(THESIS) - WILLIAM FAULKNER: TIME AND MITHOLOGY Manoel Ferreira Neto: THESIS

VI PART

What is thereupon revealed to us the present, and not the ideal limit whose place e neatly marked out past and future. Faulkner´s present is essentially catastrofic. It is the vivent which creeps up on us and then disappears. Beyond this present time there´s nothing, since the future does not exist. The present rises up from sources analyses, sources unknown to us and drives away mother passage. The same withing us, within our emotions and feelings, when we simply start the sentence and keep on reading, they drive away another sound. The present rises up from sources unknown, it´s forever beginning anew.

"And.. And.. And then..."

Faulkner shows that the present is submerged in the past, that what is lived in the present is what was lived in the past. In this case, the past is not so much an evocation as it is a constant pressure upon the present, the pressure of what has been what it is.

Consciousness shows that the present is submerged in the past that was lived whose placed is neated marked out between past and future. Faulkner´s present is essentialist, essentially catastrof. It´s the event which creeps up on us and disappears.

Consciousness, therefore, is mostly memory. But not the kind of memory which attaches the present to a past know as past and no longer existing. For memory is so much a past of what actually exists that it does not know itself as memory, does not know itself as anything but the sense of the past, we must conclude - and this lies at the core of Faulkner that is the past which is real.

Quentin´s monologue in "The Sound and the Fury" would be a typical illustration of this principle: Whilst Quentin is fighting with another student we read about a first fight he had with his sister´s lover which took place several years previously, and this is what he is actually experiencing.

The characters and the conflict are particular and credible. But they are mythological. In Mr. Faulkner´s mythology there are two kinds of characters; they are Sartorises or Snopses. Whatever the fmaily names may be. And in the spiritual geography of Mr. Faulkner´s work there are two words: "The Sartoris worlds in detail, dramatizing the inevitable conflict between them.

In a re-arranged of the novels, say for a collection edition the "Unvanquished" might well stand first; for the actions occur later, historically, than in other parts of the books, and its objectives; in the essential terms of Mr. Faulkner´s methodology, the gramatic tension of this work. On the side of the conflict there are the Sartorises, recognizable human beings who act traditionally. Against them the invasion. Northern Aimies, and their diffused dies the reconstruction era, wage of war, aiming to make the tradition actions of the Sartoris impossible.

The invaders are unable to cope the "Sartoris"; but their invasion provides other antagonist. With an occasion within which his special anti-Sartoris talent makes him singularly powerful. This antagonist is the landless poor-white horse trader, Ab Snopes; his special talent is his low cunning as an enterpreneur. He acts without regard for the legitimacy of his means; he has no ethical code. In the crisis brought about by the war, he is embled to use a member of the Sartoris family for his own advantage because, for the first time, he can be useful to the Sartorises. Moreover, he is embled to make this Sartoris (Mrs. Rosa Millard) betray herself into an act of self-interest such as his, and to cause her death while using her as his too.

In simplest terms, a story is an account of something that happened. Teh "something that happens" is the action. In most stories the action is more than just a series of unrelated incidents; rather, the action is organized into a plot. The plot is the plan, the blue print of the story. The basis of every balanced that the reader is in doubt about the outcome. Generally the opposing forces are persons or groups of persons, though many fine stories have been written about other kinds of conflict, such as the struggle of an individual against the fores of nature, and some of our best stories are purely psychological; the conflict centers about ideas or attitudes. The turning point of which the reader can foresee the outcome of the struggle is called the climax.

In an extraordinarily interview Faulkner gave to Jean Stein for the Paris Review, we´re bound to recognize these features, how he used to imagine. Think and write of one his most important books. It´s common, or should I say, it continues happening people to think a critic creates a work as he wishes, jut to have something to say about someone. Onde in a whilst a critic transforms someone´s work into a greater one. Once in a whilst, a critic transforms a work into an interest of not to recognize someone´s work. But it´s not real. It depends upon the analyses we have decided to establish, a critic must search for it within the word.

"Interviewer: What work is that?

Faulkner: The Sound and the Fury I wrote it five separate times, trying to tell the story, to rid my self of the dream which would continue to anguish me until I did. It´s a tragedy of two lost women; Caddy and her daughter. Dilsey is one of my favorite characters, because she is brave, courageous, generous, gentle, and honest. She´s much more brave and honest and generous than me.

Interviewer: How did "The Sound and the Fury" begin?

Faulkner: It began with a mental picture. I didn´t realize at the time it was symbolical. The picture was of he muddy seat of a little girl´s drawer in a pear tree, where she could see through a window where her grandmother´s funeral was taking place and report what they were and what they were and what they were doing, how her pants short story and that it would have to be a book. And then I realized the symbolism of the soiled pants, and that image was replaced by the one of the fatherless and motherless girl climbing down the rainpipe to escape from the only home she had, where she had never been offered love or affection or understanding".

"We had already began to tell the story through the eyes of the idiot child, since I felt that it would be more effective as told by someone capable of knowing what happened, but not why. I saw that I had not told store that time. I tried to tell it again, the same story through the eyes of another brother. That was still not it. I told it for the third time through the eyes of another brother, the third one. That was still not it. I tried to gather the pieces together and ill in the gaps by making myself the spokesman. It was still not complete, not until fifteen years after the book was published, when I wrote as an appendix to another book the final effort to get the story told and off my mind, so that I myself could have some peace from it. It´s the book I feel tenderest towards. I couldn´t leave to try again, though I´d probably fail again."

#RIODEJANEIRO#, 02 DE JANEIRO DE 2019#