Darl+Knows

Throughout this book and throughout all of our discussions, we discussed the notion that Darl had some sort of "power" to know everything else that is going on in the rest of the book. I wanted to ask all of you if you believed that Darl had this "power." When we first began this book, someone in my class made the comment, "Oh, this story has already happened and so he can recall all the events." But Br. Tom told us no, that's not how the story was written. This story is building. We learn everything when the characters learn everything. So how is it that Darl knows everything. I could understand how he knew about Jewel, because he understood that Jewel wasn't related. But how could Darl know something happening in another house or another area when he was in a different location? I'm still confused. 1203781557

I also am a little unsure about this, especially since it is in Darl's chapter when we first learn about Jewel's interactions with his horse. However, I think it is important to note that towards the end of the book, Cash's chapter is written as though looking back in time, when he begins his chapter explaining why Darl had to go to Jackson before he talks about Darl's arrest. There are several discrepancies like this in terms of point of view and time scheme in the novel.

My first thought has to do with Darl's seeming "omniscence." When I was reading this book, I never got the idea that Darl had any special powers, because, well, it just doesn't fit. I don't think that Faulkner would write a book in this serious, realistic tone only to reveal later that, oh my goodness, Darl has super-human powers! It doesn't make sense. Of course, I just assumed that we were seeing the situation as Darl would interpret it, even though he wasn't there, but now that I think about it, perhaps we are supposed to get even more out of it than that. I think that perhaps Faulkner is telling us something about Darl--Darl is so perceptive and thoughtful that he can understand how events might play out even if he wasn't there. So, no for the "powers," but I definitely think that this says something about Darl's personality.

And, the reason I brought up Cash's chapter that seems to be written looking back is that I don't think it is fair to take this book totally literally. Though the rest of the novel may have been written then and there, as things were happening, this chapter seems different. Therefore, why couldn't we just assume that perhaps Darl's chapters describing things he didn't witness were simply written that way because the author wanted us to see a situation throught Darl's eyes, even if he wasn't literally present? 1203790981

Darl is not a clairvoyant, as far as I am concerned. He doesn't have to be. I think that our key to this lies in Gass's essay (as much as everyone argued with it, it has a compelling argument). A book is not about reality. It can't be, because it is not real. So Darl's total omniscient view cannot conflict with reality because he is not real. He is the purpose of the author's writing, nothing more.

With that in mind, Darl's all-knowing can be characterized into Faulkner's objectives. First, he wants a character that has the powers of a natural human being. Thus, Darl cannot see into the mind of others or witness what he has not seen. But of course he does, so how do we reconcile this. I stand by my original assertion that Darl is nothing more than an excellent observer. Thus, he knows the other characters very well. Even if he is not there, he would be able to describe them in perfect accuracy. He knows how they will react, and he can provide a view that describes the feelings of each character without their own thoughts cluttering the scene. And even if Darl cannot know perfectly what would happen, it does not matter. Maybe Darl's image of what happened was entirely inaccurate. Maybe there was sobbing at her feet and she delivered a lovely final soliloquy. But if she did, it wouldn't matter. It is simply substituing one fiction for another. //None of this really ever happened!//

Faulkner wanted to achieve something with this scene. He wanted to describe how the characters would handle her death. It does not matter whether Darl's description is accurate because Faulkner made it accurate. It is what he wants it to be. Darl does not have to see all, and it is of no consequence. Thus, Darl can talk any way that Faulkner wants, because he is Faulkner's child 1203837455

I too think that Darl is merely an excellent observer. Otherwise, wouldn't he have gone mad earlier on? It took a while before everything around him got to him badly enough to where he lost his cool. So Darl knew about Dewey Dell and he knew about Jewel. But what I am wondering is whether he knew all about Anse's motives. I felt that he was on to him when on page 235 when they were talking about how Cash needed to see the doctor. They decided it was most important to dig the grave, and Anse remarked that it would cost money, which sounded to me like one of the most insensitve things one could say about one's dead spouse's burial. Maybe it was this way for Darl as well, because he said, "Do you begrudge her it?" Anse had been saying that throughout the book, so saw it as sarcasm. Did he really know the extent? If so, when - or did he know all along?1203881869

I thought that it was intriguing that Darl went mad in the end because it follows the long theme we've had so far this year that it is the "crazy" and the blind who can see, and have the most insight. For whatever reason, Darl is the odd man in the family. I think it's because he has more insight than the rest of them. I remember there was one part in the novel that said the reason for this was because they could tell that he was analyzing them by the way he was looking at them. Kind of like that whole idea of being conscious about being seen. They judged him as queer because they knew that he could see the queerness inside of themselves. Why should Darl be the scapegoat of their own insecurities? 1203994459

I also think that Darl is just more observant than the rest of them. For instance, with him knowing about Dewey Dell's pregnancy, he probably saw that she was acting differently, took note of the signs, and put two and two together. Not even words were necessary because he could figure it all out from observing. However, I don't think that he is the only "odd man in the family" as LDo says he is. Remember, Cash had "a look," too, although his only came when there was something related to carpentry, and Jewel had a look when he was with that wild horse of his. They were all a little bit off the wall; he just happened to be a little more off the wall.1203996364

I think that Darl's ability to know so much about the events going on is an essential part of his character, but also helps to build the unity of the novel. I think that if we didn't have someone who seemed to be a strong narrator and capable of giving us reliable insight into things going on then it would be much more difficult to keep things straight, and that it helps to bring everything else that happens together. Secondly his insightfulness is important to his character. Other characters don't feel comfortable around him because he can see them for who they are and can break through their isolation. With Dewy Dell especially this causes her to have a strong dislike for him. His family might not have turned on him quite as easily if it were not for his intuative ablity to see other people through a sort of objective lens. 1204002113

I think this was the topic that I thought the most about while reading this novel. I had a hard time figuring out how Darl could be off in another town, with Jewel, and suddenly realize that his mother had passed away without hearing word from anyone and without being there himself. It was surprising that he also knew about Dewey Dell's pregnancy without having to ask or without being told, which resulted in her being quite upset with him and even daydreaming about killing him. I believe Faulkner added in Darl's perceptiveness because everyone else was so blind to what was going on around them. All of Anse and Addie's children seemed to be emotionally numb about Addie's death except for Darl, and Anse was especially cold about the whole situation. Everyone was practically emotionless in that family and barely acknowledged anything about one another, except for occasional bursts of rage from Jewel. Darl was always thought of as "queer" because he was simply the only one in that crazy family that actually noticed and cared about what was going on around him. 1204072671

Yea I argued the point in class that Darl is supernatural and I don't understand how he isn't. He can tell us other events that are happening in other locations at the same time. There is no possible explanation for this to occur naturally, therefore I think this is supernatural. This element of the story thrown in was kind out of place I think. Everything else in the book is dark and wierd but still realistic, except these all-seeing type powers Darl has. It's very strange because usually we are limited to one viewpoint in the book, but Darl apparently can tap into the others. I'm not sure what that means though if someone could help me out.1204174233

Okay, I don't know if I agree with this whole supernatural thing. Yes Darl some how knew what was going on in other places, but Addie also had a chapter and she was dead. Thus, I think it was just Faulkner's way of trying to fill in the gaps for us. I believe Darl was all-knowing with his queer eyes because he wasn't so wrapped up in his own needs and could see into the soul of others. I don't think he is crazy or mental challenged or can foretell the future. I think he's just an ordinary guy with a gift to understand other and to recognize when others are having issues. Does anyone really believe he has magical, supernatural powers? 1204254043~