Welcome to Francis Academic Press

International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology, 2021, 3(3); doi: 10.25236/IJFS.2021.030316.

Fallen Monument: a Marxist Analysis of William Faulkner’s a Rose for Emily

Author(s)

Shiying Feng

Corresponding Author:
Shiying Feng
Affiliation(s)

Minzu University of China, Beijing, China

Abstract

William Faulkner as a great novelist in the 20th century has long been thought as a representative writer of American southern literature. And his short story A Rose for Emily has attracted extensive attention in literary circles with its distinctive narrative structure and fascinating plot. Many scholars have conducted in-depth discussions from different perspectives like writing skills, feminism research and psychological research, but so far none so much has been done from the perspective of Marxist criticism, which actually can not only provide a unique view to reveal the different fortunes of southern people that are undergoing the great social change after American Civil War but also help to uncover Faulkner’s complex emotions towards his hometown, the south of the United States.

Keywords

A rose for emily, William faulkner, Marxism

Cite This Paper

Shiying Feng. Fallen Monument: a Marxist Analysis of William Faulkner’s a Rose for Emily. International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology (2021), Vol. 3, Issue 3: 85-87. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJFS.2021.030316.

References

[1] Bressler, Charles. Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice (A Second Printing). 5th ed., Pearson, 2011, pp.166-179.

[2] Eagleton, Terry. “Literature and History.” Marxism and Literature Criticism, University of California Press, 1976, pp. 1-15.

[3] Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide. 2nd ed., Routledge, 2006, pp. 53-61.

[4] Eagleton, Terry. “The Author as Producer.” Marxism and Literature Criticism, University of California Press, 1976, pp. 55-67.

[5] Ollman, Bertell. Alienation: Marx’s Conception of Man in a Capitalist Society (Cambridge Studies in the History and Theory of Politics). 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 1977. pp. 131-158