Gothic Literature Analysis: “The Cathedral” and “A Rose for Emily”
A man’s blindness and a deranged woman’s reclusiveness both catalyze societal judgements infused with futile jealousy and ingenuine sympathy. The short story written by William Faulkner “A Rose for Emily” reveals Emily’s mutual oedipal relationship with her father, thus creating a common ‘parasitic’ trend among the Grierson’s. Composed of unstable psychological complexes, Faulkner is exposing the effects certain situations invoke as well as the ways the main character confront and cope with them. The second short story, “The Cathedral” by Raymond Carver, materializes a moment of epiphany between a blind man and a jealous man, where the jealous man discovers sight that he never knew he lacked.
Both the encounter and relationship between the narrator and the main character build critical literary interaction which defines the designated roles each prominent character plays. The four comparative factors present in both stories are the significance and reflective roles of the narrators, the philosophic and moral disadvantages of society’s structure, the intention of exhibiting and confronting death, and both the representative symbol of Robert and Emily as well as their effects on the narrator and society. The contrasting factors are emulated by shifts in point of view, the individual strengths and weaknesses of Emily and Robert, non-collective character response to loss and adaptational abilities to cope with change, and finally, the circumstances that develop the characters personality and attributes. Furthermore, an academic literary insight provided by Sandra Lee Kleppe’s, “Faulkner, Welty, and the Short Story Composite”, provides substantial information about the specific style of writing Faulkner is known for. Jack Scherting also contributes to the literary insight of Faulkner, specifically in the portrayal in “A Rose for Emily”. Scherting relates Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytic diagnosis of the Oedipus Complex within his opusculum, “Emily Grierson’s Oedipus Complex: Motif, Motive, and Meaning in Faulkner’s A Rose for Emily”. The psycho analyzation of Emily is necessary to understand her motives behind murdering Homer Barron and keeping his corpse, as well as a reminder of the obsessive relationship she maintained with her father. Both short stories can be compared in respect to their overall interpreted symbolism, character development, inclusion of death, and overall societal impact of moral comprehension.
Incipiently, the similar significance and reflective roles of the narrators and their different shifts in point of view contribute to the analyzation of Robert and Emily. In “The Cathedral”, by Raymond Carver, the narrator’s significance is reflected by his collective sentiments about certain types of people. He expresses his discontent and disapproval of having his wife’s friend, Robert, a man, a ‘blind man’ no less, stay at his house. The narrator’s resentment is reflected, “I wasn’t enthusiastic about his visit.” (Carver, 1), which contends jealousy of his wife’s close relationship with Robert. He is pre-judging Robert based off the stereotypical way blind people are portrayed in films. The narrator says, “his being blind bothered me”, for perhaps he was apprehensive about whether he would feel comfortable in the presence of a blind man, or perhaps, could not; did not, want to fathom the sensation of being blind. This disquietude was not bore out of the narrator’s sentiments, nor his sympathy, but rather, his anxiousness. Worry arose from the rational uncertainty he faced. This premeditated apprehensiveness characterizes the narrator as a man of various prejudice and insensitivity. In William Faulkner’s, “A Rose for Emily”, the collective convictions of society are portrayed through the narrator, which imposes the narrator with an integral responsibility: to honestly portray Emily. In honesty, one inherently thinks of truth and fairness, but honesty can be conjunct of two sides: the truth, and the fabricated truth that benefits the lie. Essentially, that narrator judges and mocks Emily, as conveyed when claiming to feel bad for her during her misfortunes. The townsfolk of Connecticut hide contemptuous jealousy behind the false expressions of grief and pity for Emily when she begins to lose money and love, illustrated in, “rustling of craned silk and satin behind jalousies…the matched team passed: “Poor Emily.”” (Faulkner, III). Both short stories are similar when the reader realizes the significance of the narrators and how the impact the perspective from which the story is told. The importance of narrator from “The Cathedral” is identical to the prominence of the narrator from “A Rose for Emily”, in the sense that both represent the collective thoughts and judgments of society inflicted upon Robert and Emily. How they both combat these indiscretions will be mentioned later. The narrators shift in point of view contrast between the two stories. Faulkner’s narrator appears to not be impacted by the discovery of Emily’ secrets or moved by the torrents of her life, hence, like Emily, not accepting or considering the drastic change of events. Correlatingly, Scherting writes from the psychological aspect of the narrator in, “Emily Grierson’s Oedipus Complex: Motif, Motive, and Meaning in Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily””, and concludes, “through his narrator {Faulkner}, is obviously describing a psychotic personality” (Scherting, 1). Carver’s narrator, however, shifts his point of view to that of the blind man. The initial change in point of view the narrator experiences toward the blind man is during the dinner when, “I watched with admiration how he used his knife and fork on the meat.” (Carver, 5). Later, Robert asks him to describe a Cathedral, in which the narrator is verbally unable to. Robert suggests that he hover his hand over his {the narrator} while he draws it out instead. Upon completion, Robert asks if his {the narrators} eyes are closed, in which the narrator ascends to this moment of epiphany. Not only has a blind man taught him to see, but he also realizes that he has been blind of morals his entire life. Now, for the first time, he can truly see amid closing his eyes. This shift is created by the spiritual, or religious connection both men shared while drawing the Cathedral. The vison of the mind, not the eyes, is true sight.
Moreover, the philosophic and moral disadvantages of society’s structure cultivated the strengths and weaknesses of Robert and Emily. Carver’s story features male domination and disability insubordination. Society’s morals in “The Cathedral”, for example, reflect various views about controversial topics, such as black people and disabled people. It can be inferred that the narrator is prejudice towards black people based on the remark, “Was his wife a Negro?” (Carver, 3) in response to his wife claiming Robert’s late wife was named Beulah. As well as his doubt towards Robert, shown here, “My idea of blindness came from the movies. In the movies, the blind moved slowly and never laughed.” (Carver, 1). Upon meeting Robert and having dinner with him, the narrator is surprised to learn how open minded and social he is. For Rob is portrayed as a joking, loud, and interesting man. The narrator’s prejudiced views about blind people were most dispelled when he offers Rob marijuana and he accepts, claiming, “There’s a first time for everything.” (Craver, 7) and begins to see how adventurous Robert is. The disadvantage, however, is the assumption that all people of a certain quality are to be stereotyped the same. Such a society functions with a narrow scope of vision that is much to underdeveloped to grow and fluctuate with change. If a boat does not flow with the waves the boat will break. The society present in Faulkner’s short story displays an old fashioned, close knit community dominated by souther patriarchy. Gossip is apparent in this society as well as the discrimination against black sand unmarried women. Emily’s case particularly, was the fact that she was single and was not fulfilling her moral obligation to get married and create a family, as exhibited here, “when she got to be thirty and was still single, we were not pleased exactly, but vindicated;” (Faulkner, 2). Society also was eager to judge Emily when she was seen with Homer and thus decided to scandalize her for belong seen with a man below her station as well as accuse her of abandoning family pride. The townspeople did not respect Emily and colluded behind her back. They viewed her as a reclusive pauper and as a crazy woman. Sandra Lee Kleppe’s, “Faulkner, Welty, and the Short Story Composite”, analyzed Faulkner’s literary criticisms and explained that he was notorious for utilizing antebellum setting sin his work, relating to the discrimination of women and poor treatment of slaves. Within the confinements of society, Robert and Emily endured separately with expectations and obligatory morals. Robert possesses more strength and mental stability than Emily, for he accepts his wife’s death, and Emily cannot come to terms with death. His openness to change proves to be strength, for he is cultivating an ability to adapt to change. Perhaps Robert’s exceptional adapting ability is bore from his experience compensating for his inability to see. Instead of focusing on all he couldn’t see, he learned to feel, smell, and listen, heightening all of his senses. Emily’s weakness derived from her ineptitude to accept death. When her father died and the townspeople came to console her, she, “told them that her father was not dead. She did that for three days” (Faulkner, II). When confronted with tragedy, she subsided in denial and societal seclusion. She could not bear the actual reality for the pain of her grief would be much too debilitating. From this weakness, she grew sick, she grew insane. She relapsed into the child he once was, “When we saw her again, her hair was cut short, making her look like a girl” (Faulkner, III). She wanted to relive a part of her life that was happier, more sociable, and brighter. That was her mistake. She lived in another dimension separate from reality and forgot that decades had passed…she forgot certain people had died. In comparison, the disadvantages of society were the gender-based expectations and stereotypical discrimination imposed on people. Likewise, both time periods functioned within patriarchal views. The stories condoned discrimination and resentment towards the black, the poor, women, and the disabled. In contrast, Robert’s strengths were his ability to compensate with loss and maintain a stable mindset, all while being openminded. Emily, on the other hand, could no longer function, lost touch with reality, and showed more weakness during change. Perhaps it is society that tests a person to show their true selves, their true power and submission.
The intention of exhibiting and confronting death within the plot cultivates how the characters will be able to response to loss. Death is prevalent in both stories ostensibly for the emotional impact the character will constitute. Carver mentions the death of Robert’s wife and how, “they had been inseparable for eight years” (Carver, 3). Robert is still able to function despite the death of his wife. He is able to respond to loss by compensating for all he is missing. His wife died, he visits friends and family. He has never tried something, he does it. Perhaps those actions can insinuate a type of impulsiveness. Though, death does not seem to impact Robert as much as it impacts Emily. Faulkner exhibits how Emily unifies death with life when she refuses to release reality and accept her certitude, her perception does not shift, “She told them that her father was not dead.” (Faulkner, II). In contrast, Craver emulates a shift in point of view when his characters undergo development. When confronting death, her weakness was her inability to accept it, so she compensated for all she lost. Both Rob and Emily compensated for loss. Focusing on Emily’s psychology, it is probable that she has developed a certain mentality about her that has impaired her from becoming a mentally stable adult, touching reality, rather than secluding away from it submerging into her own fantasy. Scherting discusses two types of complexes developed by Psychologist Sigmund Freud: The Positive and Negative Oedipal Complex. The Positive Oedipal Complex is characterized by a child’s unconscious sexual desire for the opposite-sex parent ad hatred for the same-sed parent. Whereas the Negative Oedipal Complex is characterized by a child’s development to hate the opposite-sex parent and grow to sexually desire the same-sex parent. Emily developed a cognitively intensive Positive Oedipal Complex mentality, in which she inherently grew sexually attached to her father. This attachment most likely developed when he deprived her of male suitors until 30. Thus, preventing her from mentally maturing into an adult that can maintain intimate relationships. Furthermore, this is a viable possibility explaining her attachment to Homer Barron, in which she viewed as a surrogate for her father, Mr. Grierson. Replacing her father and creating a source of comfort enabled Emily to cope with loss and death. Emily had poisoned Barron to keep him with her always. She killed him before life could take him, because she was unable to fuse life and death. Interestingly, she notoriously engaged in acts of necrophilia, indicating she has no fear of death, but perhaps death in her presence. In her reality, she was frozen in time. The room she has she had sealed off with Barrons body, is proof of this, for his wedding suit lay out waiting for him to put on. Both authors directly bridge a connection to intertwining death in life, in which creates a life of solitude or sociability depending on the nature of the character. Robert was able to utilize his strengths to advance in his life while Emily was lodged between her fantasy and reality. Contrastingly, Robert confronted death with an open heart and an open mind. He was able to accept this change. Emily, however, denied herself the realization of this reality. And in order to escape time, she froze it. Time does not stop for anyone, nor would it stop for a frozen fantasy; in the end, even the clock dies.
The representative symbol of Robert and Emily as well as their effects on the narrator and society correlate with the circumstances that build their true character. In “The Cathedral” Robert represents the symbol of vision, enlightenment, epiphany; the ability to see with the mind rather than the eyes. He embodies the spiritual realization one can attain if they shift their perspective and learn to comprehend difference. Although Robert was a symbol in the story “The Cathedral” he was not the vocal point for the story. Though we learned his background, that was not the paramount of the story. The narrator, however, was. We were unaware of Robert’s thoughts, but we were exposed to the thoughts and feelings of the narrator. The principle of the story sought to focalize the importance of narrational perception and shifting viewpoint resulting from revelation. It is speculated that Emily represented multiple symbols, a rose and tradition. In the traditional aspect, Emily could have been symbolized as a living monument of the past, as well as a certain timelessness frozen in cultural heritage, preventing change from occurring, “There was one room in that region above stairs which no one had seen in forty years” (Faulkner, v). Emily, as intended for the name of the story, represented a rose. She portrayed a certain fragility that was softly pallid and vulnerable to the outside world, which is why her father, who represented the thorns of a rose, obsessively protected her. This is why the death of her father played such a vital role in shaping the woman she became. She became delusional and helpless. She perhaps, compensated for the loss she encountered and was thus drove to madness. She was a rose without thorns, the most pitiful of all. Sketched with beauty and pain, she drove the town jealous in vain, for her twisted sadness morphed into a drifting madness killing what would be stolen, she wanted to feel whole. The impacts the characters had on society varied. Robert had a positive impact on society, depicted by the narrator. Carver’s narrator reforms his perception about blind people and life when he comprehends Robert; vision, “But I had my eyes closed…I thought it was something I ought to do.” (Carver, 11). Consequently, improving the life of the narrator. Emily imprints a negative impact on society. Society began to be jealous of her, then pitied her, then were struck with horror as they discovered her insanity prevailing through her actions. Robert’s and Emily’s impacts on society as a result of the circumstances they faced, which developed the essence of their character. Kleppe’s examination of Faulkner’s styles indicates that Faulkner’s narrators often had incidental judgment towards the main conflict within a story (Kleppe, 29). Confronted by the death of his wife and his blindless, Robert must compensate for his losses. His coping method enables him to grow stronger and more independent. His independence can be attributed his blindless, which he has faced his whole life. This shaped him into a self-sufficient character. Emily, on the other hand, was raised by her father in a wealthy antebellum setting. She was raised to be proper and maintain a certain standard in society. Denied the freedom to build exterior relationships with the opposite sex, Emily becomes a reliant character. She depends on her father for every aspect of her life. A prominent comparison between Emily and Robert, are the lack of thoughts and insight the reader is exposed to. In both short stories, the reader is aware of the narrator’s thoughts. Another comparison are the circumstances that develop the character of Emily and Robert. Both charters encounter loss and change. In contrast, the effects they both maintain on society differ, for Robert sparks a positive influence and Emily insinuates a negative impact. The overall symbolism, effect on society, and character development provides the reader with a greatly detailed painting to envision the literary scene before them.
In the essence of structure and literary disarray, Faulkner and Carver design story lines compiled of intricate styles. The comparative factors include the significance and reflective roles of the narrators, the philosophic and moral disadvantages of society’s structure, the intention of exhibiting and confronting death, and both the representative symbol of Robert and Emily as well as their effects on the narrator and society. The contrasting factors are emulated by shifts in point of view, the individual strengths and weaknesses of Emily and Robert, non-collective character response to loss and adaptational abilities to cope with change, and finally, the circumstances that develop the characters personality and attributes which are incorporated to design a structured story composed of literary complex. The overall contrast between “The Cathedral” and “A Rose for Emily” lie in the augmented character structure and narrational value. When one confronts death, a loss of such magnitude that all future seems unbearable, one can be driven to insanity, incapable of accepting change and the sad reality, while other times, one can cope with reality and accept the fate they have been dealt. Like a rose without thorns, Emily was defenseless, so she created invisible barriers…like a man without eyes, Robert had to rely on his ears and sensation to see; a certain vision he would never lose even if he gave it away one thousand times.
Cited Works
Carver, Raymond. “PDF.” Vintage Contemporaries, 20 Oct. 1993.
Faulkner, William. “A Rose for Emily.” The Forum, 30 Apr. 1930.
Kleppe, Sandra Lee. “Faulkner, Welty, and the Short Story Composite.” EBSCO, literary magazines, 3 Mar. 2006.
Scherting, Jack. “Emily Grierson’s Oedipus Complex: Motif, Motive, and Meaning in Faulkner’s ‘A Rose for Emily.” EBSCO, literary magazine, 1 Sept. 1980.
