Barn Burning Analysis

Jonathan Kozol’s Fire in the Ashes is an honest depiction of the hardships and triumphs of families in the South Bronx, New York. In this book, Kozol introduces us to several Hispanic and Black families that he originally met in the Mott Haven/Martinique Hotel in the 1980’s and allows us to view their trajectory in the proceeding 25 years. By allowing the reader a look into the lives of these families, he provides us with a realistic depiction of the disadvantages families living in poverty encounter despite interventions from charity organizations and philanthropic donors. Kozol identifies that without “systematic justice and systematic equity in public education” (Kozol, 2013, pg 304) students in these impoverished neighborhoods will continue to lack the same economic opportunities that may potentially lead them out of the welfare system. Kozol emphasizes lack of stable housing, and unequal educational opportunities, as primarily conditions to perpetuating poverty. Despite the challenges that the families endure, Kozol is able to show that they are resilient.

Both of these stories feature moral decisions as salient points throughout. In “Barn Burning”, Abner Snopes’s sense of morality has been compromised by his experiences during the Civil War. He now expresses and identifies himself through his violent acts, i.e., burning barns, stealing horses, and living off of other people. His son, Sartoris Snopes, has the moral decision of whether to be

William Faulkner’s “Barn Burning” takes a lot of real life cultural values and ways of southern life in the late 1800s. Many of those values and ways are expressed by sharecropping and tenant farming.

The short story,”Barn Burning”written by William Faulkner is about a 10 year old boy named Sarty, who gets called to the stand of the court; his father, Abner Snopes, is accused of burning a barn down. Sarty knows that his father is guilty of arson and wants justice to be served, but, his father wants him to stay loyal to his family and blood. The conflict of morals vs. family goes on for the entire story,Sarty’s moral beliefs are embedded in justice and peace, while his father wants him to protect his family no matter the circumstances. Literary devices used in the story are symbolism and diction, the symbols of blood and fire being, family and a chain.and being told from the perspective of a timid ten year old boy. One of the major themes present throughout the story is courage, wanting to tell on his father for arson but, being shot down by his intimidating father. William Faulkner illustrates the theme of courage through the use of symbolism and diction

They’re always about something bad happening” (McCarthy 269). So by this statement, we know that the boy while empathetic, still feels negative emotions for himself. We feel as if the boy is what keeps the book going, the fire; he is the only one who can and will keep the story going because he is seen as something greater than all. After the father dies, we see that the boy finds a group of wanderers and joins them.

William Faulkner born and raised in the South. Faulkner being a Southerner had intimate knowledge of the history of the south. Faulkner wrote “Barn Burning” on what he heard growing up. He would listen to stories of famers from the small town he grew up in. Faulkner’s family history gave him inspiration to write the story about Colonel Sartoris in “Barn Burning.” William Faulkner’s “Barn Burning” is about a relation between a boy and his father. The young boy is expected to side with the family to protect his family and his father. In Joseph Flora’s essay about “Burning Barn” he points out “how two brothers in the same family could be so different” (Flora 755). Colonel Sartoris a young boy who is faced with knowing his father is a barn burner who has been getting away with his crime. Sarty must decide between family loyalty and doing the right the thing.

A father figure is commonly known for his compassion and general desire for the best in his family, however, in “Barn Burning”, Abner Snopes commits crimes and shows a lack of respect.

Children and young-adults look up to their parents for the hard choices they need to face and for support when needed. When a child is taught to make their own decisions, they can learn to be more independent in the future. According to Psychology Today, “Decision making is crucial because the decisions your children make dictate the path that their lives take.” To become a healthier and more mature adult, it is critical to a young person that they make positive judgement calls. In the novels, The Other Wes Moore and The Scarlet Letter, the authors focus on the point that children are greatly influenced by their parents to make the right choice. In The Scarlet Letter written by Nathaniel Hawthorne, Hester, the main character, has a child named Pearl who is considerably impacted by her mother. Pearl is compared to her mother using direct characterization and tone, but is also seen as more valuable than a symbol of disgrace. The same thing occurs in The Other Wes Moore by Wes Moore. The author, Wes Moore, and the other Wes Moore both grew up in the same area with similar home situations, but they ended up taking different paths as adults. The author captures their similarities and disparity through the use of literary devices to bring about the idea that their parent’s decisions affect them. The direct characterization and tone present throughout The Scarlet Letter and The Other Wes Moore gives the message that the choices the parents make influence their children’s decisions in the future.

Normally in life, you look up to your father to be the care taker and to encourage you to make your own decisions on what is right and what is wrong. You figure your father should have your best interest at heart and to show compassion for you. In William Faulkner's short story "Barn Burning," Abner is the opposite of the normal father figure you would see. Rather than encouraging his son, Sarty, to make his own decisions on what is right and what is wrong, Abner wants Sarty to lie for him to protect his freedom, so Abner won’t get caught for burning barns. Abner forces fear into Sarty to make sure he will lie for him

Now, we can look at the other side of the pendulum. Sartoris Snope is also being pulled away from his family. We see grief and despair evident in the very instances where he is defending his father and trying to find a place in his family. When he changes his thought of his "father's enemy" to "our enemy", the narrator indicates that he does this with despair. When he is called to testify in the first trial he thinks, "He aims for me to lie. And I will have to do hit." Again, the narrator states that this thought comes with frantic grief and despair. In these two instances, we see the pendulum swinging very quickly between the two extremes. Sarty tries to defend his father but it is with grief and despair. If a person truly believes in what or who they are defending it would not be with grief and despair but with confidence and persistence. Upon seeing the de Spain mansion, Sarty thinks, "They are safe from him. People whose lives are a part of this peace and dignity are beyond his touch, he no more to them than a buzzing wasp: capable of stinging for a little moment but that's all; the spell of the peace and dignity rendering even the barns and stable and cribs which belong to it impervious to the puny flames he might contrive…" After the rug has been ruined and the twenty bushels requested Sarty has this thought, "Maybe

How does a child feel when their parents conceive destructive values and manipulative connotations? To any child a parent is the person that they look up to and in most cases look for encouragement. However, some parents tend to value destruction and their own self-gain more than the life of their child. Both William Faulkner’s “As I Lay Dying” and Toni Morrison’s “The Bluest Eye” demonstrating a principle that when parents are bound to their twisted, manipulative, and even immoral values that their children will ultimately be the ones to pay the price as they either embrace the similar hollow values themselves or set out to fulfill their own desires through often times self-destructive means.

At first glance, the story “Barn burning” seems just to be about a tyrannical father and a son who is in the grips of that tyranny. I think Faulkner explores at least one important philosophical question in this story were he asks at what point should a person make a choice between what his parent(s) and / or family believes and his own values?

Every person reaches a point in their lives when they must define themselves in relation to their parents. We all come through this experience differently, depending on our parents and the situation that we are in. For some people the experience comes very early in their lives, and can be a significant life changing experience. In William Faulkner’s “Barn Burning” Colonel Sartoris Snopes must decide either to stand with his father and compromise his integrity, or embrace honesty and morality and condemn his family. This is a difficult decision to make, especially for a ten year old boy that has nothing outside of what his father provides. Sarty’s decision to ultimately betray his father is dependent on his observation of Abner’s character

The saying, “blood is thicker than water” is a term used to imply that family relationships are always more important than friends. However, at times it may be hard to choose between family and friends based on right and wrong. In the short story, Barn Burning, written by “William Faulkner, a Nobel Prize winning novelist of the American South”(“William Faulkner”), choosing between family and doing what is right for honor and justice is highly expressed. The main character, Colonel Sartoris Snopes, nicknamed Sarty, battles his thoughts of doing what is right or wrong throughout the story. After following the orders of his father for ten years, Sarty eventually decides to make his own choice and go against the pull of blood.

Summary of central events: Mr. Snopes burns Mr. Harris barn because Mr. Harris charges him, “a dollar pound fee,” (515) for the return of his hog. In court the judge dismisses the charges against Snopes but warns him to leave the town for good and Snopes agrees to comply. The next day the family arrives at their new home. After Snopes tracks horse manure onto the expensive rug, the server instructs him to clean and return it. Snopes ruins the rug from improper cleaning and Major de Spain “charge[s] [him] twenty bushels of corn against [his] crop” (521). At the last court appearance the judge decides that Mr.Snopes has to pay Major de Spain 10 bushels of corn for the ruin of the rug. Because Snopes is upset from having to pay de Spain for