change and get
1 See Danto, Magee and Gold Dawalibi 2 experienced in order to formulate their true essence at last. The influence of these two philosophical doctrines can be clearly detected in each writer’s works.
In recent years, our views about human existence have been drastically changed.
“What all existentialists have in common is the fundamental doctrine that existence precedes essence” (Copleston 23). On the contrary to the previous notion, it was commonly believed since Plato that “the highest ethical good is the same for everyone”
(Macquarrie 16) and that a human is born with certain predetermined fixed qualities and features that can never be changed. These aged views used to limit the human’s freedom and aspiration for change; they doom a persona that he/she is fated and cannot change. The Old beliefs and convictions are attacked by existentialist thinkers and philosophers because they do not constitute the “true essence” of the human’s subjectivity; among those philosophers is the French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre.
Existentialism refuses all the old ways of thinking and opens new dimensions and horizons of freedom and willpower. Existentialism sees humans with will and consciousness; it seeks to make every human more able to decide and choose with his freewill and confidence. “The fact that humans are conscious of their mortality, and must make decisions about their life is what existentialism is all about” (Bullock and
Trombley 297).
Existentialism refuses the stereotypically frozen mentality. It erases the old beliefs, traditions and convictions since Plato. Existentialism is a call to build one’s “true essence” rather than “what labels, roles, stereotypes, definitions, or other preconceived Dawalibi 3 categories the individuals fit “essence”. The actual life of the individuals is what constitutes what could be called their “true essence” instead of there being an arbitrarily attributed essence others use to define them. As existentialism manifested clearly in
Mitchell’s work, a human being for existentialists defines his own true essence rather than what is imposed on him/her. Existentialism rejects the universal abstract metaphysical thoughts because humans are not objects to be used by the patriarchy or the government. It concentrates on the role of the individual, “…many existentialists have regarded traditional systematic or academic philosophies, in both style and content, as too abstract and remote from concrete human experience (Breisach 5;
Kaufmann 12).
Individuals for existentialists are completely independent free responsible conscious beings. “Existentialists shared the belief that philosophical thinking begins with the human subject and the supreme value of existentialist thought is commonly acknowledged to be freedom, its primary virtue is authenticity” (Flynn xi). The application of existentialism to literature shapes a frame work of a useful wide range to understand the writer’s mentality and the ideology he/she used to form his/her characters. In “Time in Faulkner: The Sound and the Fury,” Sartre sees Faulkner’s characters as lacking free will. In particular, he points out that Quentin has no future and his suicide is built up as inevitable. Events in Faulkner are often described as already completed with very little attention paid to the actual moment of the event.
Sartre likens Faulkner’s characters to people in a convertible with their gazes forever fixed behind them as they drive onward. Faulkner’s vision of the world is originally Dawalibi 4 predetermined; nothing can be changed and everything happens is predestined and previously fated. Faulkner is metaphysical; for him, there is a second layer that we cannot see where fates are written on humans. These metaphysics obviously run contrary to Sartre’s belief in free will and humans’ capacity to become responsible and free; nevertheless, Sartre was still fond of Faulkner’s fiction: “I like his art, but I don’t believe in his metaphysics. A barred future is still a future” (qtd in Moore 5).
Faulkner’s characterization of his protagonists like Quentin Compson and Emily
Grierson does seem to imply his characters are not free to act. Faulkner determines himself to Essentialism; the characters do not have apparent qualities but embedded qualities since birth. The initial significant point is that Sartre and Faulkner contradict with the notions of heredity and the ability to change, i.e. essence and existence. Sartre does not believe that heredity limits the humans’ will and freedom while it seems that
Faulkner believes that there are certain inherited qualities and features since birth determine one’s life. Existentialists believe that: “. . . Human beings—through their consciousness—create their own values and determine a meaning for their life; the human being does not possess any inherent identity or value. By posing the acts that constitute him or her, he or she makes his or her existence more significant” (Patrick).
Humanism, on the other hand, is an attitude that “emphasizes the dignity and worth of the individual. A basic premise of humanism is that people are rational beings who possess within themselves the capacity for truth and goodness” (Danto).
Humanism generalizes the virtue of goodness on all human beings while existentialists Dawalibi 5 are pessimistic; they are anxious and dread. Humans, for them, are neglected and abandoned in this world; every human is fully free and fully responsible for his choices.
For this reason he/she always feels worried and anxious and always regrets other choices.
Existentialism should be understood in the light of other philosophical doctrines because it is a daring movement rejecting all the ragged philosophical doctrines that state “the highest ethical good is the same for everybody”. Modern Existentialism is mainly defined by the most prominent figure Jean-Paul Sartre and his very close confidant Simon De Beauvoir. Obviously American literature is not secluded from the effect of essentialism and existentialism. Margret Mitchell, for example, formulated
Scarlett O’Hara to become a real feminist heroine. Scarlett is a free willed, defiant, responsible and rebellious heroine.
The existential reading of literary works focuses on the human individuality and subjectivity. To be existential, characters should be independent, free and responsible.
The significance of existentialism is that it always gives existence more reliability over essence and “it denies that the universe has any intrinsic meaning or purpose. It requires people to take responsibility for their own actions and shape their own destinies.”2 The principles of existentialism discussed in this work are common to the majority of existentialists. Although no set of principles can apply uniformly to all existentialists, certain basic characteristics of existentialism are central to both the
2 Encarta Encyclopedia Dictionary Dawalibi 6 nonreligious writers like Sartre and Camus and the theistic existentialists like
Kierkegaard, Maritain, Marcel, Tillich, Berdyaev and Buber. These characteristics are:
An insistence that human life is understandable only in terms of an individual
man's existence, i.e., that man's existence precedes his essence. A conviction that
human reason is impotent to deal with the dark places in human life which are
'non-reason' and a feeling that modern man lives his life alienated from Cod,
nature, other men, and his own true self. Recognition of the anxiety that
oppresses man because he must accept full responsibility for his own moral
choices, a sense that a man alienated from God and man can encounter only
Nothingness and a concern to enlarge the range of human freedom (Bigelow
170).
In this study, the existential characteristics are incarnated mainly in the characters of Scarlet O'Hara and Rhett Butler in Mitchell’s work Gone with the Wind.
Mitchell smashes all the gender rules imposed on women by the patriarchy and insistes on women’s freedom, choice and commitment. Whilst the general view about women in
Faulkner’s works is that they are subjects of sympathy. Mitchell, on the other hand, adoptes a rebellious, defiant attacking ideology on all old convictions and beliefs.
Margaret Mitchell’s work is considered by many critics an early feminist work which epitomizes the existential feminist notions in freedom and liberty. Both Rhett Butler and
Scarlett O’Hara represent the new world, the new south, a pragmatic world that defies old convictions and traditions and opens new horizons of freedom and self determination. In her work, Mitchell shows that those who cling to old traditions and Dawalibi 7 convictions like Ashley Wilkes and Melanie Hamilton die and fade away while those who could adapt and adjust themselves like Scarlett O’Hara and Rhett Butler prosper, grow and develop. Mitchell’s pragmatic, existential ideology together with her romance feminist touches made her work a best seller in the USA. This study will compare
Simon de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex with Mitchell’s views and perspectives in Gone with the Wind. This comparison will elaborate on Mitchell’s existential and feminist views.
On the other hand, Faulkner female protagonists especially Emily Grierson in “A
Rose for Emily” represent essential fixed unchanged nature as Emily behaves in the same manner for about forty years locking her self indoors and refusing any kind of change:
When looking at essentialism, which has a long and illustrious history within the
development of Western philosophy, in terms of feminist theory and gender
studies, it is a term which refers here to the attribution of a fixed essence to
women. Women’s essence is assumed to be given and universal and is usually,
though not necessarily, identified with women’s biology and “natural”
characteristics (Grosz).
The main significant issue in this dissertation is to show differences in ideology between two American writers William Faulkner and Margaret Mitchell writing about the American South and The Civil War and representing two contradictory philosophical doctrines that are essentialism and existentialism. The study will rely upon some recent scientific theories related to genetics and heredity to understand the Dawalibi 8 human behaviour and that can elaborate on the notion of essence and existence. The scientific theories will be relied upon because of some problematic notion in the philosophical doctrine itself:
For existentialists people are (1) defined only insofar as they act and (2) that they
are responsible for their actions. For example, someone who acts cruelly towards
other people is, by that act, defined as a cruel person. Furthermore, by this action
of cruelty, such persons are themselves responsible for their new identity (cruel
persons). This is as opposed to their genes, or human nature, bearing the blame
(Baird).
As a philosophical doctrine opposed to existentialism; “essentialism is the view that for any specific entity there is a set of attributes which are necessary to its identity and function” (Cartwright). In Western thought the concept is found in the work of Plato and Aristotle. Platonic idealism is the earliest known theory of how all known things and concepts have an essential reality behind them (an “Idea” or “Form”), an essence that makes those things and concepts what they are. Essentialism is a very old philosophical doctrine whilst existentialism is very recent and pragmatic. Aristotle’s categories propose that all objects are the objects they are by virtue of their substance, that the substance makes the object what it is. The essential qualities of an object, so
George Lakoff summarizes Aristotle’s highly influential view, are “those properties that make the thing what it is, and without which it would be not that kind of thing”
(Cartwright). As such, Essentialism, in its broadest sense, is any philosophy that Dawalibi 9 acknowledges the primacy of Essence. Unlike Existentialism, which posits “being” as the fundamental reality
…the essentialist ontology must be approached from a metaphysical perspective.
Empirical knowledge is developed from experience of a relational universe
whose components and attributes are defined and measured in terms of
intellectually constructed laws. Thus, for the scientist, reality is explored as an
evolutionary system of diverse entities, the order of which is determined by the
principle of causality (Russell).
Comparing and contrasting Faulkner’s views and ideologies with Mitchell’s views and ideology from essentialist and existentialist perspectives, the study is an attempt to show how each writer portrays his/her characters and the American south.
Faulkner, the humanist, sympathies with women and criticizes patriarchal society; but to be an existentialist, there must be a frank call for freedom and a rebellious state against old beliefs and convictions. Static characters do not represent the existential doctrine because they keep their predetermined essence, they should be dynamic and interactive with incidents. Mitchell’s work which represents the feminist ideology has the rebellious defiant attacking state against the patriarchal laws and all the predetermined essential old convictions and beliefs.
This dissertation consists of an introduction, four chapters, and a conclusion.
Chapter one titled “Essence and Existence: Humanism and Existentialism” lays down the theoretical background of the philosophical notion ‘Essence and Existence’ in Dawalibi 10 humanism and existentialism. Chapter two titled “Essence and Existence in William
Faulkner’s “’A Rose for Emily’” deals with Faulkner’s short story “A Rose for Emily” from a humanist perspective. Chapter three titled “Essence and Existence in William
Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury” elaborates more on Faulkner’s ideologies of humanism and essentialism. In chapter four “Essence and Existence in Margret
Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind”, the study deals with the feminist and existential concepts and ideas. The dissertation combines the analytical, argumentative and comparative methods. It is an attempt to show the effect of essentialism on William
Faulkner as a humanist and the effect of existentialism on Margret Mitchell as a feminist. The study is an application of essentialism and existentialism to American
Literature i.e. William Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily” and The Sound and the Fury and to
Margret Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind. Dawalibi 11
Chapter One Essence and Existence: Humanism and Existentialism
William Faulkner and Margret Mitchell approached their characters in the light of their different ideologies; one expressing her existentialist world-view, the other his humanist philosophy. William Faulkner committed himself to humanism as a philosophical movement. William Faulkner is a classical Christian humanist who believes in the existence of God as a creator of man and that man is the center of the world not the church. “Early humanists saw no conflict between reason and their
Christian faith. They inveighed against the abuses of the Church, but not against the
Church itself” (Schaeffer 146). For this reason, Faulkner believed that God created certain features and characteristics in a human as predetermined essence among these features the capacity for truth and goodness. These features, in fact, can not be changed because man is predestined.
Faulkner’s characters walk towards their destiny inevitably, they have no choice and each character has his/her own certain features and characteristics that are kept as part and parcel of one’s persona. “Classical Humanism has an essentialist conception of the human being, which means that it believes in an eternal and unchangeable human nature” (Mastin). In fact, this doctrine develops more than that in Calvinism. For the
Calvinists, man is predetermined even before birth to go either to hell or heaven. For Dawalibi 12 the existentialists, man is born absolutely free; he is never predetermined or predestined; he is free to choose and fully responsible for his choices. It is worth noting that existentialism reacted against the idealism and rationalism of Hegel. Existentialism also states that rationalism and science are not enough to explain the human behavior, and it also reacted against essentialism declaring that the capacity for truth and goodness are chosen by the individual’s free will.
The feminist movement asserts the freedom and existence of women. Margret
Mitchell as a feminist writer insists upon the same characteristics and aspects of existentialism. Gone with the Wind is considered an early feminist work. The novelist advocates a new type of twentieth century American heroine. Mitchell’s adaptation of modern features like freedom, choice, responsibility and commitment made her a real feminist. Mitchell adapts new modern concepts of womanhood where old concepts should be broken and eliminated with the advances in technology and with the new life-style after The Civil War. Mitchell’s heroine Scarlett O’Hara is a new type of heroine who is responsible and independent; she is ready to take care of herself and everybody around her. Scarlett has the qualities of leadership that enable her to build America, the new nation. Scarlett works where there are no plantations, no slaves and no servants.
Mitchell creates a new type of heroine that can contribute to the society rather than be dependent on men.
Women, for Faulkner, are subjects of sympathy, Faulkner criticizes the patriarchy, but unlike Mitchell, he does not have the rebellious challenging method in Dawalibi 13 his writings. Women, in his writings, do not change; they are essentially predetermined to be submissive and dependent.
Linda Smith in 2011 in her “The ‘Authentic, Essentialist, Deeply Spiritual’
Other”, writes that “Pedagogically, essentialism was attacked because of its assumption that, because of this essence, it was necessary to be a woman and to experience life as a woman before one could analyze or understand women’s oppression” (Laurie). The existentialist philosophy opposes the predetermined look towards women; it is a call for freedom against the old beliefs and conventions. At that time, the social and political debate considered “the essentialist view on gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity, or other group characteristics is that they are fixed traits”. These traits, for a classical humanist like Faulkner, are considered sacred rules. Faulkner keeps the old conventions and traditions unchanged because they are already predetermined not only for women but for the society as a whole. Laurie adds that “when ‘essence’ may imply permanence some argue that essentialist thinking tends towards political conservatism and therefore opposes social change.” In fact, this is what Faulkner maintains in his works of art; he keeps the class boundaries unchanged; he keeps the essentially predetermined rules of a society. Moreover, though one can witness his sympathy for women against the patriarchy, he does not have a rebellious call for a change.
For essentialists, the nature of a thing is predetermined and predefined; it precedes its existence and this makes this nature unchangeable. For essentialists, women’s submissiveness, dependency and unchangeability are related to their Dawalibi 14 biological nature. For this reason, a reader does not witness any change in the characters’ features in Faulkner’s works. For existentialists like Mitchell, characters choose their qualities themselves. They are born free to create their essence; they are not predestined or predetermined.
Feminist theorist Elizabeth Grosz states in her 1995 publication, Space, time and
perversion: essays on the politics of bodies, that essentialism “entails the belief that
those characteristics defined as women’s essence are shared in common by all
women at all times. It implies a limit of the variations and possibilities of
change—it is not possible for a subject to act in a manner contrary to her essence.
Her essence underlies all the apparent variations differentiating women from
each other. Essentialism thus refers to the existence of fixed characteristic, given
attributes, and ahistorical functions that limit the possibilities of change and thus
of social reorganization (Grosz).
Feminists, like Margret Mitchell, advocate new ideologies about womanhood.
Women, for them, are no longer submissive, inferior and dependent by nature. Margret
Mitchell’s attempt to break free out of antique laws and old convictions includes adaptation of existential characteristics especially freedom of choice, but the fact of biological differences between the two sexes which gives supremacy to one sex rather the other is still debatable for some feminists:
It usually deals with biologism and naturalism, but women’s essence is also
preoccupied with psychological characteristics which are not seen to reside in Dawalibi 15
nature or biology, such as nurturance, empathy, support, non-competitiveness,
etc. Women's essence may also be attributed to some activities related to social
practices, which may or may not be dictated by biology, such as intuitiveness,
emotional responsiveness, concern and commitment to helping others (Grosz).
The distinction between essence and existence is one of the oldest in philosophy and has very wide applicability and usefulness. Essentialism is as old as Plato and Aristotle.
Before Hegel’s idealism was the Platonic idealism: “Platonic idealism is the earliest known theory of how all known things and concepts have an essential reality behind them, an essence that makes those things and concepts what they are” (Cartwright).
This view is contrasted with non-essentialism, which states that, “for any given kind of entity, there are no specific traits which entities of that kind must possess”.
The idealism of Plato supports certain specific features that are unique of each individual before birth. In other words, an entity is prejudged to have these characteristics already; these features are inherited by nature and not chosen by the human’s free will. For this reason, Platonic idealism contends that an individual’s essence precedes his existence. An individual is predestined to be good or bad regardless of his freewill. As the individual’s freewill is limited, he becomes a stereotype because he only absorbs his society’s convictions and dogmas without being able even to question them. Individuals in the community become just like a photocopier for their society’s traditions, customs and beliefs. “Plato’s forms are regarded as patriarchs to essentialist dogma simply because they are a case of what is Dawalibi 16 intrinsic. The abstract properties that make them what they are. Plato was one of the first essentialists, believing in the concept of ideal forms, an abstract entity of which individual objects are mere facsimiles” (“Essentialism” Wikipedia). The term
‘essentialism’ is attacked by feminist existentialists because essentialism relates women’s submissiveness and dependence to their biological nature. Existentialism, on the other hand, does not consider any predetermined traits or qualities that determine women as submissive or dependent. Despite the metaphysical basis for the term, academics in science, aesthetics, heuristics, psychology, and gender-based sociological studies have advanced their causes under the banner of essentialism. Diana Fuss argues that “Essentialism is most commonly understood as a belief in the real, true essence of things, the invariable and fixed properties which define the ‘whatness’ of a given entity” (“Essentialism” Wikipedia).3
To say that anything ‘exists’ is simply to point to the fact “that it is”, existence is characterized by concreteness and particularity and also by a sheer givenness. A triangle for example is a triangle in essence; it is not a circle or a square or a rectangle.
That means I can only change the form in which something exists. If the existence of anything has to do with the fact “that it is”, its essence consists in “what it is.” The subjective existence of reality precedes and defines its nature; who you are (your essence) is defined by what you do (your existence). The essence of an object is constituted by those basic characteristics that make it one kind of an object rather than another. The
3 Diana Fuss, Louis W. Fairchild Class of ’24 Professor of English, has taught at Princeton since 1988, after receiving her PhD from Brown University in English and Semiotics. Dawalibi 17 essence of a silver dollar, for example, would be described in terms of its color, metallic luster, composition, weight, shape and so on. One would have to mention all the characteristics that are necessary to define this as a dollar rather than anything else. It follows then that essence is characterized by abstractness and universality.
Furthermore, essences lend themselves to the operations of rational thought, to analysis, in ways which the sheer contingency and “thatness” of existence resist.4
Throughout the history of philosophy, sometimes essences and sometimes existences have dominated thought. The whole tradition that stemmed from Plato has exalted essence at the expense of existence. This tradition has seen existence as belonging to the realm of the contingent and changeable. Reason turns away from this realm and looks for unchanging and universal essences, for a realm of forms and ideas.
Throughout the history of philosophy, most philosophers since Plato have held that the highest ethical good is the same for everyone; insofar as one approaches moral perfection, one resembles other morally perfect individuals. However, in the modern philosophy of essence and existence, existentialists believe that the existent, the concrete and the particular very much asserted over the abstract, the essential and the universal.
Existence is more material, tangible and concrete; it is more actual while essence is more spiritual, abstract, universal and metaphysical. Essence is not seen but can be detected because it has effects on existence; it is like morals and souls.
4 In this study, I follow the distinction between essence and existence as terms of philosophy. For more details and a good definition of the terms, see Macquarrie. Dawalibi 18
In his book Existentialism, Macquarrie portrays the image of existence in the western world; that “our ways of thinking have been so dominated by the notion of thinghood as the pragmatic mode of existence”. This way of thinking led to the domination of the existential thinking on every aspect of life. Still, after all, “to assert the existence of the soul might be taken to mean that there exists a subtle and possibly indestructible soul-substance.” But if we want to assert that the soul exists, then we have to find another way that is completely different from the normal thinking. “We have to visualize still another mode of existence appropriate to souls or selves, conceived in a formal rather than a substantial way.” (64)
The problem of essence and existence cuts to the heart of metaphysics, or the study of being qua being. The western philosophy about essence and existence meets with the eastern one. Such Western Philosophy can be traced back to the East. An
Islamic philosophy took on profound significance in the wake of its transmission to
Mediaeval Europe. Among those who talked about essence and existence was the Arab intellectual 'Ibn Sina’, known in English as Avicenna. Avicenna made an essential distinction between essence and existence when he differentiated between the possible and the necessary, Avicenna argues that:
Existents are of two kinds: the first is the “possible,” it can be conceived
essentially (as an essence) without a necessity to conceive it as an existent being,
because its essence is different from its existence. For example, the design of a
house (in one’s mind) does not necessitate its existence in reality. It needs a cause Dawalibi 19
(the builder) to make it exists. It is possible for this cause to determine its
existence or its nonexistence. This being which has the possibility of existence or
nonexistence is called the “possible.” (Al-Allaf 139)
With the idea of the “possible”, Avicenna does not contradict the western atheistic philosophers. Sartre gives a very similar example about the “Possible” that is a
“knife”. Sartre states that the maker creates the image of the knife in his mind before manufacturing it. For this reason the knife’s essence precedes its existence and man is the definer of essence and nothing for him is predefined. For Sartre, “there is no predetermined essence that determines our existence. Man is the one who determines his essence; for this reason his existence precedes his essence” (Peyre 1-15). Man is the necessary being and the origin of all origins who defines his true essence; no thing for man is predetermined. This ideology is similar to Margret Mitchell’s as Mitchell believes that man is the creator of his essence by his free will and commitment. There are no predetermined features or destined qualities that limit the human’s free will and free thinking. While, on the other hand, Faulkner’s ideology is similar to the religious believers like Avicenna regarding the “necessary” being who is God. Faulkner does not neglect the predestined features of humans; these features for Avicenna are the natural tendencies. Faulkner believes in the predetermined essence as there is another mighty creator who made the man; the necessary being:
The second existent, or being, is the “necessary,” it is impossible to conceive this
without existence, as with God, whose essence and existence cannot be Dawalibi 20
separated. Thus, this being does not need a cause to give Him existence because
He is always in existence. To conceive of the necessary as a nonexistent is
impossible. The possible must have a cause to actualize it, and the existence of
this possible will be the effect. A thing cannot be the cause of itself, and the series
of causes and effects cannot regress to infinity. Therefore, there must be an
ultimate cause for the possible, and this is God, the necessary being (Al-Allaf
139).
Avicenna differentiated between essence and existence and elaborated on the relationship between both, but according to modern existentialism, he is not considered existential because modern existentialism insists not only upon the notion of existence over essence but also on freedom, responsibility, subjectivity and choice. Kierkegaard is considered the real establisher of modern existentialism. Though Kierkegaard is a theistic philosopher he believes that existence precedes essence like Sartre. The necessary being for Sartre is ‘the man’ while the necessary being for Avicenna is ‘God’.
Avicenna identified the ultimate cause for the possible. By entailment, he goes back to the origin of all origins, God.
Later in his book 'The healing' or [ash-Shifā’], Ibn Sina says that: Things which
are included in existence can be divided in the mind into two [kinds]. One of
these is that which, when it is considered in itself, does not have its existence by
necessity. And it is clear that its existence is also not impossible, for if its
existence were impossible, it would not be included in existence. This thing is in Dawalibi 21
the domain of possibility. The other of these is that which, when it is considered
in itself, has its existence by necessity (Al-Allaf 140).5
Sartre expressed the same notion but differently. For him, Man is the centre of interest; Man is a project that lives en soi [in-itself] and pour soi [for itself] and this enterprise precedes everything else except itself. This is very similar to Mitchell’s protagonist Scarlett O'Hara who made the enterprise of her life, knew her goal and got released for it; Scarlett made her future herself. A human, after all, has dignity and he looks towards the future, his existence is different from other existed objects. “If existence precedes essence then man is responsible for what exists. The first thing that existentialism aims for is to face man with his reality and to load him with the full responsibility of his existence” (Sartre 46). Sartre believes that existence is an enterprise to define essence and man always tries to identify himself by achieving his abilities.
Existence is freedom because man continually lives in an existent attitude and he is the one who determines his attitude by free choice but he also feels worried and disappointed when he regrets the other choices. Sartre thinks that there is a distance between man and himself and he can never reach himself no matter how hard he tries until he reaches death which is the destiny of all creatures. A human being is no more than the enterprise which he started and planned for himself. Thus, he is no more than the total of his works; he is no more than his life.
5 Avicenna solves a very exciting mathematical equation as he proves that (The “possible” cannot be the cause of its existence and the impossibility of two coequal existents both being necessary). See Al-Allaf 139-47 Dawalibi 22
The philosophy of essence and existence took a completely different tendency or movement in the 19th and 20th centuries. This philosophy in Europe focused mainly on man's existence and with genius philosophers like Soren Kierkegaard and Jean-Paul
Sartre who mainly emphasized the individual's existence, subjectivity, freedom and choice; Existentialism appeared6. Existentialism is taken from the word existence; it means that you are a present being, but man is different from all other existent beings like trees, stones or any other objects because a human being has a mind and by using our minds, we discover ourselves and extract our essence afterwards, that means we are existence first and then essence. Existentialism as a distinct philosophical and literary movement belongs to the 19th and 20th centuries, but elements of existentialism can be found in the thought (and life) of Socrates, in the Bible, and in the work of many premodern philosophers and writers.
The first to anticipate the major concerns of modern existentialism was the 17th- century French philosopher Blaise Pascal. It is considered “anachronistic to describe
Pascal as an existentialist” (Clarke) because Pascal did not call himself existential, but rather he created the original basics of existentialism. “One of the most prominent features of his work is the philosophical reflection on the radical contingency of human affairs. . . He used these reflections to puncture the pride, arrogance, and self-love of those who thought of themselves as superior to the vicissitudes of human life.” (Clarke)
6 For strong points of view on different aspects of the issue, see Guicharnaud 15-20; Dreyfus; Macquarrie and Wild 142-48. Dawalibi 23
Furthermore, Pascal rejected the rigorous rationalism of his contemporary René
Descartes, asserting, in his Pensées (1670), that a systematic philosophy that presumes to explain God and humanity is a form of pride. Like later existentialist writers, Pascal saw human life in terms of paradoxes: The human self, which combines mind and body, is itself a paradox and contradiction.
In the twentieth century, the Danish philosopher, “Soren Kierkegaard is regarded as the founder of modern existentialism” (Marino 3; MacDonald). Soren believes in God but also believes that the belief in God does not limit the human’s freedom of choice and free will. Writing in his Journals, Kierkegaard said: “The thing is to understand myself, to see what God really wishes me to do; the thing is to find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can live and die”7
Other existentialist writers have echoed Kierkegaard's belief that one must choose one's own way without the aid of universal, objective standards. Against the traditional view that moral choice involves an objective judgment of right and wrong, existentialists have argued that no objective, rational basis can be found for moral decisions. The 19th-century German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche further contended that the individual must decide which situations are to count as moral situations.
All existentialists have followed Kierkegaard in stressing the importance of passionate individual action in deciding questions of both morality and truth. They have insisted, accordingly, that personal experience is essential in arriving at the truth. The human
7 The Journals, trans. Alexander Dru (Oxford University Press, 1938). Dawalibi 24 subjectivity and freedom are then, the main aspects of existentialism. The twentieth century, in general, has seen a steady assault against objectivism: “Einstein’s theory of relativity alone cast doubt on the belief that objective knowledge was simply a relentless and progressive accumulation of facts. The philosopher, T.S. Kuhn, has shown that what emerges as a ‘fact’ in science depends upon the frame of reference which the scientific observer brings to the object of understanding” (Selden 106). Thus, the understanding of a situation by someone involved in that situation is superior to that of a detached, objective observer. This emphasis on the perspective of the individual agent has also made existentialists suspicious of systematic reasoning.
Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and other existentialist writers have been deliberately unsystematic in the exposition of their philosophies, preferring to express themselves in aphorisms, dialogues, parables, and other literary forms. Despite their antirationalist position, however, most existentialists cannot be said to be irrationalists in the sense of denying all validity to rational thought8. They have held that rational clarity is desirable wherever possible, but that the most important questions in life are not accessible to reason or science. Furthermore, they have argued that even science is not as rational as is commonly supposed. Nietzsche, for instance, asserted that the scientific assumption of an orderly universe is for the most part a useful fiction.9 Philosophers of existentialism represent more than one ideology; there is the theistic existentialism
8 This notion will be discussed elaborately when analyzing the character of Rhett Buttler in Mitchell’s work Gone with the Wind 9 It’s quite important to show the relationship between existentialism as a philosophy of the twentieth century on one hand and science and rationalism on the other. For more details see Dreyfus and Macquarrie. Dawalibi 25 which is represented by Soren Kierkegaard and Karl Jaspers, and there is the atheistic existentialism that is represented by Martin Heidegger and Jean-Paul Sartre. Margret
Mitchell, in fact, shares the common notion of all existentialist philosophers that is existence precedes essence and her insistence upon freedom, responsibility, subjectivity and choice as a feminist writer makes her a real existential feminist American figure.
Margret Mitchell, as an affected figure of existentialism, applied Kierkegaard’s notion of defying the old convictions and beliefs and stressing the individual’s commitments and subjectivity. “The individual therefore must always be prepared to defy the norms of society for the sake of the higher authority of a personally valid way of life” (Dreyfus). In fact, Kierkegaard’s philosophy reacted against the rationalism and idealism of the German philosopher George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel “who claimed to have worked out a total rational understanding of humanity and history”; Kierkegaard, like all existentialists, did not believe in science or rationalism to explain humans’ behavior. He “stressed the ambiguity and absurdity of the human situation. The individual’s response to this situation must be to live a totally committed life, and this commitment can only be understood by the individual who has made it” (Dreyfus).
In fact, modern existentialism begins with Kierkegaard’s championing of the concreteness of existence against what he took to be the essentialism of Hegel.
Kierkegaard sees that man passes through three different periods in his life: the first period is the sensual period as the child feels the world around him and after it comes the moral period where the child absorbs the social customs, values and morals; in the Dawalibi 26 end comes the religious period where man realizes his existence and becomes an individual in front of God.10
Emmanuel Kant, on the other hand, was an essential philosopher whose philosophy and ideology is similar to Faulkner’s. He sees that every essence especially the humans’ essence is predetermined and specified, while the existential philosophy opposes this determination claiming that man is free and he is the one who determines his essence. In fact, this is the essential difference between existentialism and Kant.
Existentialism reverses the traditional philosophical view that essence ‘the nature’ of a thing is more immutable and fundamental than its existence. Man is born free to decide and choose the way of his life; he is free to act the way he finds suitable to progress; nothing is imposed on him by God or the Patriarchy. To existentialists, “human beings through their consciousness create their own values and determine a meaning for their life because, in the beginning, the human being does not possess any inherent identity or value; by posing the acts that constitute him or her, he or she makes his or her existence more significant” (Breisach 5; Kaufmann 12).
The French intellectuals Jean-Paul Sartre and Simon De Beauvoir together are the most prominent representatives of existentialism in the twentieth century whose philosophy has considerable influence on Margret Mitchell and feminism. Jean Paul-
Sartre helped to develop existential philosophy through his writings, novels, and plays.
He believed that existence precedes essence which means that a personality is not built
10 Translated from: Toward a Philosophical Encyclopedia: Sartre and Existentialism. See Galeb 5-30. Dawalibi 27 over a previously designed model or a precise purpose, because it is the human being who chooses to engage in such an enterprise. Margret Mitchell, as an existential feminist, strongly emphasizes the main existential aspects that are: human freedom, choice, and responsibility. Scarlett O'Hara, as a real representative of Mitchell’s ideology always has the hope and determination to progress. She believes that God would help her if she helps herself, for this reason, she is pragmatic. Scarlett’s strength and confidence emanate deep from her heart and her belief of her strength. “It was not the lifting up of her heart to God that brought this balm, for religion went no more than lip deep with her. It was the sight of her mother’s serene face upturned to the throne of
God and His saints and angels, praying for blessings on those whom she loved”
(Mitchell 44). This idea is also repeated on the tongue of Rhett Butler when he clearly declared that “God is on the side of the strongest battalion!” (Mitchell 71). In Mitchell’s work, the protagonists’ optimism emanates from their deep self-confidence, freewill and determination. For them, “when there is a will, there is always a way”. They never surrender or give up; this ideology, in fact, makes Mitchell a real American existential feminist figure.
It is worth noting that existentialism is a wide philosophical doctrine; it is not only represented by Sartre. If Sartre is explicitly “atheistic and pessimistic”, this does not mean that all existentialists are the same. What all existentialists have in common is the insistence upon freedom, subjectivity, responsibility and choice and the common belief that existence precedes essence. Dawalibi 28
When a human being is born in this world, all other people look at him as an existent object only, but after forty or fifty years, his personality becomes more glazed and molded and his real essence starts to appear and this is what we mean by essence after existence. In fact, we guide ourselves from existence to essence, our life is like an enterprise, we build it since childhood and as much as we are skillful in building up ourselves, our life would become more sublime and noble. And because life is a great enterprise and since we are the ones who are conducting it, then Existentialism insists that we are responsible for our life and our existence. We are responsible because we are free when we choose and we are responsible for the choices that mold our essence.
Jean-Paul Sartre clarifies the notions of freedom and responsibility in his book Being and
Nothingness:
In the treatise Being and Nothingness, the French writer Jean-Paul Sartre reasons
that the essential nothingness of human existence leaves individuals to take sole
responsibility for their own actions. Shunning the morality and constraints of
society, individuals must embrace personal responsibility to craft a world for
themselves. Along with focusing on the importance of exercising individual
responsibility, Sartre stresses that the understanding of freedom of choice is the
only means of authenticating human existence (Cranston 60).
Sartre concentrates on the humans’ freedom of choice to create one’s free personality. Free people are more self-confident and more experienced because they depend on themselves making their decisions. People get more experienced and skilled Dawalibi 29 when take full responsibility of their choices; they make the intolerable situations tolerable because they are very different from normal people. Therefore, an oppressive situation is not intolerable in itself, but once regarded as such by those who feel oppressed the situation becomes intolerable. Each one of us responds differently to the same situation according to his experiences and abilities. The veteran and the long- practiced people would find the intolerable situation tolerable unlike those inexperienced ones. It is also worth mentioning that long experiences glaze one’s personality, people learn to behave according to their environment and education. A man, for example, defines himself as a cruel person by behaving cruelly in his society and when he chooses to be a cruel person at a time when he can choose to be a good kind man. To clarify, it can be said that a man who acts cruelly towards other people is, by that act, defines himself as a cruel man. It is clear that people choose to behave in a certain way because they feel satisfied about the consequences and about their behavior. “Of course, the more positive therapeutic aspect of this is also implied: you can choose to act in a different way, and to be a good person instead of a cruel person.
Here it is also clear that since man can choose to be either cruel or good, he is, in fact, neither of these things essentially.” (Baird)
The idea of absolute freedom of choice raised up this notion, this notion also cancels the old belief that humans are born with certain inherited qualities; or natural qualities; that man is not born generous, conniving, selfish or shrewd but becomes one.
He/she, by his free will defines himself and chooses his apparent qualities: “For Sartre, man is not determined by heredity . . . only to a very limited extent by his past. He Dawalibi 30 himself is his own Prometheus, as Michelet would have put it. He always remains unpredictable, free to break with what he has been and to elect a new path.” (Peyre 37)
Choice, a motif permeating the works of Margaret Mitchell, is a very important prominent aspect of existentialism. One must take a chance, make a choice and changes his life, but scientifically speaking, the human behavior, in fact, is a complicated process affected by one’s psyche, temper, experiences and genes. For this reason, existentialism states that rationalism and science are not enough to explain the human behavior.
Existentialists also state that not even heredity or genes affect one’s freedom or choices.
Humanity's primary distinction, in the view of most existentialists, is the freedom to choose. Existentialists have held that human beings do not have a fixed nature or essence as other animals and plants do; each human being makes choices that create his or her own nature.
Choice is therefore central to human existence, and it is inescapable; even the refusal to choose is a choice. Freedom of choice entails commitment and responsibility.
Because individuals are free to choose their own path, existentialists have argued, they must accept the risk and responsibility of following their commitment wherever it leads. For Sartre, existence precedes essence, “Freedom is existence and in it existence precedes essence. This means that what we do, how we act in our life, determines our apparent “qualities”; I exist by defining myself in the world at each moment.” (Crowell)
In fact, existentialists do not believe in the ultimate meaning of qualities i.e. qualities as innate characteristics of human beings, for them, the meaning is vague or blurred ". . . Dawalibi 31 what we discovered in the course of those years is this, that the words greatness, patriotism, citizen, man, humanism are terribly equivocal, and that man is not justified by the ‘names’ of these characteristics." (Guicharnaud 19)
For existentialists, Humans are born with no predetermined essence or nature until they exist and find themselves in their societies, encounter themselves, surge up in the world, start interacting with their atmosphere and define themselves afterwards.
This idea is manifested in Mitchell’s work Gone with the Wind11. I exist by defining myself in the world at each moment. We absorb the morals and values of our societies and with each experience we go through, a new different person one becomes.
Experiences add a lot to one’s personality and glaze it until one finds his/her true essence in the end. Humans have got different mental abilities, different thinking, and different psyches. All of these differences play a major role in how we choose, how we define ourselves and how we surge up in the world. There is no fixed nature or essence for a human being because man discovers his essence later after he takes several choices in his life and of course our essences differ as our choices. To prove this, let me put forth this example: two real twin sisters, in one family who are brought up in the same house, received the same education and even went through the same experiences but they behave totally differently and they have very different interests and hobbies and they are different in mentality. This explains the unique human essence of each persona. This also explains that human beings respond differently to the same stimulus in accordance with their inclinations because each persona is created in a different way. A brave
11 Chapter four elaborates sufficiently on this idea. Dawalibi 32 person chooses to conquer while a coward chooses to withdraw. Here, Sartre indicates to a very important notion; he says that this is you because this is how you built your personality and you made people look at you this way. Sartre’s close confident Simone de Beauvoir also uses this concept in her feminist existentialism to develop the idea that
“one is not born, but rather becomes a woman” (qtd in Manhon 156).
The persona is affected by the others’ look that either alienates or socializes this persona. An example about the effect of the other look is the extrovert and the introvert personae. The extrovert sees himself as the others' look at him while the introvert concentrates his concerns and interests on himself and on his inner psyche without any need for others or for their care, he adjusts his behavior with regard to his own needs unlike the extrovert who tries to behave in a way that is suitable and appropriate for others.
“Freedom, responsibility, choice and subjectivism are the most important aspects of existentialism.”(Macquarrie 16; Crowell) We are not objects to be used by God or a government or a corporation, nor are we to be ‘adjusted’ or molded into roles. We must look deeper than our roles and find ourselves. So that we do not have a way out but we must choose; I am my choices and I cannot not choose. If I do not choose, that is still a choice. If faced with inevitable circumstances, we still choose how we are in these circumstances. But what can we say about those people who choose to end their lives and commit suicides like Quentin Compson in Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury or those who “wish” to be something – anything, a bird for instance – and then be it? Dawalibi 33
Existentially speaking, according to Sartre’s account; however, this would be a kind of
‘bad faith’. This means that man is defined only insofar as he acts and that he is responsible for his choices.
… there can be few themes, if any, nearer to the heart of existentialism than
freedom. The theme is present in all the existentialist writers. It is prominent in
Kierkegaard . . . the interest in freedom, or rather the passion for freedom, is not
confined to any particular variety of existentialist. Surely two of the greatest
apostles of freedom in the twentieth century have been the atheists Sartre and
Camus. Sartre is just as insistent as Kierkegaard that freedom and existence are
indistinguishable. One does not first exist and then becomes free; rather, to be
human is already to be free. (Macquarrie 177)
Man after all is his experiences and experiments in life. When he becomes an old man, he finds his essence at last. Sartre believes that we are orphans in this world, we do not have a principle for morals or definite goals; we are neglected and free. Freedom is a judgment rather than a trait, “it does not descend upon one like an illumination of delight, a tongue of fire. Freedom does not come laden with comforting presents; it is grave and massive, “a plenitude” “freedom is exile and I condemned to be free.” (Peyre
34-35). For this reason, we are always worried; we are perplexed and confused about how we can choose and plan for our lives and about how we can perform the enterprise of our lives. Within this context, Sartre comments at Dostoevsky’s speech: “If God does not exist so everything becomes allowed.” Of course, this entails that a man becomes a Dawalibi 34 criminal and can do whatever he likes to satisfy his needs. Sartre replies that man is free because he is responsible and these lusts do not lead him, but man leads them and he is responsible how to deal with them. Furthermore, Sartre explains freedom in its broad meanings, the ultimate freedom with no chains. Sartre connects freedom with generosity and existence; he explains freedom in its ultimate meanings. It is the freedom that leads humans to their happiness and welfare.
My existence is, because it is called for. In so far as I assume it, it becomes pure
generosity. I am because I give myself lavishly . . . Instead of feeling ourselves as
superfluous [de trop], we now experience that our existence is prolonged and
willed in its slightest details by an absolute freedom that, at the same time, it
conditions, and that we want to deserve through our own freedom. In this lies
the deepest element of our joy in loving, when it exists: that we feel justified in
existing (Sartre 19).
Sartre explains the freedom in its broadest meanings. Freedom, for him, means choice and responsibility, it is the freedom of ideas and thoughts, freedom of expressing opinions and sharing them, freedom is mutual respect between all individuals in a society.
Margret Mitchell meets with Albert Camus another man of letters in approaching freedom; Camus is a French intellectual writer. He was a contemporary existentialist writer with Sartre who wrote several books about freedom, but Camus differs from Sartre because he insists on the freedom of the country as a whole and not Dawalibi 35 only the individual freedom. In his book Resistance, Rebellion and Death, Camus shows the challenging war against tyranny and slavery: “Paris is fighting today so that France may speak up tomorrow. The people are under arms tonight because they hope for justice for tomorrow” (35). In fact, we can never talk about a free man in an occupied nation. Freedom is one unity i.e. a free man in a free nation. It is clear that the ideas of the two contemporary existentialists, Sartre and Camus, complement and supplement each other because we can never detach man from his society. “the only way of really being a man among men is to assert one’s freedom by rebelling against established orders, mere masks of the absurd” (Guicharnaud 67).
Sartre wants to enlarge the idea of freedom. Freedom is a daring rebellious call against the old convictions, strict traditions and old beliefs. People are obliged to behave and choose according to their societies’ customs, cultures, values, rules, manners, civics and habits; these are the society’s limits. In the end, human beings always try to choose the best of what is available and the best of what they can do. They try to adjust themselves in their societies. “Sartre and Camus want to bring out the irreducible element that distinguishes man from the rest of the world, their interest lies more in its manifestations and creations than in the mechanism of “natures” or
“essences” which are considered as secondary” (Guicharnaud 63). Existentialists believe that it is we who invent our personality and we always try to choose the best of what is available and aspire for the top. This ideology is hated by the stereotypes who represent the old convictions and beliefs. Existentialists describe the coward man as the one who is responsible for his cowardice and he is not a coward because he has a certain Dawalibi 36 physiological or psychological system, but he is a coward because he built himself this way by his doings and the hero built himself on the image of heroism. For Sartre, man is not identified or specified in the beginning but he later formulates himself the way he likes and exists the way he wants. He also thinks that there is no human nature because, for him, there is no creator to imagine it.
Existentialism, phenomenology12 and the modern philosophical movements were also very much influenced by the thoughts of the German philosopher Martin
Heidegger. According to Heidegger, humankind has fallen into a crisis by taking a narrow, technological approach to the world and by ignoring the larger question of existence. People, if they wish to live authentically, must broaden their perspectives.
Instead of taking their existence for granted, people should view themselves as part of being. Heidegger reacted against an attempt to put philosophy on a conclusive rationalistic basis—in this case the phenomenology of the 20th-century German philosopher Edmund Husserl. Heidegger argued that humanity finds itself in an incomprehensible, indifferent world. Human beings can never hope to understand why they are here; instead, each individual must choose a goal and follow it with passionate conviction, aware of the certainty of death and the ultimate meaninglessness of one's life. Heidegger contributed to existentialist thought an original emphasis on being and ontology.
12 Phenomenology: 20th-century philosophical movement dedicated to describing the structures of experience as they present themselves to consciousness, without recourse to theory, deduction, or assumptions from other disciplines such as the natural sciences. Dawalibi 37
In Sartre's book What is Literature? He focuses mainly on man the existent being.
Man is the most important creature in the universe where everything is created for him; the free man is the goal of life. Sartre also focuses on the existent reader who evaluates the work of art. Sartre says that “no book possesses a finished, inherent and external meaning. A novel is not only written but also read; and as the world changes, so must its meaning” (Sartre xii). Existentialism and modern science insist on subjectivism, we can never ignore the role of the seer as a subject to judge any work of art. Sartre says that literature is a mirror of the world and literary men are presenting the world with a new perspective.
Each painting, each book, is a recovery for the totality of being. Each of them
presents this totality to the freedom of the spectator. For this is quite the final
goal of art: to recover this world by giving it to be seen as it is, but as if it had its
source in human freedom . . . The writer chooses to appeal to the freedom of
other men so that, by the reciprocal implications of their demands, they may
readapt the totality of being to man and may again enclose the universe within
man . . . If the painter presents us with a field or a vase of flowers, his paintings
are windows which are open to the whole world (Sartre 41).
Nature or essence cannot be changed but, in the end, it is discovered. Existence does not change essence but precedes it. Man, in the end, is his essence and existence.
We cannot separate these two from each other. The two American writers Faulkner and
Mitchell wrote about the same era but from completely different perspectives, different Dawalibi 38 attitudes and different ideologies. Faulkner has adopted the essential humanistic perspective while Mitchell the feminist existential perspective. Dawalibi 39
Chapter Two Essence and Existence in William Faulkner’s
“A Rose for Emily”
William Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily” is a good example about Faulkner’s ideology and policy in formulating his characters. Faulkner has strong passion and fondness of The Old South; for this reason, he clings strongly to the good old days of
The South and to the old classical traditions of honor and chivalry. Using the decay and corruption of The South after the American Civil War (1861-1865) as a background,
Faulkner portrays the tragedy that occurs when the traditional values of a society disintegrate. Some of his chief concerns are the nature of evil and guilt and the relationship between the past and the present. Despite his preoccupation with depravity and violence, however, Faulkner also writes of people’s capacity to perform acts of nobility and goodness. He writes almost exclusively about The South, but he is not a regional novelist; instead examining universal themes of concern to all humanity.
“Faulkner does not attempt to whitewash The South; he portrays all Southerners, the bigoted, the ignorant, the moderate, the intelligent, the violent, and the humane”
(Everett xii).
“A Rose for Emily” is the first short story that Faulkner published in a major magazine. It appeared in April 30th, 1930, issue of Forum. The story is set in a small town in The South, about late 1800s and early 1900s. The setting of this short story is Dawalibi 40 important because it uncovers the war’s aftermath on the people of The South. Today, the much-anthologized story is among the most widely read and highly praised of
Faulkner’s work. Beyond its lurid appeal and somewhat Gothic13 atmosphere,
Faulkner’s “ghost story,” as he once called it, gestures to broader ideas, including the tensions between North and South, complexities of a changing world order, disappearing realms of gentility and aristocracy and rigid social constraints placed on women. Ultimately, it is the story’s chilling portrait of aberrant psychology and necrophilia14 that draws readers into the dank, dusty world of Emily Grierson.
Emily Grierson is a Southerner. She is an aristocratic lady who lives a luxurious life under the wing of her vigorous rigid strict father. Emily’s father turns down all the suitors who propose to Emily and claims that they are not suitable for her because she belongs to a high noble class. The role of Emily’s father is immutable and unavoidable because he is very powerful and dominating. Miss Emily is raised by her father and is taught that she is of a higher class than the rest of the town. The Griersons, once a prestigious family name, become part of the past and no longer hold such resonance.
Emily is very much affected by her father and she deadly trusts and loves him to the existent that she wants to keep his corpse after his death. The image of the father standing in the foreground while Miss Emily in the background shows the father’s dominant position and the daughter’s subordinating role. Yet, Emily’s reactions to the
13 Gothic literature: type of romantic fiction that predominated in English literature in the last third of the 18th century and the first two decades of the 19th century, the setting for which was usually a ruined Gothic castle or abbey. The Gothic novel, or Gothic romance, emphasized mystery and horror and was filled with ghost-haunted rooms, underground passages, and secret stairways (Redmond). 14 Necrophilia: Sexual desire for dead bodies (Encarta Dictionary). Dawalibi 41 incidents after the war are crucial. She is left after her father’s death alone at home to become an abandoned spinster.
Emily becomes the subject of grief and sadness; all this makes Emily the lady aristocrat who can not manage to adapt to any kind of change. Faulkner portrays his protagonist in The New South to be very dreary and sad; he wants to give the image of
The New South in the eyes of Emily. He says once “Given a choice between grief and nothing, I would choose grief” (Wikiquote). These Pessimistic features like grief, sadness and dread are general characteristics of the Postbellum South. In this story,
Faulkner deals with Emily in particular and with women in general from a humanistic perspective; his trend in his writings is dyed humanly and we can detect that clearly in his speech in Stockholm when he was awarded the noble prize in literature. “. . . the speech that changed the way his readers all over the world viewed his work . . . The speech changed the way the world saw William Faulkner, and brought a whole new interpretation to the stories he created” (Magee 1).
Faulkner believes in the inner ability of man and his will to “prevail”; this entails that Faulkner asserts on the power of the human’s essence “because he has a soul, a spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and endurance.” (qtd. in Magee 1) Faulkner’s ideology and his new look towards man make “Critics and readers take a second look at his writing, interpreting it this time through the eyes of his apparent humanist perspective.” (Magee 1) His ideology in classical humanism is essentially contradicted with the existential thoughts that assert the humans’ existence, responsibility and Dawalibi 42 freedom. Furthermore, Humanism generalizes the idea that goodness and welfare are good characteristics embedded in all humans. For this reason, humanism considers the human’s essence the source where all goodness and truth emanate. From an existential perspective, these characteristics, if they really existed, are not launched unless they are triggered by the human’s fertile existence and one’s free will. Following the humanistic method approaching The New South, Faulkner asserted the human’s essence when repeatedly focusing on the human’s soul and spirit. “I feel that this award was not made to me as a man, but to my work--a life's work in the agony and sweat of the human spirit”. Faulkner concentrates not only on the soul and spirit but also on the
“human’s heart”:
I believe that man will not merely endure: he will prevail. He is immortal,
not because he alone among creatures has an inexhaustible voice, but
because he has a soul, a spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and
endurance. The poet's, the writer's, duty is to write about these things. It is
his privilege to help man endure by lifting his heart, by reminding him of
the courage and honor and hope and pride and compassion and pity and
sacrifice which have been the glory of his past. The poet's voice need not
merely be the record of man, it can be one of the props, the pillars to help
him endure and prevail. (qtd. in Magee 2) Dawalibi 43
Faulkner’s works and writings emanated from The South. He is not like any other writer who wrote about The South because he lived the ordeal himself. He saw the people’s sacrifice and sufferings in the war and after the war. Faulkner portrays the real ugly image of war; war and everything related to it: killing, devastations, destruction, plundering, deterioration and bloodshed but Faulkner faces that with
“courage and honor and hope and pride and compassion and pity and sacrifice”. He obviously believes in the embedded powers of humans and their will to prevail. He also relies upon the role of the literary men to help man; it is the writer’s and the poet’s duty to help man endure by lifting his heart. Faulkner’s writings emanate from long sufferings and experiences in the war.
The Civil War in the United States started in 1861 and ended in 1865. It lasted for about four years but the war’s aftermath was very critical on The South. As life changed after the war, not all people could get along with it. The Southerners tried to adjust themselves with the new changes, but to adapt a new atmosphere and to cope up a new situation needs a lot of stamina and resolution. Faulkner’s work represents the difficulty of trying to maintain the essence of traditional society in a generating world. The
Southerners felt that their existence in The South is no longer as it used to be. Change is something inevitable; new businesses and new buildings appeared. “. . . garages and cotton gins had encroached and obliterated even the august names of that neighborhood; only Miss Emily's house was left, lifting its stubborn and coquettish decay above the cotton wagons and the gasoline pumps-an eyesore among eyesores.”
(Faulkner 1 ‘A Rose for Emily’) These details show that Miss Emily and her house share Dawalibi 44 the same character and the existence of garages and cotton gins wiped out the aristocratic traces in that neighborhood. As life changed, people began to respond, but change is not welcomed and was not easy for many; nevertheless, life must go on and
The Southerners tried to adapt the new changes. Miss Emily, in turn, continually tries to prevent any sort of change through death or other means from occurring in her town.
She is so frightened of change that she would not allow the city to put numbers on her house for mail. “Miss Emily alone refused to let them fasten the metal numbers above her door and attach a mailbox to it. She would not listen to them” (Faulkner 5).
When circumstances get harder, especially in wars, people are driven unwillingly to become more irritable until war ends and stabilization takes place. After that, the aspects of normal life appear again, but not necessarily the same as they used to be. In our story, we have a different unique example, the protagonist Emily Grierson refuses all the new aspects and stays attached to the past. “Alive, Miss Emily had been a tradition, a duty and a care; a sort of hereditary obligation upon the town” (Faulkner 1).
Her existence is mainly at home and she prefers to live in her own world that connects her to The Old South. Miss Emily’s erratic and idiosyncratic behavior becomes outright bizarre, and the reader, like the townspeople in the story, is left wondering how to explain the fact that Miss Emily has spent years living and sleeping with the corpse of
Homer Barron. When her father died, no one doubted her mental powers when she refused to admit her father’s death: “we did not say she was crazy then” (Faulkner 1).
But as a lady aristocrat and an emotional creature, Emily gradually develops a kind of necrophilia affected by her father’s death. This kind of necrophilia is not meant to be Dawalibi 45
“the sexual attraction” to dead bodies in the full sense of the term because Emily does not keep her father’s corpse for sexual desires. She keeps him near her because she refuses to admit his death; she refuses his absence, a matter that is normally and socially understood. Keeping her father’s corpse is publically accepted and the neighborhood sympathizes with Emily and understands her behavior as a lady aristocrat who is very fond of her father.
In fact, Emily develops a kind of a mutiny against fait accompli; against reality.
“Emily seems to be characterized as a crotchety old lady who cannot cope with the changing world” (Everett 165). Emily is in a conflict with the new world, with the
Yankee’s society. Deep in her heart, she is devastated and extremely sad; a matter that pushed her to behave like a crazy woman, but is she really crazy in deed? Emily, like her great-aunt old lady Wyatt is weak in essence. This weakness prevents her from facing the new world and makes her look odd in her behaviors. “…old lady Wyatt, her great-aunt, had gone completely crazy at last”. (Faulkner 2) Her father’s death was like a trigger that launched her embedded predetermined characteristics. “The touch of insanity in the Grierson family is subtly called to the attention of the reader several times“(Everett 165). This touch of insanity is said to be related to genes; therefore related to predetermined essence. The convictional role of Emily Grierson in Faulkner’s policy is essentially predetermined and cannot change and Emily’s behaviors in
Faulkner’s mentality can never change because they are genetic. According to Pierre Dawalibi 46
Bourdieu,15 “although he (Faulkner) duly points out the oddities of Emily’s behavior, he relies on the common representation of aristocracy to suggest that they can be imputed not to madness but to a commitment of aristocratic grandeur and pride” (374
“A Reflecting Story”). This means that Emily, as a lady aristocrat, refuses to surrender; refuses to submit to the changing world. She prefers to keep herself indoors and not to become a Yankee; it is her pride and grandeur. Emily Garrison, after all, could manage to live alone after her father’s death for about forty years. She gives china painting lessons and affords herself and her servant; all of these behaviors cancel the idea of insanity. But why would Faulkner say it like: “we did not say she was crazy then”?
Though the implication is strong that such a label could be applied later, Emily is not crazy but more likely to be psychologically disturbed especially after her father’s death and after the deterioration of The South. Some feminist critics interpret Miss Emily’s illness differently. Sarah Appleton Aguilar, for instance, contends that Miss Emily
“insists on maintaining her own existence, which the townspeople continually refuse to allow as they wish her to sustain her position as icon and memorial to the antebellum
South” (30).
Emily’s reactions towards the townspeople become angrier; she repeats several times that “I have no taxes in Jefferson. Colonel Sartoris explained it to me. Perhaps one of you can gain access to the city records and satisfy yourselves.” (Faulkner 1) It is not the fact that she says this that hints at her psychosis. Rather, it is her insistence against
15 Pierre Bourdieu was a sociologist, anthropologist, philosopher, and renowned public intellectual. For more see The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences in the works cited list. Dawalibi 47 the fact that they are present and her refusal to listen to aldermen at all that makes her more than just stubborn town eccentric. In reading this work, one has the impression that Emily is very much adhering herself to the old traditions and convictions; adhering herself to the fixed essence of The Old South, an essence of a society that is predetermined for her and can never be changed, that is, Emily belongs to a high noble class and would never be satisfied to be in a lower position. The scene at the drug store also proves her irritable stubborn behavior. When the druggist told her that “the law requires you to tell what you are going to use it for . . . Miss Emily just stared at him, her head tilted back in order to look him eye for eye, until he looked away and went and got the arsenic” (Faulkner 3). Arthur Kinney argues that “Miss Emily’s delusions, especially about her father’s death, develop as a defense mechanism, for the death of her father represents “the death of the old order and of herself as well” (94).
Emily could not change and is isolated in her own world of illusions and dreams. She lives in a fantasy world where the people she likes never die. She refuses every kind of change completely; she locks the door on herself for years and refuses to communicate or interact with the world around. She stays neglected and abandoned; her existence is mainly at home. This way, change would be impossible because people usually change when they go through new experiences in life. People change when they interact and communicate with others and with the atmosphere around, and with each experience one goes through, a new different person one becomes. Faulkner mentiones that Emily only changes apparently, her “plumpness in another was obesity in her . . .
She had grown fat and her hair was turning gray. During the next few years it grew Dawalibi 48 grayer and grayer” (Faulkner 1-4). No sign in the story denotes that Emily changes essentially; only apparently. For this reason, Emily is an introvert girl and this is not an acquisition but a nature.16 No one taught Emily to be a solitary; all her acts prove that she is not an outgoing or interactive woman. From an existential point of view, “one exists first, and through one’s acts, one becomes something.”(Cosper) In other words, one’s acts determine one’s personality. The human’s behaviors represent him since he is a free and very responsible person. This entails, existentially speaking, that Emily
Grierson bears the full responsibility about her acts, but of course, Emily does not want to isolate herself from the world; she did not choose to be a spinster, she is victimized and according to her abilities; she found no other way.
Emily is not only victimized and doomed but also fated; Emily cannot but be what she is. She cannot but be a tragedy and a subject of sympathy. Emily is alienated and abandoned and she felt desperate. As if her life ended with her father’s death; death completed her agony and made her completely frustrated: “She was sick for a long time. When we saw her again, her hair was cut short, making her look like a girl, with a vague resemblance to those angels in colored church windows - sort of tragic and serene.” (Faulkner 3) Faulkner skillfully draws the image of Emily after her calamity. Emily encounters her father’s death weakly; she is not prepared for such a big change in her life. The effect of the first shock was very violent on her. An incident like this needs stamina; resolution and great courage, but obviously Emily is not prepared for this. Moreover, Emily is affected by the look of the others towards her especially
16 This idea will be elaborated upon and discussed thoroughly later in the next chapter. Dawalibi 49 after her father’s death. She avoids the others’ eyes; she keeps herself indoors to avoid the others’ look towards her. She only appears occasionally from her house’s windows:
“Now and then we would see her at a window for a moment . . . Now and then we would see her in one of the downstairs’ windows” (Faulkner 4). Sartre states that “all the relationships between humans are shapes of conflicts and contradictions.”
(Cranston 77). He also states that “to feel embarrassed for example is a proof of the existence of others . . . I will not feel embarrassed or shy unless there is another creature in the world who witnesses my doings. I show my existence as the others see me. In other words, I am embarrassed of myself as I seem to the other”17 (Cranston 77).
In fact, Emily is not embarrassed or shy of her doings, but she hides herself from the world because her pride and nobility prevent her to surrender. She does not want to be a subject of schadenfreude18 for anybody. This is clearly detected in Faulkner’s speech: “When her father died, it got about that the house was all that was left to her; and in a way, people were glad. At last they could pity Miss Emily. Being left alone, and a pauper, she had become humanized. Now she too would know the old thrill and the old despair of a penny more or less.”(Faulkner 2) Emily rarely leaves her home because she has the pride and glory of nobility, “Not that Miss Emily would have accepted charity.” (Faulkner 1) Emily belongs to a high aristocratic family. According to
17 This is my translation; the information is taken from a secondary source because the original is not available. 18 According to Encarta Dictionary: Schadenfreude gloating at somebody else's bad luck: malicious or smug pleasure taken in somebody else's misfortune [Late 19th century. < German < Schaden "harm" + Freude "joy"] Dawalibi 50
Bourdieu19, she is noble in blood; noble in essence. “It is the idea of nobility, a socially instituted favorable prejudice . . . functions as a principle of construction of social reality
. . . nobility, as an essence that precedes and produces existence, opens or excludes by definition a whole range of possible.” (371) Emily refuses reality because she is noble and belongs to a high aristocratic family. When her father passes away, her source of power and the one whom she depends on as a woman, she refuses to let his corpse:
“She told them that her father was not dead. She did that for three days, with the ministers calling on her, and the doctors, trying to persuade her to let them dispose of the body. Just as they were about to resort to law and force, she broke down, and they buried her father quickly.” (Faulkner 2)
Emily is a woman; she is delicate and genteel in essence. The way that Emily keeps on from the beginning until the end means that there are certain based qualities and characteristics in her personality, “human-based morality” (Danto). She has the ability that enables her to endure all of those years abandoned and isolated. For years, she could not change the way of life as she lives under the wing of her father. Emily’s father, charged with transmitting these traditions and values to Miss Emily, is rigid in reinforcing these expectations, and in the words of the narrator, the father is a man who had “thwarted her woman’s life so many times” (Faulkner 4) Emily keeps the same characteristics and qualities unchanged from the very beginning until the very end because they are embedded in her. Faulkner, as we have mentioned in the very beginning, believes in humans’ endurance, sacrifice, spirit and soul; he believes in
19 The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Dawalibi 51 humans’ essence. Through his writings and words, there is another proof that he believes in goodness embedded in every human since birth.
Joseph Gold, in his book: A Study in Humanism from Metaphor to Discourse suggests that “goodness is simply in all of the children in Faulkner’s work”:
[T]he child, not yet fully conditioned by usage and acquaintance, assumes
a special significance in Faulkner’s work, because the child, being newer
and less rigid, is capable of the greater sympathy and more ready
willingness to judge each individual as an individual . . . [they] are able
to see with clearer, more innocent eyes, and to judge by more human and
less abstract standards. (qtd. in Magee 4)20
The humanist gives more consideration to the goodness embedded in each human’s essence. For existentialists, no one is born aggressive or evil by nature, but he becomes one. He or she acquires traits and characteristics from the atmosphere around.
Children absorb morals from their parents as they grow up. They reflect their own environment and education. Acquisition can never be neglected but heredity, genes and the natural disposition are also effective principles to be taken into consideration. These effective principles are related to the innateness; to essence. “Alive, Miss Emily had been a tradition, a duty, and a care; a sort of hereditary obligation upon the town”
(Faulkner 1). It is well known that humans do not only inherit physical apparent traits but also innate traits; scientifically speaking, these innate traits are compounded with
20 The original source is (Gold 78). See the works cited list Dawalibi 52 the humans’ genes, (as opposed to the existential notion of a human’s fixed essence).
We do not only ask: “how does he/she looks like?” but we also ask: “What is he/she like?” To be more authentic, according to scientific studies on human genes, not all traits are acquired. For instance, children inherit their physical features from their parents besides the heredity of their inner characteristics like intelligence. The question is: Are we born sensitive and emotional by essence or we “become ones”? Faulkner supports the consolidation of the idea of essence and the innate human qualities embedded in all humans; this is strongly established in the belief of the human’s soul as opposed to the absolute existential notion of traits acquisition.
. . . ,Sir Francis Galton, a British scientist and Darwin’s cousin, argued that
biological inheritance is far more important than environment in
determining character and intelligence. This theory, known as
hereditarianism, met considerable resistance, especially in the United
States. Sociologists and biologists who criticized hereditarianism believed
that changes in the environment could produce physical changes in the
individual that would be passed on to future generations (Bannister).
Basically, it seems that no element can be ignored. Emily is affected by her environment as she is also affected by her genes. This effect is absolutely unavoidable.
The effect of the environment along with Emily’s genes made the physical changes in her. All these conditions together formulate Emily; the introvert girl. Nevertheless, still the idea of essence and existence is more controversial. Essence is represented by genes Dawalibi 53 and soul from one part and Existence is represented by the freewill and commitment from the other. “Weismann reemphasized the role of natural selection by arguing that a person’s characteristics are determined genetically at conception.” (Bannister)
The allegations of noble or superior groups are repeated in our story of Emily
Grierson; Emily’s father turns down all the suitors who propose to Emily professing that no one is suitable for his daughter. The Griersons regard themselves as very important and the outside world as vulgar full of people inferior to them. They belong to two entirely different worlds. After her father’s death, Miss Emily shut herself up in the house, retreating to her own world of the past. This is clearly a kind of superiority and high ranking status above the others. Another example of this “superiority” is the status of African-Americans before the emancipation proclamation. In our story, the
African-American Stereotype Tobe stays very faithful to his masters; he is the only source of life at the Griersons’ house with no change at all and with very little information about him. Tobe, like many other Negroes in the United States, is a human being in essence but he is defined by what he does (his existence). The authentic image and the existence of African-Americans is presented mainly by Faulkner as workers:
“Colonel Sartoris, the mayor –he who fathered the edict that no Negro woman should appear on the streets without an apron- remitted her taxes” (Faulkner 1). One can clearly see that Colonel Sartorius’s intentions are to enforce rules in which African
Americans are to be seen as workers, they should not be seen out of labor. Dawalibi 54
Existentially speaking, African-Americans’ existence in The South defines them as workers only, but Faulkner is more humanitarian in conveying the real sufferings of
African Americans without any prejudice. The word “negro” is mentioned in this short story thirteen times. Tobe, the African servant, is commonly said as the shadow of Miss
Emily who follows Miss Emily everywhere she goes. Faulkner despises slavery and racism, but he admires much of the chivalry and honor of The Old South.
This superiority of some racial groups over others is called in science:
“Eugenics”. The term coined by Sir Francis Galton in 1883. “Eugenists claimed that particular racial or social groups—usually wealthy Anglo-Saxons—were “naturally” superior to other groups.” (Bannister) The determination of this debate came in the twentieth century after the American biologist James Watson and British biologist
Francis Crick successfully described the structure of DNA molecule21:
During the 1960s anthropologists interested in the influence of DNA on
human behavior produced studies of the biological basis of aggression,
territoriality, mate selection, and other behavior common to people and
animals. . . . In the early 1970s American psychologist Richard J.
Herrnstein revived the social Darwinist argument that intelligence is
mostly determined by biology rather than by environmental influences
(Bannister).
21 DNA is a substance carrying organism's genetic information: a nucleic acid molecule in the form of a twisted double strand double helix that is the major component of chromosomes and carries genetic information. DNA is the means by which hereditary characteristics pass from one generation to the next. It is the building block of all life. Full form is deoxyribonucleic acid. (Encarta Dictionary) Dawalibi 55
According to this excerpt, it is not always that “we become ones” it is not always that we acquire everything from the atmosphere around but this consolidates the idea of inheriting characteristics. In the previous chapter, to elaborate on the same issue, the study showed that a man can not behave oppositely to his genes, if this behavior emanates from his nature, from his DNA molecule: “. . . the more positive therapeutic aspect of this is also implied: you can choose to act in a different way, and to be a good person instead of a cruel person. Here it is also clear that since man can choose to be either cruel or good, he is, in fact, neither of these things essentially.” (Baird). This is essence; Emily’s genes are more dominating especially with very little friction with the world around. And because this is a controversial issue, let’s say that there is little hope for Emily’s behavior to be moderated and refined, but this hope vanishes when there is not any kind of communication or interaction with the atmosphere around. Human nature exists; no doubt there are common shared characteristics common to all humans.
Similarly, there are special traits for each. This is proved in the Natural Law (ethics):
. . . in ethical philosophy, theology, law, and social theory, a set of principles,
based on what are assumed to be the permanent characteristics of human nature
that can serve as a standard for evaluating conduct and civil laws. It is
considered fundamentally unchanging and universally applicable . . . Thus,
natural law may be considered an ideal to which humanity aspires or a general
fact, the way human beings usually act. (Lynch). Dawalibi 56
Opposite to this conception, the existentialism theory based on Sartre’s conceptions cancels the essence thoroughly. It is more than that; it considers science and religion as constraints which limit our freedom:
Two central existential doctrines claim that there is no fixed human essence
structuring our lives and that our choices are never determined by anything
except our own free will. In making choices in life, we determine our individual
selves. These doctrines imply that human beings have enormous freedom.
Existentialists maintained that the human ability to make free choices is so great
that it overwhelms many individuals, who experience a ‘flight from freedom’ by
falsely treating religion, science, or other external factors as constraints and limits
on individual freedom. (Carpenter)
It is certainly that Emily would have liked to be a perfect lady with sublime noble features; she would not have chosen to be alone, sad and isolated, not only she but any woman in her shoes would have chosen to be the best. How can she ever be?
This question revolves around the absolute infinite unlimited freedom of existentialism.
No matter how hard we try, we can never reach the absolute freedom because it is a kind of perfect ideal freedom that is not applicable to our life. Existentialism offers a way to confront life and to discover the dark side of it. This theory has applications to treat illnesses like Emily’s situation; it is the Existential therapy. “Existential therapists help their clients confront and explore anxiety, loneliness, despair, fear of death, and the Dawalibi 57 feeling that life is meaningless.” (Sharf) This kind of therapy is psychiatric as it cancels the biological treatment actually:
. . . based on a philosophical approach to people and their existence, existential
therapy deals with important life themes. These themes include living and dying,
freedom, responsibility to self and others, finding meaning in life, and dealing
with a sense of meaninglessness. More than other kinds of therapists, existential
therapists examine individuals' awareness of themselves and their ability to look
beyond their immediate problems and daily events to problems of human
existence. The first existential therapists were European psychiatrists trained in
psychoanalysis who were dissatisfied with Freud's emphasis on biological drives
and unconscious processes. (Sharf)
The metaphorical “Rose for Emily” is the narrator’s way of honoring and paying tribute to a woman who had suffered years in silence. This story symbolizes the major conflict represented by The Southern pride on one part and the northern influences on the other. It is the north that had argued for the abolition of slavery, not The South.
Emily’s relationship to Homer Barron, her lover, could be seen as an extension of this
North-South-tension. There is also a deep conflict between change and resistance to change. Emily’s decay is a metaphor for the death of Southern pride, the death of the old-fashioned values. In the light of all the explained details of “A Rose for Emily”, it can be said that the significance behind calling this work “A Rose for Emily” is very humanistic. It is a call for sympathy, tender and mercy towards the “fallen monument”, Dawalibi 58
Emily. “Poor Emily” was repeated five times within this short story. Emily, after all, is a victim of war; a victim of her existence in The New South. Everything changed in The
South. The Old South represented chivalry, wealth, plantations and glory but the war’s results were devastating on Emily. After her father’s death, Emily descends gradually.
“Emily Grierson in retrospect becomes pathetically and fallibly human, the sympathy of the reader is aroused, and the story ends poignantly, superbly” (Everett 167)22.
Faulkner in his attempt to give us the real image of war through his characters is authentic, omniscient and actual because he heard a lot of stories about The Civil War and because his family had lived in Mississippi since before the Civil War. From his perspective, he wants Emily to be a subject of sympathy and mercy because she is the victim of war. While, from an existential point of view, Emily is absolutely free and completely responsible for her actions and fully aware of what she is doing. Emily is free to choose and she has chosen to complete her life the way she wanted. Even though the existential perspective bears Emily the full responsibility for every decision she took in her life, from the same perspective, there is a kind of sympathy with her because according to Simon de Behavior, Emily is not created a woman, “but becomes one”.
Emily is not only a victim of war, but also of her patriarchal society; the society that enforces very strict rigid constraints placed on women. Faulkner’s work is a call for sympathy with Emily in particular and with women in general. He could smartly draw the sympathy of his readers towards his protagonist; to the extent that made the readers
22 First published Forum, LXXXIII (April 1930), 233-8. First collected in These 13 (1931) and included in Collected Stories (1950). Dawalibi 59 feel that there is no murder at all. According to Pierre Bourdieu “. . . the meaning of words and actions is predetermined by the social image of the person who produces them, and, in the case of a person “above all suspicion,” the very idea of murder is excluded; the anticipations of common sense are stronger than the self-evidence of facts” (372). Emily is a result of Faulkner’s thoughts about The South; she is
“humanized” and a subject of sympathy and no chance for a change.
Faulkner not only presents the essence of humans, but also the essence of The
South. It is the chivalrous South. Existence changed to make a new essence, but Emily’s house is still “stubborn and coquettish”, the house represents the sentimental nostalgia of The South. The town is essentially Southern but becomes existentially northern. In the next chapter, the study elaborates more on Faulkner’s characters and the way he saw The South. Dawalibi 60
Chapter Three
Essence and Existence in William Faulkner’s
The Sound and the Fury
The Sound and the Fury is one of Faulkner’s best works23 and is a good example about Faulkner’s humanistic contemplations in formulating his characters. Faulkner could smartly join the humanistic philosophy with literature to formulate excellent unique works of art. In The Sound and the Fury, we experience three brothers’ obsessions with their sister Caddy; in a tumultuous disordered Postbellum South, the Compson family – like many families in The South - could hardly adapt to the new atmosphere.
They became alienated in their same existence; in the Yoknapatawpha county; Jefferson.
Faulkner believed in the humans’ ability to prevail, persist and progress; he has got universal thinking about the human race. “Faulkner maintains almost throughout his canon a distrust of highly educated or sophisticated characters . . . he implies that the more primitive representatives of the human race are near the universal elements of man’s common humanity” (Everett xii - iii).
Faulkner’s characters essentially dislike change; they preserve certain characteristics and qualities from the very beginning until the very end. In the novel, one could know that characters follow certain way in conducting their living toward their destiny. “The behavior of the Compson children is an innocent anticipation of
23 According to Wikipedia encyclopedia, The Sound and the Fury is considered among the first 100 best English novels ever written. Dawalibi 61 their destinies, each shows himself as he will later become” (Howe 34). The universality in Faulkner’s works is the infinite ability to prevail. It is shared among humans’ essence because “Essence is characterized by abstractness and universality” (Macquarie).
Faulkner’s humanistic ideology was reflected clearly on his writings and opinions. Stephen Hahn in his article “Humanism” explicated this ideology and also presented Faulkner as a definer of it:
. . . despite its amorphous history, the outlines of the humanistic tradition
are clear enough to suggest seeing Faulkner as not only included in the
tradition but as one who defines its future . . . humanism asserts a dignity
to the place human beings occupy, believes in a common nature and
universal values, and shapes liberal institutions to harness human powers
for the improvement of human society. In sum, humanism sees humanity
as having a spiritual nature as well as various material cultures (185).
In the light of this ideology we can have another meaning of Faulkner’s works and we can see these works from a different perspective; the assertion over man’s inner power, common nature and universal values give Faulkner’s works a new dimension; it is the assertion of the human’s essence. It is Faulkner’s “deep and profound humanitarianism. Human-centered humanitarianism is a constant theme in Faulkner’s works” (Yanhong 55). To put it in Faulkner’s words: “No man can write who is not first a humanitarian” (Wikiquote). Faulkner was a lettered man who descended from an upper-middle elite class. In his works, he advocated the traditional ideals of the elite Dawalibi 62 class that held “strong convictions that the poor should remain where they are – unthreatening to the established order” (Provosty and Donovan). This ideology reflected his works; Faulkner wanted to keep the essence of things as they are; he did not want change. While war brought up many changes for The South, Faulkner yearned for The Old South; the traditional South of chivalry, moral strength and perseverance.
Faulkner’s humanistic writings emanated from his opposition to the change brought after war.
Faulkner’s own humanism can be seen most directly in three features of
his fictional work. The first of these is the place occupied by the human
capacity to struggle with oppositions, the striving of individuals and
communities with the complexity of their history and present moment.
Perhaps this can be seen best in his ‘heart’s darling,’ Caddy Compson
(Munson 186).
As literary philosophical terminologies, essence and existence are rarely discussed or utilized anymore; yet, they offer a framework to understand how
Faulkner’s characters were guided and destined. In The Sound and the Fury, Caddy
Compson is perhaps the most important figure in the novel, as she represents the object of obsession for all of her brothers. As a child, Caddy is somewhat headstrong, but very loving and affectionate. These qualities accompany her from the very beginning till the end of the novel. She steps in as a mother figure for Quentin and Benjy in place of the self-absorbed Mrs. Compson. Caddy’s muddying of her underwear in the stream as a Dawalibi 63 young girl foreshadows her later promiscuity. Caddy does feel some degree of guilt about her promiscuity because she knows it upsets Benjy so much. “Caddy, woman and essence of woman, a being with whom Faulkner felt in such close relationship that she could only be described through an aura of epithets” (qtd in Whitfield 47)24. In The
Sound and the Fury, characters make desperate attempts to avoid change. Caddy escapes the household while her brother Quentin commits suicide.
The story of The Sound and the Fury is mainly a tragedy of “two lost women” (qtd
Cowan 16): Caddy and her daughter, Miss Quentin. Faulkner’s main concern about women in his works is that they are subjects of sympathy and solicitude unlike existentialists and existential feminists25 who call for the freedom of women and their absolute equality with men. It is Caddy Compson who was the most important figure in
Faulkner’s work. He started the novel with her and completed it for her. “I realized the symbolism of the soiled pants, and that image was replaced by one of the fatherless and motherless girl climbing down the drainpipe to escape from the only home she had, where she had never been offered love or affection or understanding” (16)26. Faulkner describes Caddy in the eyes of her brothers, as a sister and a mother figure; Caddy is a very compassionate, loving and caring woman. William Faulkner tells that “Caddy was still to me too beautiful and too moving to reduce her to telling what was going on, that
24 Original Source: Michael Cresset, “Psychological Aspects of Evil in The Sound and the Fury” The Merrill studies in The Sound and the Fury ed. Meriwether, James B (Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing co., 1970), p.116. 25 Next chapter tackles this issue in detail. 26 Taken from the interview with jean Stein, 1956. Dawalibi 64 it would be more passionate to see her through somebody else’s eyes, I thought”27
(Cowan 18). She is the source of affection for her idiot brother Benjy and an object of obsession for all of her brothers. Her daughter, Miss Quentin, inherited some of her mother’s characteristics and they became part and parcel of her essence. Miss Quentin is even more stubborn, headstrong and worldly than her mother. Jason makes Miss
Quentin’s life unendurable, as he compares her morals to her mother's and what he believes to be the morals of “nigger wenches” (Faulkner 175 The Sound and the Fury).
She is at the point of exploding: “I don't care,” she says, “I'm bad and I'm going to hell, and I don't care. I'd rather be in hell than anywhere you are.” (Faulkner 153). In her words, we detect the essence of an irritable, quick-tempered and very doomed girl. Miss
Quentin feels she is fated to be bad and had no choice. Her words also convey the same hopelessness her mother had felt in the Compson household years before. Jason feels that Quentin is immoral because she has it “in her blood” (Faulkner 194). This suggests that there is something genetic; innate features that cannot be changed. “Like I say you can't do anything with a woman like that, if she's got it in her blood, you can't do anything with her. The only thing you can do is get rid of her, let her go and live with her own sort“(Faulkner 194).
In The Sound and the fury, we do not only experience the characters’ opposition to change, but we also experience the predetermination of incidents. Quentin, the eldest of the Compsons’ children, is a sensitive bundle of neuroses. “. . . he was even from childhood a very sensitive person, he developed a sense of honor and propriety for the
25 In answering one of the questions during the discussions at the University of Virginia, 1957-58. Dawalibi 65 acts of human beings” (Everett 105-06). He is intelligent, but preoccupied with a very traditional Southern code of conduct and morality. This Southern code defines order and chaos within Quinine’s mentality, and causes him to idealize universal, abstract concepts such as honor, virtue, and feminine purity. The code preoccupies Quentin with blind devotion to abstract concepts that he is never able to act upon assertively or effectively. It is in his essence, the abstractness and universality of concepts. Quentin could never make his conception of life fit the realities. “He could not adapt, he has not been regulated to the world’s chronology, to the world’s pattern, to the world’s standards” (Everett 106). Quentin’s obsession with Caddy’s promiscuity led him to commit suicide by drowning himself in The Charles River just before the end of his first year at Harvard University. “Caddy's sin is ineradicable in Quentin's eyes, and has destroyed all of the order in his shallow existence” (Whitfield 42). From an existential perspective, Quentin is completely free to decide and is completely responsible for his choices. Nevertheless, Jean-Paul Sartre himself argues in an essay about time in The
Sound and the Fury, that “the approaching suicide . . . is not in the realm of human choice. Quentin cannot, for one second, conceive of the possibility of not killing himself.
The suicide is an issue already determined something which he approaches blindly without either desiring or conceiving it” (Hoffman and Vickery 230). In the light of this, we have a clear message that Quentin is fated; he cannot avoid killing himself because
“Suicide is not consciously chosen, for it is inevitable” (Hoffman and Vickery 230). Dawalibi 66
It is worth noting that existentialists are only concerned with the science of ontology28 i.e. only the physical world; there is no second layer for them. They are not interested in other branches of metaphysics29. They just believe in the world of existence as a creator of essences. There are no previous human qualities or characteristics that determine one’s personality. For them, man in the beginning is nothing; a blank sheet.
Two central existential doctrines claim that there is no fixed human
essence structuring our lives and that our choices are never determined by
anything except our own free will. In making choices in life, we determine our
individual selves. These doctrines imply that human beings have enormous
freedom. Existentialists maintained that the human ability to make free choices is
so great that it overwhelms many individuals, who experience a ‘flight from
freedom’ by falsely treating religion, science, or other external factors as
constraints and limits on individual freedom (Carpenter).
The essence of human beings is only defined after their long existence and long struggling. There are not biological or psychological effects which determine or affect the choices or freedom of human beings. Man is fully responsible; fully free. “. . . man must create his own essence: it is in throwing himself into the world, suffering there,
28 Study of existence: the most general branch of metaphysics, concerned with the nature of being. Theory of existence: a particular theory of being. [Early 18th century. < modern Latin, "study of being" < Greek ont- "being"] (Encarta Dictionary) 29 Metaphysics, branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of ultimate reality. Metaphysics is customarily divided into ontology, which deals with the question of how many fundamentally distinct sorts of entities compose the universe, and metaphysics proper, which is concerned with describing the most general traits of reality. These general traits together define reality and would presumably characterize any universe whatever. Because these traits are not peculiar to this universe, but are common to all possible universes, metaphysics may be conducted at the highest level of abstraction. Ontology, by contrast, because it investigates the ultimate divisions within this universe, is more closely related to the physical world of human experience (Redmond). Dawalibi 67 struggling there, that he gradually defines himself30” Existentialists do not believe in fate or destiny especially those who are atheists. Nevertheless, still “Many critics argue
Sartre’s philosophy is contradictory. Specifically, they argue that Sartre makes metaphysical arguments despite his claiming that his philosophical views ignore metaphysics” (Heidegger). As a matter of fact, Faulkner and the existential thinker Jean-
Paul Sartre were contemporaries, but Sartre’s view about Faulkner was ambivalent31.
Sartre’s view, however; is extremely existential for this reason he judges Faulkner’s work from his own perspective. In “Time and Destiny in Faulkner”, Sartre says that:
“Faulkner’s despair seems to me to precede his metaphysics.” Still, after all, Sartre does not call Faulkner an existentialist thinker or writer but for him “Faulkner uses his extraordinary art to describe our suffocation . . . I like his art, but I don’t believe in his metaphysics” (Sartre 93).
Consequently, this impels us to say that Faulkner included metaphysical notions in his works of art like universal abstract issues. In the same context, Faulkner believes that there are human qualities embedded in one’s psyche since birth and Faulkner’s characters are unchanged preserving certain way of behavior; for this reason “in
Faulkner’s work, there is never any progression, never anything which comes from the future” (Sartre 88). Everything stays as it is. “Mrs. Compson, for example, is a self- absorbed hypochondriac; Quentin, the oldest child, is a sensitive bundle of neuroses;
Caddy is stubborn, but loving and compassionate and Jason has been difficult and
30 Taken from “Characterizations of Existentialism” A propos de l'existentialisme: Mise au Point (Action, 29 December 1944) 31 For more information see Moore P.14. Dawalibi 68 mean-spirited since birth and is largely spurned by the other children32”. In Faulkner’s works, the human choice depends not only on the full responsibility or the desire to choose such and such, but rather, the circumstances around; life’s long experiences and human nature affects one’s choice. If the human nature is of one’s essence, then the existential therapy states that: “A person can choose to act in a different way, and to be a good person instead of a cruel person. Here it is also clear that since humans can choose to be either cruel or good, they are, in fact, neither of these things essentially”
(Baird). Then choice depends on each person’s nature and it is each one’s nature that make him/her behave unconsciously, while when trying to choose to behave opposite his habits, he/she behaves consciously; just like children when they try to learn their mother tongue and the second language. On the other hand, Existentialists argue that man creates his human nature and his essence; completely disregarding all the other conditions that affect the human choice: “If man as the existentialist sees him is not definable, it is because to begin with he is nothing. He will not be anything until later, and then he will be what he makes of himself. Thus, there is no human nature, because there is no God to have a conception of it” (Kaufman).
The reader of Faulkner’s works experiences the predetermination of the characters’ demeanors. The characters tend to have a certain way of conducting, managing and behaving. Their behaviors are based on their predetermined human characteristics. “Their behaviors are innocent anticipation of their destinies; each shows himself as he will later become” (Howe 34). Faulkner starts his novel with the speech of
32 SparkNotes editors Dawalibi 69 an idiot; the opening reveals Faulkner’s technique and conception about the essentiality of human beings. Dilsey and Caddy mainly dealt with Benjy out of their human affection and sympathy, while we find Jason is very cruel and vicious towards him.
Benjy was viewed by other characters as disgrace and menace, but he is innocent in heart and very emotional towards those who care about him. The idea of human essence is mostly manifested in Benjy because he can never adapt or adjust himself without the help of others; this is how Faulkner imaged Benjy:
I became interested in the relationship of the idiot to the world that he was in but
would never be able to cope with and just where could he get the tenderness, the
help, to shield him in his innocence. I mean ‘innocence’ in the sense that God had
stricken him blind at birth, that is mindless at birth, there was nothing he could
ever do about it. (14)
Luster comically emphasizes the fact that Benjy is the very essence of meaninglessness when he protests to Dilsey. "I ain't lying. Ask Benjy ef I is." He knows that Benjy can neither confirm nor deny anything. Though Benjy is severely mentally retarded; nevertheless, Benjy is the only one of all characters who truly takes notice of the
Compsons progressing decline. Faulkner’s humanistic message is not to underestimate a character or a person because each has got something unique in him/her. Benjy is viewed by other characters –particularly those who love him Caddy and Dilsey – as having “certain particular and extraordinary powers of perception. Roskus, Dilsey’s husband and the Compsons’ servant, tells that Benjy ‘knows a lot more than folks think’ Dawalibi 70
(Hoffman and Vickery 214). In fact, Benjy behaves according to his mere natural disposition. Though he is considered idiot, he has “the instinctive and intuitive power to differentiate between life-encouraging actions and life-injuring actions” (Hoffman and Vickery 214). His instinctive responses to objects used to symbolize positive values in human experience: “Faulkner‘s steadily developing emphasis on the value of certain kinds of instinctive responses in human experience” (Hoffman and Vickery 220). This emphasis over man’s internal instinctive experiences is an emphasis over man’s internal ability to prevail and persist as Faulkner phrases it; it is an emphasis over man’s essence.
Benjy’s reactions towards Caddy and towards his family emanate from his natural disposition; he rejects Caddy when she puts the lipstick or perfume. He has a remarkable natural facility that enables him to differentiate between what is evil and what is good. Caddy, for example, “smells like trees” when she is tender, caring and compassionate, but he rejects Caddy when she meets someone of her paramours and he remarks that she no longer “smells like tress”. “Consequently the reader comes to accept Benjy as a spokesman for what is natural and therefore good, as opposed to that which is sophisticated and disingenuous” (Everett 104). When Caddy left, she created a vacuum in Benjy’s life that caused him grief and loneliness because she was the source of affection and satisfaction to him. Benjy is essentially and spiritually emotional, he starts moaning whenever he hears her name. Dawalibi 71
In answering a question whether Benjy can feel love or not33, Faulkner states that
Benjy “recognized tenderness and love though he could not have named them . . . and it was the threat to tenderness and love that caused him to bellow when he felt the change in Caddy” (Stein), it is quite clear that Benjy’s reactions towards change in his surrounding come from his mere natural essence. His reactions are predetermined and anticipated. As a humanist, William Faulkner’s work is a call for sympathy and mercy;
Faulkner could smartly image an idiot’s position in his society. Though Benjy is said to have very unique inner powers of anticipation and prediction, he felt neglected, alienated and abandoned. Faulkner’s last words about Benjy epitomize all the subject matter; “the only emotion I can have for Benjy is grief and pity for all mankind” (Stein).
With very little experience about the world, Benjy represented Faulkner’s real humanistic mentality about human beings since Benjy has got based characteristics, values and behaviors which, in turn, represent the human’s based morality.34 “Roskus says: he knows lot more than folks thinks . . . he sees things that other Compsons do not or will not see. He observes scenes that subtly explain many secrets to the reader. He watches Mr. Compson becoming a helpless alcoholic; he sees Caddy with her lovers; … he sees his mother’s interest only in herself” (qtd in Everett 102-103).
The reader of The Sound and the Fury would have the feeling of the character’s perplexity because of their floundering adjustment after The Civil War; Faulkner’s scrambled and odd technique supports the confused unsettled change in The South.
33 An interview with Jean Stein, 1956 34 The idea was taken from the definition of Humanism in Encarta Encyclopedia. Dawalibi 72
Sartre’s first notion about the novel is “its technical oddity”; he asks:”why has Faulkner broken up the time of his story and scrambled the pieces?” (Sartre 87). As a matter of fact, the confusion of time in the novel resembles in essence the confusion of characters.
Time is essentially different for Faulkner’s characters because time is what they really feel not what clocks tell them. As Faulkner phrases it: “Clocks slay time. . . time is dead as long as it is being clicked off by little wheels; only when the clocks stop does time come to life” (Wikiquote). In general, Faulkner’s characters are blockaded by time. Time brings change and this change requires new adaptations and adjustments especially in
Postbellum Southern America.
In fact, the concept of time for Faulkner is different; Faulkner brings the highest essential evidence to existence first regardless its hierarchy and this constitutes its essence. “In The Sound and the Fury, nothing happens, everything has happened. This is what enables us to understand that strange formula of one of the heroes: “I am not is, I was”. In this sense also, Faulkner can make of man a being without future, sum of his climactic experiences, sum of his misfortunes” (Hoffman and Vickery 227). This makes
Faulkner’s heroes bound to the past; past which they cannot “dismiss”. This is “when fate appears”. Being the past, it is untouchable, “and that is why it is also destiny”
(Pouillon 81). As for Faulkner’s concept of the present, it is not a circumscribed or sharply defined point between past and future. “His present is irrational in its essence; it is an event, monstrous and incomprehensible, which comes upon us like a thief – comes upon us and disappears. Beyond this present, there is nothing, since the future does not exist” (Hoffman and Vickery 226). Dawalibi 73
Through the novel, we experience different concepts of time for each character and this is attributed to the unique essence of each character though they live in the same household. Benjy, for instance, is completely unaffected by the passing of time, which prevents him from progressing in life. In addition, Benjy also experiences flashbacks. These flashbacks are symbolic of Benjy’s inability to comprehend time and the effects it has on his life. Whereas Quentin is constantly living in the past, unwilling to observe what is going on around him. Quentin is the character most severely affected by time because “time brought only defeat” (Dixler 27). The continuous stress leads to his ultimate decision to commit suicide. “Time is Quentin’s great enemy because time brings change . . . The way to defeat change is to defeat time, and the ultimate way to defeat time is through death” (Cox 135). For Dilsey, time is a continuum, since she is the character that has seen the beginning of the Compson family, as well as its ultimate fate.
As Dilsey says in the novel: “I’ve seed de first en da last. . . I seed de beinnin’, en now I see de endin’”. For Jason, time is intertwined with his main obsession, money. Jason believes that the faster he can obtain money, the more prosperous he will be in life.
However, this constant obsession leads Jason to make some consequential decisions, which represent the negative effects of making time, one’s obsession. While Caddy has no section of her own, Caddy is the character that properly deals with the concept of time, and moves on from the past unlike the rest of her family. Caddy is the one positive example of time within the novel, and promotes Faulkner’s main theme of the novel, how to properly deal with change. Dawalibi 74
The American civil war has changed the general discourse of life in The South.
For this reason, The Southerners have become anguished and severely grieved because of its outcomes; and this is natural. Faulkner then, when he tried to convey the real image of The South, included existential aspects like pessimism, alienation, anxiety, despair and estrangement; these aspects are general traits tinted in postbellum
American South. “The war is the great and terrible event of American history, and its enormity has never been comprehended, even by the most gifted of American writers, although its tragic consequences for the consciousness of the succeeding generations have been embodied in Faulkner’s fiction” (Salzman 734). Consequently, the moral message behind this novel “is not necessarily a negative or pessimistic one, that the world simply has no meaning. It says rather that as long as man is in time he has the ability to make choices, and must take responsibility for those choices” (Cox 139).
War is very cruel and ugly; with everything related to it: devastation, killing, bloodshed, expulsion and destruction. People find themselves forced to choose unwillingly. Quentin chose to commit suicide; Caddy chose to escape the Compsons’ household while Jason chose to be vicious and malicious. Faulkner’s art emerged from the essence of The South “this art, which has no place in Southern life, is almost the sum total of The Southern artist. It is his breath, blood, flesh, all. Not so much that it is forced back upon him or that he is forced bodily into it by the circumstance; forced to choose, lady and tiger fashion, between being an artist and being a man”(411)35.
35 This excerpt is taken from “An Introduction to The Sound and the Fury Mississippi Quarterly 26 (Summer 1973). Dawalibi 75
When reading The Sound and the Fury, one would recognize that there are fossilized features attributed to each character as part and parcel of his/her essence.
Critics of Faulkner’s works astonishingly elucidate that Faulkner’s characters can be labeled on a certain manner since birth. While existentialists, on the other hand, strongly insist that a human is not predetermined or born with certain qualities or features. Man is the one who defines himself, nothing defines him. Faulkner himself when talking about Jason; attributes all devilish features to him. “That Jason who represented complete evil, he’s the most vicious character in my opinion I ever thought of” 36 Jason, the most vicious character, “has been difficult and mean spirited since birth and was largely spurned by the other children37”. Jason does not love even his mother,
Faulkner tells us, for he is “a sane man always,” and love always involves a contradiction of such sanity (Brooks 67).
Dilsey, in The Sound and the Fury, is the faithful breeder of the Compsons’ children, has got the most sublime and noble features of sacrifice and loyalty. Faulkner approached not only the white, but all his Afro-American characters humanly. He states that diversity and variety of any community is part and parcel of its essence. This diversity is just like Spring where one can see hundreds of colors, shapes and kinds; so that it is of a society’s nature and “To live anywhere in the world today and be against equality because of race or color is like living in Alaska and being against snow”
(Wikiquote). Faulkner portrays the real image of Dilsey in his mind without any
36 From Faulkner at Nagano, ed. Robert A. Jellife (Tokyo Kenkyusha Ltd, 1956) 37 SparkNotes Editors Dawalibi 76 prejudice: “Dilsey is one of my own favorite characters, because she is brave, courageous, generous, gentle, and honest; she is much more brave and honest and generous than me” (16). Like so many faithful African Americans, Dilsey does not alienate herself from the American society but she feels alienated. As Sartre phrases it:
“I am not alienated, but the look of the other alienates me” (Sartre 357). Dilsey is the only character who challenges the vicious Jason. She defends the absent Caddy, Miss
Quentin, Benjy and even Luster. “Dilsey emerges not only as a Negro servant in the
Compson household but as a human being” (Vickery 50). She is very sacrificing and selfless, in fact, these qualities become part and parcel of African’s essence in Faulkner’s works. Dilsey is “Stoic as some immemorial carving of heroism, going on, doing the best she can, guided only by instinct and affection and the self-respect she will not relinquish” (Scott 29).
There is no doubt that Dilsey is meant to represent the ethical norm, the realizing and acting out of one’s humanity. It is worth noting that Faulkner’s ideology demonstrates the real image of his characters’ situation. In the existentialist philosophy, humans are born with no predetermined essence or nature until they exist and define their essence; they are free and condemned to be free. In Faulkner’s works, we find the real restrictions that bound one’s freedom. Dilsey does not choose to be a house maid in the Compsons household willingly, but rather she grew up to find all members of her race helpless. “Dilsey is the conscious human accepting the limitations of herself, the iron boundaries of circumstances, and still, to the best of her ability, achieving a holy compromise for aspiration” (Scott 28). If one can choose to behave viciously or well; Dawalibi 77 then he is neither of both essentially, he is acting in fact. It is not his nature. But when he continually keeps behaving on a certain manner, then this manner is part and parcel of his essence.
As a matter of fact, existentialists do not believe that a human is born with certain innate definite qualities as an essence of a human. In fact, these qualities appear after one’s long existence. It is worth noting that differences among people are of human nature. No two persons are exactly alike, for this reason each human has got his own unique essence even when humans share the same existence. Sartre‘s notion that
“existence precedes essence” means that for every human there is a unique essence, but this essence appears only after one’s long existence while for others, this essence existed since birth. Let’s take an example from our novel, in The Sound and the Fury; we have
Quentin and Jason, two brothers brought up together in the same household from the same parents, but completely different in mentality, behaviors and features. Jason is vicious, devilish and malicious while Quentin is very genteel, handsome and gracious.
Did Jason choose to be malicious and did Quentin choose to be gracious? Or they behave like that unconsciously since birth. If it is a natural feature since birth, then their essence precedes their existence. Evelyn Scott argues that “Madness for Jason is a blank, immediate state of soul, which he feels encroaching on his meager, objectively considered universe. He is in an agony of inexplicable anticipation of disaster for which his cruelties afford him no relief” (28). However, there ought to be a chance for Jason’s features to be cultivated. He needed a special care since his childhood but since Mr.
Compson is indifferent and Mrs. Caroline Compson cares only about herself, then Dawalibi 78
Jason’s manners would complete to grow on a specific manner to become later like a fossilized feature of him.
Experiences in life are part of our existence; they can never be ignored. A good experience adds a lot to one’s personality while a harmful experience sometimes needs several years to erase its disastrous effect; like the civil war. Also, in our story, the parents’ role is essential to determine the way how children should be brought up:
The Compson sons are impotent in terms of life possibilities because of their
sister. They grow up in her potent and restless force field. They do not have
emotional protection from their parents because their parents are too absorbed in
themselves. The sons are traumatized by their sister experiences, experiences that
produce emotions that they can’t control. The resulting psychological damage
leaves them with limited human possibilities, particularly in regards to
connections with the opposite sex (Anderson 18).
In the Compsons family, Mr. Compson is very “Cynical and detached man. He subscribes to a philosophy of determinism and fatalism. He believes life is essentially meaningless and that he can do little to change the events that befall his family38” Mr.
Compson is indifferent about his daughter’s pregnancy telling his son Quentin to accept it as a natural womanly shortcoming. This indifference accelerated Quentin’s downfall and progress towards his destiny and made Jason even more strict and hardhearted while Caddy – because of her sufferings - decided to leave. Mr. Compson is a
38 SparkNotes Editors. Dawalibi 79 paterfamilias, his role is major and his effect on children is unavoidable, but because of his indifference, he led his family to this destiny.
According to Jean Pouillon, Faulkner’s people are not “blind puppets of fate”. . .
Faulkner’s is undoubtedly “a world where man exists as a crushed being” as
Malraux writes in his preface to Sanctuary, but the pressure comes from within,
not from without. Faulkner’s man crushes himself more than he is crushed. If
this is true, if destiny is in fact an inner force, and if Christmas is dominated by
himself more than by things, the hero must constantly feel fate’s affirmation
(Pouillon 84-85).
The Compsons’ destiny is in fact a determinate result of their obsession with their sister
Caddy. These obsessions bring forth certain misguiding thoughts that affect their behavior and their free will. “An inner force” denotes to their inner predetermined conviction. Quentin found no other choice; his “acts are also based on his obsession with Caddy and her loss of innocence, which he is still unwilling or unable to accept”
(Cox 134). He could not save his sister’s honor and he could not kill Dalton Ames, so that he killed himself. While Jason has chosen his way from the very beginning; his behavior is also anticipated. He is never confused; he is “aggressive by temperament”.
He systematically blackmails his sister, robs his niece, and hoodwinks his mother. His goals and motivations are entirely materialistic. One can always anticipate Jason’s reactions as he keeps behaving on the same pattern; of course this can be applied also to Dawalibi 80 the majority of Faulkner’s characters. This can be called the belief in human fixed nature.
In the light of this ideology we can say that, a writer cannot be considered existentialist if he does not insist upon man’s infinite freedom of will and full responsibility of choice clearly and frankly in his writings. In Faulkner’s works, some representations of some existential notions are not enough to determine his existentialism; especially that these notions describe the circumstances of war. Most existential features presented in Faulkner’s work are despair, anxiety, dread, alienation, estrangement and anguish. These features are presented in Faulkner’s work because of war while in existentialism, they constitute a basic establishment because of the “great amount of responsibility and freedom thrown on man’s shoulders” (Sartre 31). This also implies that: “Faulkner’s existentialism seems not to have been based on existentialist philosophy; he belonged to no school of writers and did not follow systematically any school of thought. William Barrett, both a philosopher and a critic of Faulkner’s works said: ‘Faulkner certainly never read Heidegger; he may never even have heard of him’ ”
(Kerr 264).
Faulkner believed in the freedom and responsibility of human beings but he also made a room for fate to take place, so that man is not always responsible. In fact,
Faulkner contradicted existentialists in many points like: the belief in metaphysics, universality and abstractness of ideas, the unchangeability of characters, the belief in human inherited characteristics and the belief in destiny. Paralleling to these Dawalibi 81 characteristics, the humanistic ideology was also more dominating. In fact, the main axis of concern is that Faulkner approached The Southerners humanely. He could draw his reader’s sympathy towards his characters; he believed in the humans’ essence and their absolute definite ability to persist and prevail; just with what they are accommodated naturally with because – as we have seen – Faulkner’s characters preserve certain genetic qualities since birth. In his essay “Faulkner's Individualistic
Christian Humanism”, Gorham Munson says:
Faulkner was an imaginative, impassioned, and highly skilled writer of fiction
and must be judged on his merits as such; he was not a philosopher or a great
thinker. He did, however, have some relatively simple, consistent, and deeply
sincere convictions about man and his condition that constitute a moral
philosophy. His beliefs . . . are definitely humanistic. He said himself, in
Faulkner at Nagano: “the only school I belong to, that I want to belong to, is the
humanist school” (95).
Faulkner characters kept “the fundamental qualities” that define them always and forever. These fundamental qualities “make a thing what it is”. Faulkner’s ideas about essence resemble Avicenna’s philosophy39, the philosophy that does not neglect the
39 Early 11th-century Muslim philosopher Avicenna (Arabic, Abu Ali al-Husayn ibn Abd Allah ibn Sina) (980-1037), Islamic philosopher and physician. Known for the development of Western philosophy. His work modifying Aristotelian metaphysics introduced a distinction important to later philosophy between essence (the fundamental qualities that make a thing what it is—the treeness of a tree, for example) and existence (being, or living reality). He also demonstrated how it is possible to combine the biblical view of God with Aristotle’s philosophical system. Avicenna’s writings on logic, mathematics, physics, and medicine remained influential for centuries. Dawalibi 82 inner natural tendencies of one’s disposition with regard to his/her existence.
In Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury, the predetermination of incidents is presented with each character’s behavior. The concept of destiny or fate is the decisive predetermined or far-reaching consequences that inevitably happen to somebody or something40. According to Jean Pouillon, “Faulknerian destiny does not depend on the realization of a particular contingent event. . . Faulkner’s destiny is at the source of life”
(81). In fact, Faulkner’s concepts of freedom and destiny were taken originally from the
Christian dogmas.
Faulkner's concept of man, based upon his general humanistic philosophy, is
even more essential to interpretations of his fiction than are his personal beliefs.
Central to both is the premiss of free will and, as a corollary, the belief in man's
capacity to change. Faulkner's essentially Christian principles and belief
underline his fiction: his interest in man, in individual human beings and in the
race as composed of individuals, is the passion which animates it. Cleanth
Brooks, agreeing with Randall Stewart's view of Christian elements in Faulkner's
writings, qualifies the phrase “profoundly Christian” (Kerr 257).
The idea of fate or predestination contradicts mainly with atheistic existentialism, since existentialism considers man the origin of all origins; condemned to be free and fully responsible for his choices, but if man is fated, he is not always considered responsible because there are options beyond his choice. Quentin, for instance, did not
40 Encarta Dictionary. Dawalibi 83 choose his parents or his siblings out of his free will; it is the act of God in fact. It is his fate and divine decree that Caddy is his sister and because he is a loving and caring brother, he felt responsibility towards her. “Quentin would prefer death to a reduction in his delusions of honour and his own potency” (Everett 114). Everyone in Faulkner’s work is connected firmly to the essence of The South; to the convictions and traditions.
“Mrs. Compson solipsistic world is only large enough to encompass her insistence upon inherited nobility and her wallowings in self-pity. She clings to a tradition of gentility which is no longer valid” (Everett 113-14).
In Faulkner’s work, all individuals share the same existence but their essences differ because of their genetic differences. For this reason, essence does not come after existence because it is predetermined. Other existential notions like free will and responsibility are affected not only by one’s existence but also by individual differences i.e. essence: “It is based on human freedom, responsibility and personal subjectivity.
Individual difference is sacred. Mindless following is profane” (Anderson 24). Dawalibi 84
Chapter Four Essence and Existence in Margret Mitchell’s
Gone with the Wind
Margret Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind is a strident clarion rebellious call that emphasizes one’s existence, freedom, responsibility and choice. Margret Mitchell’s feminist existential ideology was reflected mainly in her protagonist Scarlett O’Hara.
Scarlet is socially intelligent and very strong willed. Unlike Faulkner’s female characters, Mitchell’s heroine has got a remarkable facility and dynamism to adopt and manage to deal with any critical situation during and after the civil war. She has the stamina, resolution, courage, determination and capacity to get herself out of any dilemma or impasse she is involved in. Scarlet’s tenets rise up against the social restrictions and against the patriarchal society. Determination defines Scarlet and drives her to achieve everything she desires by any means necessary. She is a kind of “a female who makes considered choices regarding her way of life and suffers the anxiety associated with that freedom, isolation, or nonconformity, yet remains free, demonstrates the tenets of existentialism” (Hiatt).
Scarlett represents the real feminist existential heroine. She is free, responsible, and subjective. Each act of her contributes to defining her as she is; a brave courageous feminist outrageous rebellious woman. Scarlett changes according to the advantages and interests of herself, her family and of Tara. She believes in the selfhood and self- Dawalibi 85 interest. For Scarlett, there is always possibility for a change; she is always dynamic and facile to start making a different kind of choice. In crucial situations, Scarlett could discover her real abilities in business and leadership. She represents Mitchell’s dreamy free protagonist because Scarlett O'Hara shares many feminist characteristics with
Mitchell herself. Scarlett is a feminist heroine; she is defiant, high-spirited and strong- willed. She could violate the conventional feminine gender roles imposed on her by the patriarchy. She is a woman of action and business; she is practical and pragmatic; she practically accepts the new reality. The feminist attributes are epitomized in her personality; she is headstrong, independent, outspoken, serious, intelligent, shrewd, cunning and rational. Scarlett believes in the importance of power and tries to gain it by all means possible, economic power and political power.
Scarlett O'Hara stands as a counterpoint to the feminine virtues of the antebellum decades. A feminine woman is a stereotypical result of old customs and beliefs. The stereotypical woman in the antebellum decades is adjusted and molded into certain roles; she does not change; she is predetermined and predestined. For this reason, she cannot make her essence. The community that is condemned by old conventions would produce the same feminine models representing the cult of true womanhood. Women, at those periods, were essentially predestined to obey the laws of the patriarchy without any attempt to violate any rule. The rules are considered divine and sacred. The historian Barbara Welter portrayed an important stage in the expression of sexual stereotypes. Dawalibi 86
The attributes of True Womanhood, by which a woman judged herself
and was judged by her husband, her neighbors, and society, could be
divided into four cardinal virtues – piety, purity, submissiveness, and
domesticity. Put them all together and the spelled mother, daughter,
sister, wife – woman. Without them, no matter whether there was fame,
achievement, or wealth, all was ashes. With them she was promised
happiness and power (Welter 152).
Women in the nineteenth century were represented as “hostage in the home”. Home is her kingdom where she manifests all her innovations in entertaining her husband and bringing up the children. She is a true representative of the four Cult of True
Womanhood; the four attributes of True Womanhood represent a stereotypical feminine woman at any time. The feminine woman’s essence precedes and defines her existence; she is naturally religious and pious. Dr. Charles Meigs elaborates on the feminine notion: “hers is a pious mind; her confiding nature leads her more readily than men to accept the proffered grace of the Gospel” (Welter 153). The Cult of True
Womanhood was established by the patriarchy based on old values and beliefs, but if women must break free, then, “Women themselves, not sympathetic men, are in the best position to assess the true existential possibilities of womanhood” (Selden 129-130).
In Gone with the Wind, Melanie Hamilton is a good representative of the Cult of
True Womanhood. Though she shows some strength in some parts of the novel, she stands as a feminine figure opposite to Scarlett O'Hara. She behaves according to her Dawalibi 87 natural feminine disposition; she can see only the goodness of people and does not think ill or suspects any of her companions. When Dr. Meade, Atlanta’s foremost citizen, sends around a collection basket to encourage women to denote their jewelry,
Scarlett denotes her hated wedding ring but Melanie mistakes Scarlett’s action for courage and throws her own wedding ring, too. Melanie is very kind-hearted; she represents the feminine purity and goodness. In another incident, when India, Ashley’s sister, finds her brother Ashley in a friendly embrace with Scarlett, India spreads the rumor that they are having an affair, but to Scarlett’s surprise, Melanie takes Scarlett’s side and refuses to believe the rumors. For this reason, Melanie is directed by her good honest intentions towards others; she epitomizes the selfless woman who is ready to sacrifice herself for the sake of her truly beloved.
In Gone with the Wind, Margret Mitchell manifests her feminist existential ideology by juxtaposing this ideology with its opposites. Scarlett O'Hara and Rhett
Butler stand in a counterpoint to Melanie Hamilton Wilkes and Ashley Wilkes respectively. The interaction of Mitchell’s characters, especially the protagonists, with the incidents of war and Mitchell’s insistence upon freedom, choice and responsibility are testimonies of Mitchell’s existential ideology. But her vigorous defense of women’s rights and feminism in general molds her feminist existential philosophy. In Mitchell’s work, the dynamic characters discover their essence at last as they make benefit of all the experiences they get through; they epitomize Sartre’s notion that “existence precedes essence”; this notion is clearly detected in Scarlett’s and Rhett’s personalities mostly. Scarlett changes from a spoiled teenager to a hardworking widow to a wealthy Dawalibi 88 opportunist making her essence at last. As a free successful decision maker, Scarlet represents an ideal existential feminist. The following diagram below shows how
Scarlett’s interactions with the incidents of war are escalated and consequently these incidents create great shifts in Scarlett’s life. As a result of this, Scarlett is proved to be a very dynamic flexible character who discovers her real essence at last. Scarlett looks deep inside herself; discovers her abilities and make full use of them. Dawalibi 89
●Scarlett’s essence appears at last: A strong, defiant and challenging personality. ●
●She resolute to recover her strength and win Rhett back ● ●She marries Rhett Butler desiring for more prosperous business ● ●She becomes a very shrewd businesswoman and ● leases convicts to run her sawmill ●She enters the business world and devotes ● herself to make Frank’s business more profitable ●She marries Frank Kennedy in order to ● save Tara and pay the taxes ● ●She tries to seduce Rhett in order to pay the taxes
● ●She murders a Yankee thief
● ●She takes charge of rebuilding Tara again
● ●She drives a cart in a forest full of dangerous deserters
● ●She stays with Melanie and helps her to give birth
● ●She encounters the actions of the war in Atlanta
● ●She marries Charles Hamilton hoping to hurt Ashley
● ● She is a childish girl concerned only with her numerous suitors Dawalibi 90
Scarlett O'Hara is not a static character; she violates the gender roles and develops to become a very shrew selfish cutthroat businesswoman; this is clearly detected in her ways of conducting business. In chapter XXXVI, after looking through
Frank Kennedy’s poor ledgers, Scarlett clearly announces her better ability in running business: “A startling thought this, that a woman could handle business matters as well as or better than a man, a revolutionary thought to Scarlett who had been reared in the tradition that men were omniscient and women none too bright” (Mitchell 378). This passage shows the real existential independent free woman who takes charge and responsibility upon her shoulders and defies conviction to prove her existence in the business world. Scarlett also leases convicts to run her sawmill with no regard to the social values or criteria. Before the war, Scarlett would have been horrified at the mere mention of convicts. Now she hires them as workers. She even goes beyond the borders to dislodge her husband, Frank Kennedy, from the sawmill management claiming that he cannot run business well. She becomes a very successful mill owner, running every aspect of the business and putting her weak, incompetent husband to shame and even mocking him as “an old maid in britches” (Mitchell 61). In fact, Scarlett could manage to run the mill more effectively than Frank, but Scarlett’s budding feminist mentality prompts the shock and condemnation of her society, which frowns on the idea of a woman owning and running a mill.
Mitchell’s work is a daring attempt to break the old basis of gender roles which is based on false beliefs and conventions. In the novel, there is clear evidence that Scarlett was not an inferior woman to any of the three husbands whom she has married. Simon Dawalibi 91
De Beauvoir, in her argument about Women’s “inferiority”, documents her argument with great erudition. She states that “Women have been made inferiors and the oppression has been compounded by men’s belief that women are inferiors by nature”
(Selden 129-30). The nature that De Beauvoir opposes is the predetermined essence that women cannot change but be inferiors to men; that this nature means predestination.
De Beauvoir refuted this belief since women are only inferiors because they exist in a world that compels them to be inferiors. This argument brought forth De Beauvoir’s most famous maxim that “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.” This explanation means that a woman grows to become a subordinate creature, the insignificant figure, the insignificant other. “Feminist critics wish to show humankind the errors of such a way of thinking. Women, they declare, are people in their own right; they are not incomplete or inferior men. Literature and society have frequently stereotyped women as angles, barmaids, bitches, whores, brainless housewives, or old maids. Women must break free from such oppression and define themselves” (Bressler
107).
Throughout the novel, Mitchell shows that those who adopt old traditions cannot continue; they must face reality and determine their existence. They must break free from old constraints and rigid rules. Mitchell’s message is that feminine virtues of
The Old South have become anachronistic and that women can do and can think and even excel men if they have the chance to. This idea is clearly expressed by Ashley
Wilkes in Chapter XXXI after the Civil War. “The people who have brains and courage come through and the ones who haven’t are winnowed out” (Mitchell 320-21). Ashley is Dawalibi 92 an embodiment of The Old South, he finds himself completely out of place after the
Civil War and in the harsh new world of Reconstruction. Ashley cannot develop useful new skills. He struggles and fails to labor on Tara and run Scarlett’s sawmill for profit.
Ashley Wilkes and Melanie Hamilton do not represent the existential mentality of
Margret Mitchell. Mitchell emphasizes on those who can adjust and adapt; on those who can find their unique vocation like Scarlett.
Throughout the novel, Scarlett is constrained to make continuous choices. She not only takes a decision but also bears full responsibility of its consequences. This policy is a clear attempt by the writer to prove women’s faculty, intelligence and even transcendence. When Jonas Wilkerson, the former overseer of Tara, raises the taxes hoping to drive the O'Haras out of their land, Scarlett hurries to Rhett Butler to get the money in any means possible, but when she fails, she manages up to marry her sister’s fiancé, Frank Kennedy. Scarlett succeeds at last and saves herself, the O'Hara’s land and the family’s reputation. In fact, she has Machiavellian intelligence; she believes that the end she aims to is sublime; it is to save her folk and to save the land; the land which is the main existential cause. In the most arduous tough situations, we find Scarlett very challenging and steadfast, her extreme belief in her cause and her extreme love for her family and her land support her resistance. That is especially manifested when Scarlett starves of hunger: “As God is my witness, as God is my witness, the Yankees aren't going to lick me. I'm going to live through this, and when it's over, I'm never going to be hungry again. No, nor any of my folks. If I have to steal or kill--as God is my witness,
I'm never going to be hungry again." Scarlett learned from her father that the land is Dawalibi 93
“the only thing in this world that lasts, and don't you be forgetting it! 'Tis the only thing worth working for, worth fighting for--worth dying for.” (Mitchell 24-25). Scarlet existed in a family that sanctifies the land, for this reason her means are justified.
Margret Mitchell was born at the dawn of the nineteenth century, she was inevitably affected by her existence in a family who defends women; Mitchell’s mother was a suffragette and an advocator of women’s rights. She was also affected by the materialistic society; a society where men have to chase the dollar all day, a society where values and social doctrines changed rapidly, but “one thing at least remained the same – a true woman was a true woman, wherever she was found. If anyone male or female dared to tamper with the complex of virtues that made up True Womanhood, he was damned immediately as the enemy of God, of Civilization, and of the
Republic”(Welter 151-52). The complex virtues are considered sacred laws for the patriarchy because they were legislated in heaven. These virtues, for them, are predestined and untouchable. In the patriarchal society, De Beauvoir argues:
“the male defines what it means to be human, including, therefore, what it
means to be female . . . Since the female is not male, Beauvoir asserted, she
becomes The Other, an object whose existence is defined and interpreted
by the male, who is the dominant being in society. Always subordinate to
the male, the female finds herself a secondary or nonexistent player in the
major social institutions of her culture, such as the church, government,
and educational systems” (Bressler 104). Dawalibi 94
These virtues, then, are a pretext for domination and mastery. They are essentially prejudged; they constitute the predetermined essence of a community. For this reason, the community always and forever produces the same stereotypes of men and women alike. Existentialism came as a reaction against predetermined rules and predetermined conventions; the individual’s free will is the only determiner of one’s essence. Mitchell’s work obviously incorporates the feminist beliefs and values with the existential characteristics. She defends the same ideas that existentialism calls for;
Mitchell calls for the freedom of women and that women can be responsible and can run business. Consequently, Margret Mitchell’s work is a call for a change; for equality and for the right-of self determination.
Margret Mitchell demonstrates her existential feminist philosophy by contributing the existential characteristics not only to women, but also to men. Rhett
Butler represents the free responsible opportunistic man who brings excitement to
Scarlett’s life and encourages her impulse to change and succeed. Rhett is opportunistic and ethically loose in The New South. He supports the Yankees for his own advantages and interests. Because Rhett does not ally himself with only one camp, he feels free to criticize all groups, even those he sometimes supports. Rhett explodes at the
Confederacy at last, he severely criticizes their ways and behaviors and publically announces that this war is not for honor or glory; it is for money and domination. Rhett never feels afraid to express himself or to show his opinions. He believes in reasons, he is logical and rational and not taken by emotions or sensations. He knows from the first moment that The Southerners are fighting for a lost cause. He is reasonable and believes Dawalibi 95 in the existence of military means to defy the enemy but because these means did not exist, he was against this war from the very beginning:
Has any one of you gentlemen ever thought that there’s not a cannon
factory South of the Mason-Dixon Line? Or how few iron foundries there are in
The South? Or woolen mills or cotton factories or tanneries? Have you thought
that we would not have a single warship and that the Yankee fleet could bottle
up our harbors in a week, so that we could not sell our cotton abroad? But--of
course--you gentlemen have thought of these things . . . I have seen many things
that you all have not seen. The thousands of immigrants who'd be glad to fight
for the Yankees for food and a few dollars, the factories, the foundries, the
shipyards, the iron and coal mines--all the things we haven't got. Why, all we
have is cotton and slaves and arrogance. They'd lick us in a month (Mitchell 70-
71).
According to Margret Mitchell a man like Rhett Butler with free thinking and reasonable choices is a “powerful” man. This is also clear when he answered Stuart
Tarleton about his exact meaning; Rhett said “’God is on the side of the strongest battalion!’ ”(Mitchell 71). Among the crowd, Scarlett felt the importance of Rhett’s speech because she was also practical and reasonable. “Something in Scarlett's practical mind prompted the thought that what this man said was right, and it sounded like common sense”(Mitchell 70). Even though Rhett knows that this battle is lost, but he Dawalibi 96 cannot oppose all the angry Southerners. He just complies with The Southerner’s wishes who hope for victory.
After months of polite behavior, Rhett starts to be more and more subjective believing in his own cause rather than the lost one. Rhett starts publicly expressing his contempt for Confederate idealism and declares that he works for personal gain. Rhett’s actions are existential in form and content. His logical and rational mind does not mean that he is not existential because “most existentialists cannot be said to be irrationalists in the sense of denying all validity to rational thought. They have held that rational clarity is desirable wherever possible, but that the most important questions in life are not accessible to reason or science” (Dreyfus). Rhett is existentially prominent since he adheres himself to the most existential prominent themes which are freedom, responsibility, choice and commitment. Rhett creates his own essence; he does not obligate himself with laws and rules he is not contented with. Rhett is dynamic and practical; he makes choices that create his nature.
Choice is therefore central to human existence, and it is inescapable. Rhett’s free choices entail commitment and responsibility and this is what Rhett yearns for, he aspires to make amasses of great wealth whatever the cost is. Rhett behaves according to what he thinks is right. He does not care about what others say. He asserts that the war is more about money than people will admit and that those who make grand speeches about states’ rights care for nothing but their own wealth and privilege.
Rhett’s decisions are crucial and final. Unlike Ashley Wilkes who reinforces himself as a Dawalibi 97 symbol of The Old South, fighting desperately for a life that has already been lost to The
New South that Rhett Butler represents. Rhett has learned of Ashley’s imprisonment and tells Scarlett that Ashley could have won his freedom by betraying the
Confederacy. Scarlett asks why Ashley would have refused such an opportunity, and
Rhett, who claims he himself would have accepted, replies contemptuously that Ashley is too much of a gentleman. Rhett becomes the most famous Confederate blockade- runner and becomes the most popular man in town despite his reputation for disregarding social customs. He challenges the social orders in more than one occasion.
The entire city, with the exception of the Hamilton household, vilifies Rhett. He continues to call on Scarlett, however, and gives her a fancy hat from Paris so she will stop wearing the required black mourning veil.
Rhett Butler appears as an antithesis figure to Ashley Wilkes. Ashley becomes a nostalgic symbol of The Old South. He is like his wife, predetermined to be frail and weak. Ashley could not change and adapt the life of The New South. He is a feminine man while Scarlett is a masculine woman. When Scarlett tells Ashley that she still loves him and asks him to escape with her, they kiss passionately, and Ashley tells Scarlett that he loves her but cannot leave Melanie, for he loves his honor more than he loves
Scarlett. Ashley, too moral to behave with the necessary cunning, clings to his old
Southern gentlemanly ways. Scarlett, on the other hand, is prepared to abandon all the social ideals before the war in order to save Tara. Dawalibi 98
Mitchell suggests that there are two choices for Southerners living under
Reconstruction: they can cling to their gentility and pride and do as they are told, or they can fight back. Scarlett changes after her last proclamation of love to Ashley. He rebuffs her once again, and finally she leaves behind the last of her spoiled, coquettish ways. She cannot understand Ashley’s self-loathing and passivity or his unwillingness to act on his love for her. She finally comprehends, however, that his integrity will always prevent him from leaving Melanie. Scarlett realizes that the words, hospitality and loyalty and honor, meant more to him than she did. All this makes Ashley and
Melanie good and honored by predetermined essence, they cannot change and they cannot adopt new situations, Melanie dies at last and Ashley fades away41. The world changed and they could not change wit it. The new world needs practical people like
Scarlett and Rhett who are smart enough to progress. They could defy conventions and adjust themselves in the new world unlike Melanie and Ashley. Though Scarlett and
Rhett liked The Old South and were also nostalgic, but they did not let their emotions to control them. They have priorities that are Tara and the free good living.
The movement of Mitchell’s work is a tendency towards liberation and freedom.
This work obviously opposes oppression, compulsion and injustice against women. It is a call for equality between the two sexes; it opposes the cemented ‘otherness’ that has become a part and parcel of the institution of marriage and motherhood and it also rejects superior/inferior binary. Mitchell’s work is a practical application of the
41 Darwin’s theory about the fittest discusses how the strong lasts and how the weak die and fade away. Dawalibi 99 existential theoretical thoughts of De Beauvoir’s The Second Sex. “According to De
Beauvoir, there are four ways that women can overcome oppression. Women should: go to work, become intellectuals, work towards social reform, and refuse to internalize the “otherness” that has been created” (Tong). Actually, this exactly is done by Scarlet
O'Hara; she refuses submission, runs her own business, becomes independent and saves Tara from destruction. “Beauvoir's The Second Sex provided the vocabulary for analyzing the social constructions of femininity and the structure for critiquing those constructions, which was used as a liberating tool by attending to the ways in which patriarchal structures used sexual difference to deprive women of the intrinsic freedom of their ‘can do’ bodies” (Bergoffen).
The Southern society in Mitchell’s novel expects men and women to conform to specific gender roles. The narrator notes that the man owns the property but the woman manages it; the man takes credit for managing the property, and the woman then
“praises his cleverness.” Owning property gives men rights and power, but they share little of the reward that results from the women’s hard work. Women have all the work and responsibility of running the property, but enjoy only those rights that men condescend to grant them. The narrator stresses the absurdity of these gender roles, sarcastically saying, “The man roared like a bull when a splinter was in his finger, and the woman muffled the moans of childbirth, lest she disturb him” (Mitchell 38). In this society, men expect women to suppress their needs and desires and focus attention on men. Women are not even allowed to take credit for their own intelligence, bravery, and Dawalibi 100 strength. Women feel alienated and abandoned in their communities, not because they alienated themselves but because of the look of ‘the other’ that alienates them.
Society punishes those women who try to cross gender lines, but The Civil War was a great chance for women like Scarlett to break free. The gender constraints were originally created out of falsely understood religious dogmas and old beliefs. These constraints were fixed by the patriarchy because they serve the patriarchy’s interests.
Women are kept ignorant, submissive and dependent and this constitutes the false essence of a community; for existentialism; however, the true essence cannot be created without freedom and will. A human being creates his own essence without suppression of a tyranny or other rigid constraints. Scarlett, in her behaviors, resembled men rather than women, but her world does not allow her to budge from the restrictive role prescribed for women. Scarlett adapts to this social restraint, using her cunning and will to present a ladylike face to the world while maintaining her masculine interior. Dark, powerful Rhett represents the hardened, practical Northern world that rises up victorious after the war. Dr. Meade scandalously proposes that gentlemen must bid to dance with the lady of their choice in order to raise money for the hospital. As a widow,
Scarlett is strictly forbidden to dance, but Rhett bids a hundred and fifty dollars in gold on her. To the shock of the crowd, Scarlett accepts and hurries to the dance floor. Rhett tells Scarlett that he admires her beauty and spirit and that he knows the cause bores her as it bores him. Scarlett pretends to be angry, but she knows that what he says is true. Dawalibi 101
Scarlett O'Hara and Rhett Butler challenged reality, defied convictions and managed to adapt new changes in The South. They represent The New South and symbolize pragmatism, the practical acceptance of the new reality. Scarlett and Rhett believe that the old life has gone forever and if they want to live in a changing world they must adapt to its ways. Scarlett and Rhett could adapt the situation masterfully; the couple survives by sacrificing their commitment to tradition. Ashley could not thrive in a changed society. He represents the northern nostalgia for the prewar days.
He epitomizes the old lifestyle and cannot function in The New South. Ashley and
Melanie weaken and fade away. Mitchell suggests that overcoming adversity sometimes requires ruthlessness. Scarlett becomes a cruel shrewd business woman and a domineering wife, willingly coarsening herself in order to succeed.
Mitchell’s strident call is launched on gender discrimination, suppression and submissiveness. Obviously, every attempt by Scarlett was to prove herself as a free woman. Maurice Cranston acknowledges that the central argument in The Second Sex is a simple one: “. . . freedom is posited as the supreme ideal, and the author claims that in past and present societies’ women as a sex have been and still are being denied freedom” (qtd in Manhon 155). Mitchell adopts De Beauvoir’s challenging policies in rebelling and resisting men’s supremacy, this is clear as Mitchell applies De Beauvoir’s ideas to her heroine Scarlett O'Hara. Scarlett does not relay on men for food or protection but uses them for that, she surpasses and masters men’s business; before that, business is considered absolutely masculine and no woman ever dares even to speak about it. Dawalibi 102
De Beauvoir gives three reasons for male supremacy: (1) women had to carry the
burden of reproduction, and this made them heavily dependent on men for
protection and food. (2) Domestic labours are merely functions, not activities;
such functions imprisoned women in the sphere of repetition and immanence.
(3) Early man’s activity was often dangerous; it was concerned, not with giving
life but with risking life, and it was this feature which gave it ‘supreme
dignity’(qtd in Manhon 155).
De Beauvoir argues that women who are “irresponsible” are more likely to stay dependent on men. “. . . They adopt without discussion the opinions and values recognized by their husband or their lover and they also develop ‘childish qualities’ which are forbidden to adults because they are based on a feeling of irresponsibility”
(qtd in Manhon 47).
Scarlett O'Hara’s felt abandoned and neglected especially after her parents’ death; she is left fully responsible for herself and for everything in Tara. Everyone in
Tara depends on Scarlet as she is the source of power and affection. She is the only decision maker and leader who could wisely mange her home’s affairs. Scarlett could shoulder the plantation with responsibility and willpower; as Mitchell states it,
“Burdens are for shoulders strong enough to carry them” (Mitchell 622). But because of this, Scarlett always felt anxious and worried about her decisions because she is the only one who has full charge on the situation. Scarlett does not haste her decisions when she is not fully aware of the consequences, “I can't think about that right now. If I Dawalibi 103 do, I'll go crazy. I'll think about that tomorrow” (Mitchell 635). Scarlett could discover the meaning of freedom because of anguish and dread. Before her parents’ death,
Scarlett was only a coquettish belle. She did not know what responsibility is, but now she is fully aware that the good old days will never come back. “Perhaps - I want the old days back again and they'll never come back, and I am haunted by the memory of them and of the world falling about my ears” (Mitchell 565). Scarlett decisions have profound consequences on others; her remarkable facility in making the right decisions granted her the position of leadership.
Scarlett fell in a state of despair and angst when she found Tara burned to the ground. Tough and strong, Scarlett gritted her teeth and decided to stand still. Scarlett’s state of despair emanated from her feelings that there is nothing else to fallback on. Tara is the only source of life for the O’Hara’s; it is the land that worth everything. Tara is the only thing that Scarlett can rely on for the O'Hara’s identity; for their being. At that moment, Scarlett felt the great amount of responsibility thrown on her shoulders. “As
God is my witness, as God is my witness, the Yankees aren't going to lick me. I'm going to live through this, and when it's over, I'm never going to be hungry again. No, nor any of my folks. If I have to steal or kill--as God is my witness, I'm never going to be hungry again” (261 Mitchell). In Scarlett’s eyes, at least, social codes have been turned on their heads when a Southern belle like herself must work as hard as a field hand, but Scarlett made up her mind and decided to endure. Dawalibi 104
Margret Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind is an integral work and an actual application of De Beauvoir’s existential thoughts written in The Second Sex. “De
Beauvoir’s book is a forceful and timely polemic against old-fashioned patriarchal value systems, written by a woman who was not ideally qualified to write such a book”
(Manhon 48). Margret Mitchell left her imprint as a great feminist thinker and writer.
The sublime aim behind Gone with the Wind is greater than fame and celebrity; it is to state one’s free will and responsibility, to be existentialist, especially women. Margret
Mitchell offered a golden work for the whole humanity that will never be forgotten. Dawalibi 105
Conclusion
Obviously differences are embedded in core between Margret Mitchell and
William Faulkner. Though both writers have written about the civil war and both writers have written about The South, but their ideologies contain some crucial contradictions at the core. An absolute difference between Faulkner’s vision and
Mitchell’s is that though Mitchell’s popularity reflects how she turned her story of The
South into an American romance, she insisted upon making crucial decisions in one’s life especially for women. Scarlett O'Hara represents the strong independent liberal responsible woman who knew her way and completed it to the end. For this reason we can say that Mitchell is an existential feminist; she believes that the human being makes his own essence after his long struggles in life. Whereas we find the American stories of
The South turn to become tragedies in Faulkner’s works especially for his both protagonists Quentin Compson and Emily Grierson and this is because these characters in Faulkner’s ideology have no choice but condemned and predetermined to face their destiny like that. They cannot change their life and they are only subjects of sympathy from a humanitarian point of view. They are predefined and predestined; in Faulkner’s ideology essence comes before existence.
The study shows that the writer’s trends affect the way he/she formulates his/her characters. Obviously, William Faulkner as a humanist believed in essentialism and the inner hidden features and capabilities of humans while Mitchell believed in the free choice, responsibility and commitment to break free out of old rigid constraints and Dawalibi 106 beliefs. To illuminate on the differences, we can change roles between both philosophical doctrines. When Scarlett O'Hara is judged from the essentialist’s perspective, then, essentialism justifies Scarlett’s success because she is gifted and not because of her free choice or responsibility. The same can be applied to Emily Grierson;
Emily, from an existential perspective, has chosen to complete her life that way; it is her decision and responsibility. She locked herself indoors when she can break free. She killed Homer Baron at a time when she can live happily with him ever after. Then, for existentialists, she is not a subject of sympathy or mercy.
Another thing is that what is predestined for essentialists is considered bad faith for existentialists. Quentin Compson did not choose his parents, his country, gender or class, but from an existential perspective, he can choose what he can make of them. For essentialists, on the other hand, Quentin is predefined and inevitably destined. This, for existentialists, is considered bad faith. We are free to create our own interpretation of ourselves in relation to the world, to create a project of possibilities, of authentic actions as the expression of freedom. For existentialists, as human existence is self-conscious without being pre-defined, humans, as autonomous beings are “condemned to be free”: compelled to make future directed choices. These choices induce anxiety and uncertainty into one’s psyches. If people, as individuals, simply follow custom or social expectations to escape this angst, they have escaped the responsibility of making their own choices, of creating their own essence. They have acted in bad faith. Dawalibi 107
Mitchell, in Gone with the Wind, turned over the old convictional rules imposed by the patriarchy. Among the characters whom she fully developed is Will Benteen.
Will is one-legged Confederate soldier who becomes a fixture at Tara after the war despite his lack of family or wealth. Will makes Tara a marginally profitable farm. His competence allows Scarlett to move to Atlanta and leave him in charge. Compared to
Faulkner who likes to preserve the old classical traditions, Margret Mitchell developed
Will Benteen to break the old boundaries of the social classes. In prewar times, a poor man like Will Benteen would never have dared of wooing a landed, high-class woman like Suellen O'Hara. Will, however, becomes a part of the O’Hara family and Scarlett’s trusted advisor. Before the war, the O’Haras would never have imagined of socializing with Will or allowing him to marrying into their family, but with Tara in ruins, the
O’Haras welcome Will’s help. Once Will gets his foot in the door, his good Southern manners win over the entire family and he successfully crosses class boundaries. Will advances in the Atlanta social scene, by marrying into an aristocratic family.
Compared to Mitchell’s characters, Faulkner’s characters have no choice; they are condemned and doomed to tragedy. They cannot change; they are not dynamic to interact with the incidents of war and change. Essentialists believe that man is born with his innate natural disposition that is essence and this essence dominates and controls the human’s behavior all his life. For this reason, we notice that Emily kept going on the same track all her life. She refused any kind of change; unlike Scarlet
O’Hara who faced the world with great resolution, willpower and steadiness. Scarlett is socially intelligent unlike Caddy Compson or Emily Grierson. Though Scarlett O'Hara, Dawalibi 108
Emily Grierson and Caddy Compson are all descending from aristocratic families,
Scarlett appears to be the most dynamic, outgoing, extrovert and active character. This can be ascribed to each writer’s ideologies and beliefs, because Margret Mitchell determined herself to existentialism while Faulkner to essentialism. Consequently each approached her/his characters differently.
“Emily is a kind of hereditary obligation”. This is how Faulkner portrayed his protagonist. Faulkner as an essential humanist writer believes in human-based morality, “a system of thought that is based on the values, characteristics, and behavior that are believed to be best in human beings, rather than on any supernatural authority”
(Danto). Existentialism, on the other hand, reverses this belief. For them, “One exists first, and through one’s acts, one becomes something.”(Cosper). There is no natural disposition because there is no original creator of it. Our long existence in certain environment creates our natural disposition and our essence. Essentialists argue that one develops his acts depending on his innate capabilities; on his essence. One develops his acts in accordance with his inner tendencies and abilities. In other words, the acts that one develops are built in accordance with one’s predetermined essence. This idea again contradicts the existential idea that the “personality is not built on a previously designed model”.
In fact, the debate of essence and existence has a scientific explanation. The attributed characteristics of a human have scientific explanations. Was Emily Grierson Dawalibi 109 shy, introvert and sensitive by nature or has she chosen to be so? Are we created with certain qualities and characteristics that we can not really change?
Scientists actively explore the links between genes and behavior to
determine both the patterns and the limits of genetic influence. Such studies
continue to be controversial because behavior or mental processes can be difficult
to measure objectively. Furthermore, many behavioral traits, both normal and
abnormal, are complex, influenced by many genes as well as by personal
experiences (Liu).
Scientifically speaking, many people proved to have natural endowments, aptitudes and special abilities by nature. There are some features that are genetic and appear by natural disposition. From an essential perspective, Scarlett O'Hara is gifted because not any woman at her place dares to do what she did. While existentially speaking she is freed, responsible and subjective. The effect of being in the same existence varies from one person to another according to the response of his/her genes to the stimulations of the environment. Perfect genes with good stimuli make a successful adaption.
Consequently, not all human characteristics are essentially predetermined but acquired and vise versa. One is not born conniving, selfish, or shrewd but becomes one.
Similarly, one does not become sensitive, emotional or shy because this is nature.
Science decodes this debate by analyzing the human genes and DNA:
The unique structure and behavior of DNA ensures that human traits are
passed from generation to generation and accounts for why parents, children, Dawalibi 110
and grandchildren often have similar facial features, hair color, height, and
athletic or artistic abilities. Yet each of us inherits a unique genetic legacy from
our parents and more distant ancestors. With the exception of identical twins, no
two people have the exact same combination of alleles42 for the estimated 20,000
to 25,000 human genes… most inheritable characteristics are influenced by a
number of genes that interact in a complex fashion. Also, personal experiences
and environmental factors combine with genetic influences to shape certain
traits, including vulnerability to disease and characteristics such as intelligence,
emotions, talents, and personality (Liu).
The differences between Faulkner and Mitchell are ascribed to each one’s ideologies, beliefs and approaches. The difference is in the way each writer wanted his protagonist to be. Faulkner wanted his protagonists like Quentin Compson and Emily
Grierson to be subjects of sympathy because he is humanistic in his method while
Mitchell wanted her protagonist to be the heroine that America longs for because she is an existential feminist writer. Each writer portrayed his characters on the basis of his own philosophy and ideology and not on the basis of reality. Reality is the same but the writers are different; the characters are the product of the writer’s mentality and not the product of reality where they live.
42 One of two alternative forms of a genes that can have the same place on homologous chromosomes and are responsible for alternative traits (WordWeb Dictionary). Dawalibi 111
Works Cited
Al-Allaf, Mashhad. The Essential Ideas of Islamic Philosophy: Essence and Existence:
The “Possible” and the “Necessary”. USA: The Edwin Mellen, 2006. 139-47. Pdf file.
“Alleles” WordWeb Dictionary. Version: 1.53. Antony Lewis Ed, Freeware. UK:
Princeton University, 1997.
Anderson, John P. The Sound and the Fury in the Garden of Eden: William Faulkner’s the
sound and the fury and the Garden of Eden Myth. USA: n.p., 2002. Pdf File.
Appleton Aguilar, Sarah. The Bitch if Back: Wicked Women in Literature. Carbondale,
IL: Southern Illinois UP, 2001.Pdf File.
Baird, Forrest E.; Walter Kaufmann. From Plato to Derrida. Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2008. 12 Oct 2015. Web.
Bannister, Robert C. "Social Darwinism." Microsoft Encarta 2009. Redmond, WA:
Microsoft Corporation, 2008. [DVD] Dawalibi 112
Bergoffen, Debra. “Simone de Beauvoir”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved 2 December 2011. 3 March 2016. Web.
Bigelow, Gordon E. A Primer of Existentialism. Vol 23. No 3. Np: College English,
1961: 170-178.
Bourdieu, Pierre “International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences”. 2008.
Encyclopedia.com. 20 Sep 2015. Web.
_ _ _ “A Reflecting Story”. Trans Richard Nice, 371-377. 21 May 2015. Web
Breisach, Ernst. Introduction to Modern Existentialism. New York: n.p, 1962. Web.
Bressler, Charles E. Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall, 1994. Print.
Brooks, Cleanth. “Man, Time and Eternity” Twentieth Century Interpretations of The Sound
and the Fury: A Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. Michael H. Cowan. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall, 1968. Print.
Bullock, Alan and Stephen Trombley. The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought. 3rd
Ed. London: Fontana, 1999. Web. Dawalibi 113
Camus, Albert. Resistance, Rebellion and Death. Trans. Justin O’Brien.
New York: Vintage, 1995. Print.
Carpenter, Andrew N. "Western Philosophy." Microsoft Encarta 2009. Redmond,
WA: Microsoft Corporation, 2008. [DVD].
Cartwright, R. L. “Some remarks on essentialism”. The Journal of Philosophy 65
(20) N.p: n.p, 1968: 615–626. Web.
“Characterizations of Existentialism” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc. 22 July 2004. Web. 1 July 2016.
Clarke, Desmond, "Blaise Pascal", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring
2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta. Ed. Web.
Copleston, F.C. "Existentialism". Philosophy: 19–37. Np: n.p., 2009. Web.
Cosper, D. Dale. "Simone de Beauvoir." Microsoft Encarta 2009. Redmond, WA:
Microsoft Corporation, 2008. [DVD]
Code, Lorraine. Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories. London: Routledge World Reference,
27 September 2012. 30 April 2016. Web. Dawalibi 114
Cowan, Michael H, ed. Twentieth Century Interpretations of The Sound and the Fury: A
Collection of Critical Essays. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1968. Print.
Cox, Leland H, ed. William Faulkner: Biographical and Reference Guide. Detroit: Lib of
Cong, 1982. Print.
Cranston, Morris. Sartre between Philosophy and Literature. Trans. Mujahed Abdul
Munem Mujahed. Beirut: Alhayat Lib, 1983. Print.
Crowell, Steven, "Existentialism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2015
Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed).
D'Souza, Arun Prakash. Feminism: An Existential Perspective. Pdf file.
Danto, C Arthur. "Humanism." Microsoft Encarta 2009. Redmond, WA:
Microsoft Corporation, 2008. [DVD]
Dixler, Elsa. Barron’s Book Notes: William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury. New York:
Barron, 1985. Print.
“DNA”. Microsoft Encarta Dictionary 2009. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation,
2008. [DVD] Dawalibi 115
Dreyfus, Hubert L."Existentialism" Microsoft Encarta 2009: Redmond, WA: Microsoft
Corporation, 2008. [DVD]
Everett, Walter K. Faulkner’s Art and Characters. New York: Barron’s Educational Series,
1969. Print.
”Essentialism” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. n.p. Web. 2
February 2016.
“Existentialism “Microsoft Encarta Dictionary. 29 March 2016. 1993-2008 Microsoft
Corporation. DVD.
“Existentialism” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 22 July
2004. Web. 29 March. 2015.
Faulkner, William. "Banquet Speech." The Nobel Foundation. City Hall, Stockholm,
Sweden. 10 Dec 1950. Retrieved from “William Faulkner – Banquet Speech.”
NobelPrize.org. 2008. The Nobel Foundation. 3 Dec 2008.
_ _ _. “A Rose for Emily”. United States: n.p, 1930. Pdf File.
_ _ _. The Sound and the Fury. New York: n.p., 1972. Pdf File. Dawalibi 116
Fine, Kit. “Essence and Modality”. New York: NYUP, June 1992.
Flynn, Thomas (). Existentialism: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford UP,
2006. Web.
Galeb, Mustafa. Toward a Philosophical Encyclopedia: Sartre and Existentialism.
Beirut: Al-Hilal Lib, 1986. Print.
Gold, Joseph. William Faulkner: A Study in Humanism From Metaphor to Discourse.
Norman, OK: Oklahoma UP, 1966.
Grosz, Elizabeth. Space, Time, and Perversion: Essays on the Politics of Bodies. New York:
Routledge, 1995. Web.
Guicharnaud, Jacques. “Those Years: Existentialism 1943-1945.” Sartre: A
Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. Edith Kern. USA: Prentice-Hall, 1962. 15-20. Print.
Hahn, Stephen, ed. Approaches to Teaching Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury. Issue 57 of
Approaches to teaching World Literature. USA: Modern Language Association
of America, 1996. Web. Dawalibi 117
Heidegger, Martin. "Letter on Humanism", in Basic Writings: Nine Key Essays, plus the
Introduction to Being and Time, trans. David Farrell Krell. London: Routledge,
1978. Web.
Hiatt, Mary P. “Existentialism and Feminism”. Eric: Education Resources Information
Center. 27 September 2012. 30 April 2016. Web.
Hoffman, Fredrick J., and Olga W. Vickery, eds. William Faulkner: Three Decades of
Criticism. New York: Michigan State UP, 1960. Print.
Howe, Irving. “The Passing of the World” Twenteth Century Interpretations of The Sound
and the Fury: A Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. Michael H. Cowan. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall, 1968. Print.
“An Introduction to The Sound and the Fury” Mississippi Quarterly 26 Summer 1973:
410-415. Pdf File.
"Jean-Paul Sartre" Wikiquote. n.p: 25 September 2015. Web. 5 April 2016.
Kaufmann, Walter. “Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre”. Trans. Philip Mairet.
Np: Meridian Publishing Company, 1989. First published: World publishing
company,1956.Web.
Kerr, Elizabeth M. William Faulkner's Yoknapatawpha: "A Kind of Keystone in the Universe".
Rev. ed. New York: Fordham UP, 1985. Web.
Kinney, Arthur F. Faulkner’s Narrative Poetics: Style as Vision. Amherst, MA:
Massachusetts UP, n.d. Web.
Kurtz, Paul. Ed. The Humanist Alternative: Some Definitions of Humanism. USA: Google
Books, 1973. 28 March 2016. Web.
Laurie, Timothy. “The Ethics of Nobody I Know: Gender and the Politics of Description”. N.p: Qualitative Research Jour, 2014. Web.
Liu, Dennis. “Genetics” Microsoft Encarta 2009. Redmond, WA: Microsoft
Corporation, 2008. [DVD]
Luper, Steven. Ed. “Introduction to Existing”. 1-26. Word doc. Dawalibi 119
Lynch, John Edward. "Natural Law (ethics)." Microsoft Encarta 2009 [DVD].
Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation, 2008.
Mackinnon, Catharine A. Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State: An Agenda for Theory.
Vol 7, No. 3. Chicago: Chicago UP. web 9 July 2008 515-545. 5 April
2016.
Macquarrie, John. Existentialism. UK: Pelican, nd. Print.
Magee, Jessie L. "Faulkner the Humanist: How His Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech
Changed How We Interpret "Barn Burning"". Kentucky: Western Kentucky
University, 2009: 1–12. Student Research Conference Select. Pdf file.
Manhon, Joseph (et al.). Existentialism, Feminism and Simon de Beauvoir. 1st ed UK:
Palgrave Macmillan,1997. 2 April 2016. Web.
Marino, Gordon. “Basic Writings of Existentialism” Np: Modern Library, 2004. 14 June
2016. Web.
Mastin, Luke. “Metaphysics: Essentialism”. Np: np, 2008. 26 June 2016. Web. Dawalibi 120
Mathuramani, K and Ganesan S. Technique of Stream of Consciousness in Faulkner’s
The Sound and the Fury. Vol. II, (2012) Lapis Lazuli –An International Literary
Journal. Issue I. pdf file.
McDonald, William. “Søren Kierkegaard” . In Edward N. Zalta. Stanford Encyclopedia
of Philosophy. 2009 Edition. 14 June 2016. Web.
Mitchell, Margret. Gone with the Wind. Warner Books. Ed. New York: Macmillan, 1964.
Pdf file.
Moore, Aaron Lee. Faulkner and Humanity's Desire to be as Solid as a Thing. Florida:
Florida UP, 2009. Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations. Paper 2309.
Munson, Gorham. “Faulkner’s Yoknapatawpha: Faulkner's Individualistic Christian
Humanism”. USA: np, 1930. Google Search. 28 march 2016. Web
“Necrophilia”. Microsoft Encarta Dictionary 2009 [DVD]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft
Corporation, 2008.
“Ontology”. Microsoft Encarta Dictionary 2009 [DVD]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft
Corporation, 2008. Dawalibi 121
Patrick Baert, The Existentialist Moment: The Rise of Sartre as a Public Intellectual. N.p.
Polity Press, 2015.
Peyre, Henri. “Sartre’s Roads to Freedom” Sartre: A Collection of Critical Essays.
Ed. Edith Kern. USA: Prentice-Hall, 1962. 31-38. Print.
Pouillon, Jean. “Time and Destiny in Faulkner” Faulkner: A Collection of Critical Essays.
Ed. Robert Penn Warren. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1966. Print.
Provosty, Laura and Douglas Donovan. "White Trash: Transit of an American Icon".
Web. 18 March 2016.
Russll, Bertrand. A History of Western Philosophy. London: Routledge, 1991. Web.
Salzman, Jack, ed. American Studies: An Annotated Bibliography. Vol 1. London:
Cambridge UP, 1986. Print.
Sartre, Jean P. What is Literature? Trans. Bernard Frechtman. Northampton: Lib.
of Gallimard, 1948. Print. Rpt in Great Britain by John Dickens in 1970.
_ _ _ “Time and Destiny in Faulkner” Faulkner: A Collection of Critical Essays.
Ed. Robert Penn Warren. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1966. Print. Dawalibi 122
Schaeffer, Francis A. How Should We Then Live? Crossway. 146–147. Web.
Scott, Evelyn. Twentieth Century Interpretations of The Sound and the Fury: A Collection of
Critical Essays. Ed. Michael H. Cowan. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1968. Print.
Seidl, Horst. “From Existence to Essence: Re-gaining the Aristotelian-Thomistic
Doctrine in Front of Modern problems”. Rome: Universidad Lateranense, 2010.
PDF File.
Selden, Raman. A Reader’s Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory. Liverpool: The Harvest
P, 1985. Print.
Sharf, Richard S. "Psychotherapy." Microsoft Encarta 2009. Redmond, WA:
Microsoft Corporation, 2008. [DVD]
SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on ‘A Rose for Emily’”. SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes
LLC. 2007. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.
SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on The Sound and the Fury” SparkNotes.com.
SparkNotes LLC. 2007. Web. 5 Oct. 2015.
Stein, Jean. The Paris Preview: Interviews. Paris: Paris Previeow.org, 2016. Web Dawalibi 123
"Stream of Consciousness." Microsoft Encarta 2009. Redmond, WA: Microsoft
Corporation, 2008. [DVD]
Tong, Rosemarie. "Feminist Thought: A More Comprehensive Introduction Existential
Feminism” Serene Durssell. Chapter5, Part II. 5 April 2016, 181-191. Web.
Vickery, Olga W. “Worlds in Counterpoint” Twentieth Century Interpretations of The
Sound and the Fury: A Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. Michael H. Cowan. New
Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1968. Print.
Webber, Jonathan. The Existentialism of Jean-Paul Sartre. New York: Routledge,
2008. Pdf file.
Welter, Barbara. “The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820-1860”. Vol: 18. Issue: 2. USA:
Johns Hopkins UP, 1966. 151-174. Pdf file.
Whitfield, Charlene. “The Unspoken Heroine in William Faulkner’s The Sound and the
Fury”. Diss. Atlanta Georgia U, 1977. ETD Collection for AUC Robert W.
Woodruff Library. Paper 1235. Dawalibi 124
Wild, D John. “Existentialism as a Philosophy”. Sartre: A Collection of Critical
Essays. Ed. Edith Kern. United States of America: Prentice-Hall, 1962. 142-
148. Print.
Wikiquote. “William Faulkner” Wikiquote.org n.p: 25 September 2015. Web. 1 Oct 2015.
Yanhong, Fang. The Sources of Faulkner’s Humanism. Vol. 11, No. 10. Canada: Canadian
Social Sciences, 2015. 54-57. Pdf file. Dawalibi 125
Works Consulted
Bair, Deirdre. Simone De Beauvoir: a Biography. New York: Summit. 1990. Print.
Barnes, Kelley. Fixing a Hole: Bridging the Gap between Text and Performance. Diss,
West Georgia: Georgia University P, 2001. Web. Digital file pdf.
Best, Jr., Edward E. “Cicero, Livy and Educated Roman Women.” Classical Journal 65.5
(Feb.1970): 199+. JSTOR. Web. 18 June 2013.
Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge, 1994.
Deloria, Philip Joseph. Playing Indian. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998.
Dixon, Thomas. The Leopard’s Spots: A Romance of the White Man’s Burden: 1865-1900.
New York: Doubleday Page, 1902.
_ _ _The Clansman: A Historical Romance of the Ku Klux Klan. New York:
Doubleday Page, 1905.
Dunning, William Archibald. Essays on the civil war and reconstruction and related
topics. 1897. 2nd ed. 1904. New York: Harper & Row, 1965. Dawalibi 126
Faulkner, William. The Sound and the Fury. New York: Jonathan Cape and Harrison
Smith, 1929. print.
Greeson, Jennifer Rae. Our South: Geographic Fantasy and the Rise of National Literature.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2010.
Hamblin, Robert W. “‘Longer than Anything’: Faulkner’s ‘Grand Design’ in Absalom,
Absalom!” Faukner and the Artist, ed. Kartiganer and Abadie. 269-293.
Kaplan, Amy. The Anarchy of Empire in the Making of U.S. Culture. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 2002.
Kreyling, Michael. Inventing Southern Literature. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi,
1998.
Lott, Eric. Love and Theft: Blackface Minstrelsy and the American Working Class. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1993.
Marcus, Greil and Werner Sollors eds. A New Literary History of America: Margret
Mitchell and William Faulkner. New York. 22 June 2016. Web. Dawalibi 127
McAlexander, Hubert H. “Gone with the Wind”. New Georgia Encyclopedia. Georgia:
University of Georgia P, 2004. 27 May 2016. Web.
McPherson, Tara. Reconstructing Dixie: Race, Gender, and Nostalgia in the Imagined South.
Durham: Duke University Press, 2003.
Mosier-Dubinsky, Joy (2013) “Women in Ancient Rome,” JCCC Honors Journal: Vol. 4:
Iss. 2, Article 5. Web. 1 May 2014.
Simons, Margaret A. and Jessica Benjamin. “Simone De Beauvior: An Interview.”
Feminist Studies. Vol. 5, No. 2 (Summer 1979). 330-345. J-Stor. Web. 20 Feb 2014.
Freer, Debra. “Introduction: Margaret Mitchell and Henry Love Angel—A Lost
Love.” Lost Laysen. Debra Freer, ed. New York: Scribner, 1996. 13-63.
Urgo, Joseph R. “William Faulkner and the Drama of Meaning: The Discovery of the
Figurative in As I Lay Dying.” South Atlantic Review 53 (May 1988): 11-23.
Zunjic, Bob. “Jean-Paul Sartre: The Humanism of Existentialism” (1946) np.18-5-2015.