Death Blog Post #2

"A Rose for Emily" by William Faulkner

#5 What are the advantages of the first person plural point of view in this story? What would be lost if it were told in first-person singular, by one of the townspeople, or in third-person limited point of view?

 This was a more confusing story than the first one I read. I found it very hard to follow because there didn't seem to be any plot line I could actually follow. It was really messed up, though. She slept with a dead guy up until she died? That is really messed up. The story is told in first person plural point of view which gives a sense that everyone else is sort of looking in at Emily's life. If it were narrated in any other way, the story would lose the sense that everyone in the town was fascinated by her. She seemed nice in the beginning, but towards the end other people seemed to be talking about her and saying rumors. It says, "We did not say she was crazy then. We believed she had to do that. We remembered all the young men her father had driven away, and we knew that with nothing left, she would have to cling to cling to that which had robbed her, as people will" (Faulkner 285). This shows that the third person plural of all the people collectively thought she was going crazy and that she was being a huge werido.