English 3319 students:
During your 50-minutes class time (1:00-1:50 p.m.) on Monday, September 27, please publish a comment of at least two well-developed paragraphs about this topic: What do you think are the most significant moral flaws in Thomas Sutpen's attempts in Absalom, Absalom! to create a coherent history and family legacy during his life, as William Faulkner explains on pp. 224-285. (This part begins with the statement, "His trouble was innocence," and ends with "what had happened was just a delusion and did not actually exist.")
When you compose your comment, please keep in mind that modernism emphasizes examples of the corruption and fragmentation of allegedly stable social order in the past. This corruption and fragmentation has led to chaos, according to Faulkner and other modernists.
After you publish your two-paragraph comment, please reply in one well-developed paragraph to at least one of the other students' comments.
As we have discussed, you should compose your comment and reply paragraphs in a separate Word document or in an email to yourself so that you would not have to rewrite them in case you have a technical glitch when you try to publish them. If you have trouble publishing them at first, just copy and paste them into the comment and reply boxes a second (and even a third) time until they are successfully published.
This glitch usually happens when a student is not logged into a Google account (gmail) when he or she tries to submit the comment or reply. To avoid that possibility, be sure to log in first. However, this glitch also sometimes happens even when a student is logged in, so, to avoid being frustrated in either case, you should compose your comment and reply in a Word document or an email to yourself. If you cannot submit your comment and reply after a few attempts, please email them to me to publish on your behalf: linda.kornasky@angelo.edu.
Reminders: On Wednesday, September 29, we will discuss Gertrude Stein's experimental writings: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/gertrude-stein
Thank you,
Dr. Kornasky
Throughout the course of “Absalom, Absalom”, Thomas Sutpen seems to be steadfastly focused on one singular goal; creating a legacy in his name that will last and be known for decades after he passes on. However, as the story progresses, Thomas begins to lose his grip on reality, unwilling to adapt to the world around him and adjust his methods of attaining this goal. After eventually losing any semblance of his goal of 100 square miles of land and a family name that will be revered by others for generations, it finally becomes evident what exactly kept him from his goal and instead leaves him disappointed and bitter.
ReplyDeleteThe most significant moral flaw that I saw throughout “Absalom, Absalom” was Thomas Sutpen’s refusal to acknowledge that he needs to change to accomplish some of his goals. Sutpen is so obsessed with achieving his goals that he becomes completely blind to any sense of ethics or morality, losing his humanity in a sense. The most glaring example of this is when Thomas rejects his son, Charles, because he found out that his mother was ⅛ black. This is one of the many examples of Sutpen refusing to accept any deviations from his pursuit of his dream as he becomes almost robotic in this chase of personal happiness.. As he pushes on towards his dreams, Sutpen loses control of the life he wishes to have, instead becoming a slave to the idea of it. It is because of this that he does not recognize any need for change in pursuit of his goal, and therefore begins to disregard any moral or humanistic values.
This reply was made by Aaron McGuire.
DeleteI completely agree with the moral flaw you listed. Sutpen was depicted countless times in the retellings of his family's story as a stubborn man with a profound tunnel-vision about his life. He would never accept anything less than perfection for his vision but in doing so he destroyed any chances he had to fulfill it. Excellent work!
I really enjoyed your perspective Brooks. Your words on how Sutpen became blind to any ethics or morality fits in perfectly with his self prescribed "innocence", as it is apparent he never accumulated any morals whatsoever in his life. Sutpen, rather than being a person who cares for the lives of others, is a man whose chief concern is that of power, and also as you write, legacy.
DeleteThis post was made by Aaron McGuire.
ReplyDeleteOne significant moral flaw Thomas Sutpen held in his attempts to create a family legacy and coherent history is his incredible stubbornness in both his beliefs and his motivation. Throughout the book, Thomas never seems to give up on his attempts to create a lasting and “pure” family legacy by securing a full-blooded white son. However, in his relentless pursuit of this goal, he tears down the very family he is seeking to build up, be it through his own mistakes or through his decisions and reactions. An example of this can be found in the sampled reading when it describes his decision to propose to Miss Rosa, saying that, “So he suggested what he suggested to her, and she did what he should have known she would do and would have known probably if he had not bogged himself again in his morality which had all the parts but which refused to run, to move.”
Another significant moral flaw Thomas held was the lengths he went to achieve this goal before his passing. Also found throughout the book are countless examples of Sutpen being in a constant, desperate rush to achieve a suitable heir to inherit his legacy before passing. As each attempt failed, be it due to his own standards of suitability or his crass decision-making, his sense of urgency seemed to worsen up until his death. A strong example of this desperate urgency can be found in the sample text when he is attempting to settle down yet again, saying that, “All that he was concerned about was the possibility that he might not have time sufficient to do it in, regain his lost ground in. He did not waste any of what time he had either.”
Aaron, I found your comment to be quite well written. We share several of the same sentiments, mainly our focus on Sutpen's desire for a purely white son to be his heir. However, one thing you touched on was Thomas Sutpen's proposal to Miss Rosa, a woman who he later betrays. This is another perfect example of how Sutpen tosses aside all morals in pursuit of his goals, and seems to not lose any sleep nor have no problem with his horrible treatment of others.
Delete(My book has different page numbers)
ReplyDeleteIn William Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom! the most significant moral flaw in Thomas Sutpen’s history originated from within his childhood. The entirety of his personality and essential nature are a manifestation of the environment in which he was raised. As Quinten’s grandfather explains, Sutpen was raised in an isolated backwoods land where West Virginia would later be established. From his birth, Sutpen is portrayed as being an independent and “innocent” boy (229). However, I feel the word innocent is too kind to Sutpen; maybe naïve would be more fitting, as Sutpen’s moral character was never developed in the least. Rather than see the world as a place of promise, Sutpen, as a result of his exposure to racism and discrimination, saw the world as a place to attain power. After he moves and is acclimated to the more “civilized” Virginia, he experiences his first struggle with the power of others, as he is denied entry into a house deemed too civilized for his presence. In response, Sutpen makes his first move to consolidate what little power he had by running away and planning “to do something about it,” “it” being the experience he just had (224).
All of the rest of his life is a manifestation of this event, as he makes it his one duty in life to be the one who may turn others away at the door. In an attempt to avoid being the one who is “turned away” Sutpen abandons his parental family, and later does the same with the “family” he progenerates (248, 250). All of his other moral flaws are originated form his desire for dominion over those he deems as lesser. He destroys the lives of many in his pursuit to be the one who may turn others away.
Hi Wyatt,
DeleteI really like your post and agree with what you said. You worded perfectly exactly what I had hoped to achieve in my post. It is all a manifestation of the one event that he experienced as a child. I also feel innocent is too kind of a word considering how he treats people throughout the book, even once he is a grown man and has fathered children. It is hard to see how his sheer determination to have power causes him to abandon his own family. He gives everything in order to maintain a legacy he is proud of, only to tarnish his family name in an irreparable way.
This reply is written by Madelyn Mendoza.
DeleteHi Wyatt, I really think this is well thought out response and it is extremely well worded. I really appreciate the way you described how the people in the course of the novel carry their perceptions of Sutpen and this is alos a point I talked about in my own piece about how the overall perceptions of people can change the reality of which we live. Once again, I really liked this response and best of luck the rest of the term.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThomas Sutpen’s most significant moral flaws that led to his disastrous family legacy are his prejudices against slaves, his lack of compassion and his careless sexual practices. Although Sutpen did not come from wealth, he built a new name for himself and achieved both social and monetary success once he moved to Mississippi. He takes immense pride in this but, due to his continuous carelessness with his sexual activity, he fathers a son to a woman who he later finds out to be black and abandons them both. This abandoned son represents the same abandonment that Sutpen faced himself as a boy when he renounced his family and his social position as a white man when he used the back door of a house that is intended for slave/servant use only. The boy Bon, unknowingly, appears and intends to marry Judith, Sutpen’s daughter. Lacking compassion, Sutpen reveals to everyone the truth after discovering that Bon is his abandoned son and ultimately Judith’s half-brother. This exposes Sutpen for his past indiscretion, but only the incest is exposed not the truth of Bon’s bloodline. Sutpen and Henry, his son, both serve in the military during the war and Sutpen is even a colonel during this time. This brings himself and his family respect and honor. However, soon after Henry learns of Bon’s lineage, he murders him at the front gates of the Sutpen’s plantation on the day of his wedding to Judith. This rehashes the shame of the family and their legacy. Following this, Sutpen falls into alcoholism. Although he is respected and admired by Wash Jones, he has an affair with his granddaughter who is only fifteen. Upon discovering this through the birth of Milly’s child, Wash Jones murders Sutpen, further shaming the family name and again exposing his reckless sexual practices. At the end of the book, we know that Henry had lived out his days at the plantation house until a shamed daughter of Thomas Sutpen’s with a slave woman, burns the house down with them both inside. The family legacy is inevitably tarnished by Sutpen’s moral flaws, even once he had passed.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that Sutpen's primary moral failing is in his prejudices. When he was young he was "innocent" and did not understand the societal differences in race and class. Once he does learn this, instead of taking his experiences and attempting to create a better world, he allows this to harden him and turn him cruel. He does not want to stop the racial abuse and abuse from the upper class, but rather wants to be the abuser. This blinds him to all other aspects of life, and he allows his obsession with wielding power over others to cloud his judgements and destroy his life.
Delete(Katherine Spitzer)
Hi Brittney! I really liked your post and totally agree that his biggest moral flaw had to do with his prejudices against his slaves and his carelessness when it came to sleeping with women. I really thought you did a good job encapsulating how his flaws ultimately led to the downfall of his legacy.
DeleteWhen Thomas Sutpen attempts to create a coherent history and family legacy during his life, his most significant moral failings fall in the fact that he is blinded and corrupted by ambition. Thomas Sutpen serves to illustrate the failed American dream and disillusionment towards the upper class that characterized the Modernist period. Thomas was poor, “white trash,” and uneducated. Realizing exactly what this meant for his life after the fateful encounter at the door, he decides to get up and become a wealthy, upper class man. With this goal in mind, he no longer cares about who his actions may hurt, as long as they help him attain his goals. This selfish and arrogant attitude is his downfall, and he is left in squalor to be killed by a man who mirrors the early life of Sutpen.
ReplyDeleteSutpen’s primary motivation in life was ensuring that his children never received the same treatment and humiliation that he did as a boy, as well as to have a son to whom he could leave his wealth and legacy. However, he mistreats all of his children and is the cause of their pain and humiliation. Through this hypocrisy, he effectively destroys each and every one of his children, thereby destroying his legacy, the only thing he truly cared about. Even in telling his own history, he creates a fragmented storyline that contributes to the mystery, which he clings to in order to maintain his status, surrounding him. This fragmentation echoes his own thought process, which is only able to see his past humiliation and plans for future success at the expense of those he is supposed to care about. His status becomes the driving force in his mind, and this is what ultimately bankrupts him. He is born poor and uneducated, and dies at the hand of the man who embodies what he might have been. Through his own flaws and refusal to pay attention to those around him, he is left lower then he was in his early life.
(Katherine Spitzer)
Hi Katherine! I think your analysis of Sutpen is spot on. He does anything he can to achieve his goals even if that means hurting others. I like how you compare Sutpen to the failed American dream and how he possesses this goal that he will never achieve. I think you did a great job of explaining how the fragmentation plays a part in Sutpen’s story and how he is responsible for his own downfall.
DeleteThomas Sutpen was a man who had many flaws. However, I believe his most significant moral flaw was his pride. He would much rather hurt those around him rather than admitting the truth about his family. This one flaw single handedly caused Sutpen and his family’s downfall. Throughout his whole life, Sutpen was set on creating a legacy created from pure white DNA. And every time he would get it wrong, he would simply move on and try again, not having any regard for the people he leaves behind.
ReplyDeleteSutpen’s sin is symbolic to the South and its corrupt past. Sutpen represents the moral flaws of the South. For instance, the South lost the war because they were on the wrong side of a moral debate. Their flaw, like Sutpen’s, was that they only cared about the success and pride of their own. They both strived to the same goal: own land, slaves, a plantation, a respectable white wife, and a family to carry the legacy. This is what success was to the South and to Sutpen. And by accepting this idea of success, it leads them to commit horrible crimes and ultimately leads Sutpen to destroy his family, and the South to bring about their ruin.
Hi Veronica! Your explanation has clear points that I fully agree with. Pride, was indeed his greatest moral flaw, he had no empathy for the people around him and simply wanted to succeed in terms of his 'design'. I enjoy how you bring in the 'corrupt past' of the south since it provides great context into Sutpen's idea of a legacy.
DeleteThomas Sutpen throughout Absalom Absalom shows many moral flaws but his most significant is Sutpen rejecting his first son Charles. In the novel it is made known that as a young boy Sutpen is rejected and runs away in order to create a better life for himself. When he finds out his first son has African American blood in him and he rejects him as the Sutpen heir and thus the snowball effect begins. Charles is able to manipulate Henry into trusting him over Thomas and so Henry decides to renounce his birthright as the heir to Sutpen's legacy. Sutpen later tries to have another son but is unsuccessful. He dies with no real heir to his fortune and no real family. If Sutpen would have just acknowledged Charles as his son he could have had a lasting legacy Similar to the south's viewpoint at the time Sutpen thought it was not right for his son to be part black. Sutpen wanted his legacy to be purely white and because of his flaws his legacy and family history was damaged forever.
ReplyDeleteAnother significant moral flaw Thomas Sutpen had was his need to be wealthy over everything else. When he moved to Jefferson he was set on creating this huge house and lasting legacy. He married a woman who was well liked in the town and had two children with her. Sutpen’s troubles did not come till later when Charles, his first son, met Henry, his other son at college. Once his son turned on him his legacy began to crumble. In the end his house is set on fire and the last of his legacy is destroyed. Sutpen’s need for wealth and recognition alienated himself from his family and ultimately caused the destruction of his life.Through his actions Sutpen caused a lot of pain and suffering to those closest to him. Even as Sutpen’s story is being told years later by Quentin he often refers to him as a demon just as Rosa Caulfield did. Quentin referring to Sutpen as a demon shows that even through generations Sutpen’s need for wealth outshone everything else and truly made him a terrible person.
Hey Rebeka! I very much enjoyed your take on Thomas Sutpen's worries over wealth and legacy, as I didn't even think of that related to the topic of the discussion, but find that your reasoning fits perfectly. In my view, his failure to care for his family "the way a father should" in favor of focusing on his legacy ultimately ensured mutual destruction of that same legacy. If no one is there to carry on your legacy truly, it cannot live, and his actions leading up to that revelation paint him as a truly demonic man indeed. I liked your thoughts!
DeleteI really enjoyed reading your comment, Rebeka. I agree that Thomas' need to be wealthy is a significant moral flaw. I like how you connected these thoughts to his alienation from his family and the destruction of his life. That is something I did not think about!
DeleteThomas Sutpen’s greatest moral flaws lie neatly in his failure to understand the world in any context outside of the rigid, “normal” social order by which he tried to preserve his bloodline. In attempting to keep his family’s history clean and straightforward, Thomas egregiously aids in the murder of another man, regardless of Bon’s status as his illegitimate son, though this detail is essential to the entirety of the novel’s plot. In murdering this man, Sutpen ironically stained his family’s history beyond reprieve and corrupted what could be considered the sanctity of matrimony between Bon and his daughter Judith in tandem with the social expectation to not murder one’s own brother. Considering it was Henry who ultimately murdered Bon rooted in racism, a jarringly socially accepted practice in the Sutpen family, even in spite of Bon’s partial heritage, their actions still serve as egregious moral crimes.
ReplyDeleteThe ultimate moral failure of Sutpen’s crusade, in my view, is his failure to show love to his own son. His marriage was ultimately called off at the discovery of his wife’s African American blood, however miniscule, but this doesn’t change the fact that his son still shared his blood as well. The longest standing social institution in this setting remained loyalty to one’s family, and yet, Thomas hypocritically (at least in the context of all his other actions) violated this, isolating and even targeting his abandoned son from a familial experience and free-living in the South in general. His affairs and attempts to bear a cleaner family lineage ultimately become corrupted as well, but his greatest failure, in attempting to preserve a clean family history, is his greatest moral failure.
Hi Matthew, In the long run I don’t believe Sutpen ever once really cared for him family rather than just the family name. After Sutpen started to realize everything was falling apart in the end and would never achieve his goal, he just became more bitter and angry, but his selfishness never stopped. So, I agree with you when saying his attempts in having a clean family legacy was his greatest downfall. Just because he tried to ignore and abandoned his past “mistakes” doesn’t stop the fact that they exist.
DeleteTom Sutpen’s had many flaws in his character even as a young child. He was raised by a drunken father who definitely played a part in his growing up even after running away and attempting to make it on his own at quite a young age. Sutpen’s biggest concern seemed to always be his reputation but given the time period it makes sense on why it was so important to him. After working on the plantation at a young age and seeing the owner live this “lavish” lifestyle in his eyes made his jealousy grow. Even though it seemed like Sutpen may have hated the man, in the long run it seems like he wanted to be just like him but soon realized he would never be able to amount to it. His quest to create a legacy and carry on his name was never quite reached like he always wanted.
ReplyDeleteIn the retelling of Sutpen’s story on pp. 224-285 Quentin explains the story seeming like he’s trying to shine a lighter light on it but every now and then Shreve is sure to remind him by correct Sutpen’s name to “demon”. As Shreve had heard his own version of the story from his own family that had painted Sutpen’s life in a much more accurate darker light. In the long run I don’t think Sutpen would ever be able to have the family legacy he wants because of all the hidden secrets and mistakes that repeatedly always came back to haunt him and remind him of his wrong doings. His greediness and selfishness would end up being his downfall all the way up till his death.
Renee Balboa
DeleteI think that you made a great point in the first part of the discussion because how he was brought up is the source of his problems. He has grown into the person he is today because of the things that he experiences or saw from the start of his life. In the second part I agree that it is import and to face your demons before trying to start a new way of life because there isn't much that has been resolved.
Absolom, Absolom! An intriguing novel that surrounds a man and his desire of a legacy. The writing with lengthy sentences and in-depth dialogue presents vivid experiences of each character and has major aspects that surround morality. Thomas Sutpen along with many other characters that belong in his family all expose themselves to a unique way of living that allows them to inherit morality flaws. Sutpen went through extreme changes and found flaws within himself as he got older.
ReplyDeleteAs a young boy who didn’t know exactly why he was moving around so much and was unsure of his own age, he lived through scenarios that made him question many things. He has this unknowing innocence that he was not able to consciously point out so while he had this naïve mindset that “...men themselves had little to do with the choosing and less of the regret it had never once occurred to him that any man should take any such blind accident as that as authority or warrant to look down at others, any others” (Faulkner 222) it somehow did not change while he witnessed the complete opposite of this. The white men looked down on the slaves and he eventually felt the desire to want that power. On page 228, he states “he would have liked for his father to have a broadcloth monkey to hand him the jug and to carry the wood...” which shows that his environment had great influence over his morality which presents a flaw. As he gets older and attends school, he soon understands the consequences of his actions and morality traits. Sutpen discovers that “perhaps a man builds for his future in more ways than one, builds not only toward the body which will be his tomorrow or next year, but toward actions and the subsequent irrevocable courses of resultant action which his weak senses and intellect cannot foresee but which ten or twenty or thirty years from now he will take, will have to take in order to survive the act” (Faulkner 243) which greatly justifies his future actions. By the time where he has already had a wife and moves onto his second one, he feels a sense of betrayal because of his racism and prejudice. He states, “...yet they deliberately withheld from the one fact which I have reason to know they were aware would have caused me to decline the entire matter otherwise...” and the secret was that his wife and mother of his child is of color. He understood that the “new fact rendered it impossible that this woman and child be incorporated...” in his design.
Sutpen had many faults and great desires to create this ‘design’ he states that in order to ‘accomplish’ it he “…should require money, a house, a plantation, slaves, family—incidentally of course, a wife” (Faulkner 263) which prioritizes the average southern life. Not only was this lifestyle chaotic and corrupt but also morally wrong.
(My page number are different)
I enjoyed reading your answer. I found it interesting that you pointed out that Sutpen wants to live a successful Southern life. I noticed something similar, how his supposed "morality" was tied to the culture of the South. It seems you also mentioned this when you wrote that his environment affects his character and his decision to try to take power. I also found it interesting that you pointed out that he sees himself as the victim when he leaves his first wife, because of her race. I believe this is because he has so wholeheartedly accepted the bigoted culture of the South that it has become his own moral code.
DeleteIn Absalom, Absalom! the fragmentation that exists in 1909 which Quentin experiences is a direct result of the incredibly bigoted pre-Civil War society of the South. Thomas Sutpen first encounters this society when he moves to a plantation and is refused entrance at the front door. He immediately recognizes that this discrimination is degrading and wrong, but his most important moral flaw is that, rather than trying to fix or escape this system, he actively participates in it. His solution to being degraded is to put himself in a position where he will be able to control and degrade others. He does this by acquiring slaves in the West Indies, and then forming his own plantation. However, he is not seeking to gain power for its own sake, but instead he is trying to gain power to raise his social standing, so that he will not be looked down upon.
ReplyDeleteSutpen explains that, in attempting to raise his social standing, he is exercising his own kind of morality. This “morality” is hardly moral at all, since he ends up harming a number of people. This is reflective of southern society as a whole. There were many rules about how to conduct oneself involving class standing and race, but this was not true morality so much as a set of social rules to follow. This is significant, because Sutpen seems to believe these social rules are equivalent with actual morality. In pursuit of his goal, Sutpen commits several immoral acts: he abandons his first wife and son, leaving them with money, and he degrades not only black people but also the French architect and Wash Jones. His only concern is that something might threaten his plan to raise his standing and create a family legacy. His skewed morality results in fragmentation in his descendants, since Henry kills Bon despite his love for him, and loves Bon despite the knowledge Bon is married. This is representative of the South as a whole; its twisted system of slavery and social standing led to fragmentation in later generations, as clearly evidenced by Quentin, who is attempting to put the many pieces of the puzzle back together.
Renee Balboa
ReplyDeleteI think the most significant moral flaw in Absalom Absalom is to have the mindset of a stereotypical southerner in this time. Although this is all he knows and all he practices in his everyday life, it is something that can change especially when family becomes involved. The idea that he abandoned his family because of the eighth percent of “negro blood” in his wife is terrible. He would rather leave both his son and his wife because of something they have no control over. The idea that he could just leave and there be no consequences is mind boggling and it is not a great mindset to have.
He is a very prideful man and that is another thing that can be considered a moral flaw. He is very set on the idea of being perfect while he himself is very imperfect. He has a mindset that is not practical for the life he has set for himself. A lot of his problems come from his childhood and it has become apparent in his adult lifestyle. He has grown to be a very selfish man and if something doesn’t benefit him then he is not interested in putting his time and effort into it.
Hi Renee,
DeleteI thought it is really shocking to see Thomas abandoning his family because of that reason. He is so selfish and a life like his would not be happy for himself as well. It reminds me how important a person's childhood memories are.
In Absalom, Absalom!, Thomas Sutpen has one main goal. This goal is to create a coherent history and family legacy. Thomas Sutpen is so focused on achieving this goal that he shows significant moral flaws. The most important example is when he rejects his own son Charles Bon as well as his wife because he learns that his wife and therefore also his son have “negro blood”. This example shows very well how stubborn Thomas Sutpen is in his beliefs. He wants to create this family legacy but having a wife and son that are not completely white does not fit into the family legacy that he wants to create. He chooses to abandon his family in order to create another family that is going to coincide with his beliefs. Having an heir for his family legacy is very important for Thomas Sutpen but he also has specific ideas about how his heir should be. Charles Bon is not considered to be an acceptable heir for Thomas Sutpen just because of his race.
ReplyDeleteAnother moral flaw of Thomas Sutpen is his attitude towards slavery. He himself kept slaves for his plantation to ensure having a family legacy to pass on. This is of course common for the South of the United States at this time, but still an important moral flaw in my opinion. Thomas Sutpen’s goal is to have a big plantation with many slaves to create a fortune. It becomes evident throughout the novel that he does not care about the people in his life because his other goals (creating a family legacy, having an affluent plantation) are more important to him.
We had a very similar mindset in our approaches. I think of the cattle comment made early into the reading. The plantation owner that Sutpen uses as a blueprint for success is thought to view anyone of lower station, white or black, as cattle or tools to further his own means, which is an attitude Sutpen clearly displays throughout the novel. Enslaved people to Sutpen were an easily exploitable resource and status symbol. Whether he thought they had human value or not would always come secondary to the uses they presented to him and his vision.
DeleteThomas Sutpen is a man blinded by the opulence and status inherent in the social structure of the southern aristocracy. In pursuing the idea of an empire, one like the plantation his family had lived on, Sutpen’s obsession drives him to abandon his first wife and child simply because they do not fit into his design. “I found that she was not and could never be, through no fault of her own, adjunctive or incremental to the design which I had in mind, so I provided for her and put her aside.” (Faulkner, Chapter 7) Sutpen views this woman, and all the others to come after her much like a brood mare, as he references to Milly and Wash Jones later. These women only exist in his life to offer him the perfect heir. If they cannot or will not provide him one, then they are of no use to him. Charles Bon’s mother, though a perfectly fine woman and wife to Sutpen, cannot produce the heir that Sutpen has envisioned and so she is left behind, though provided for by him. Aside from General Compson, Sutpen really doesn’t treat other people as if they have the intrinsic value that is inherent in all human beings. Sutpen’s boyhood dream could not be comprised by any means, and yet his very attempts to execute this vision are what ultimately destroyed it.
ReplyDeleteSutpen’s vision, incorruptible in his own mind, overrides basic morality and responsibility. Charles Bon, in Sutpen’s mind, exist as the unfortunate product of a shady deal and reflects the attitude of a slowly decaying past which Sutpen has desperately reached for since he was fourteen. Sutpen never seems to regret leaving his first family behind, only the consequences that followed. He’d rather see his last family destroyed than accept a son that doesn’t fall into his vision.
Thomas Sutpen's “Absalom, Absalom!” reflects American individualism, and the necessarily of each person to be recognized as an individual. Stupen represents his moral flaw in individualism and desire of success and wealth. He not only isolates himself but violates the sanctity of the human hearts. His selfishness and desire to be acknowledged by generations results a huge tragedy.
ReplyDeleteSutpen abandons his family in Virginia. He rejects his part-black wife and son; he refuses to acknowledge Charles Bon and regards Henry as a fratricide. It lets us know that he has another moral flaw which is racism. Sutpen and South aim their success achieving a land, slaves, and a family for the legacy. It results a lot of tragedies such as crimes and destruction in life.
Hi Yeseul,
DeleteYes Stupen has a materialistic view on the world and he is very selfish. he regards them as a fratricde? i think he views them more as expendable especially Charles.
I honestly think that his most significant flow is that he did not acknowledge the children that he had with multiple other women. He indulged in this idea in deep rooted racism and that none of his children were good enough to maintain this legacy and be his heir. Which ultimately failed. He viewed woman as broodmares who were only good if they could bear son’s and of course did not have any negro blood. Honestly the idea of superiority over another due to the color of their skin is the reason behind the flaw. It is really interesting to see it manifest on its importance when the next generation comes up.
ReplyDeleteI thought that it was funny in order for him to create a coherent history and family legacy he had to muddy it. He had multiple children but only 2 sons. He could have had that clear history had he just stuck to one woman and not left due to her blood. His innocence was that he viewed the world in black and white, almost literally. He didn’t have a problem with mixing when it came for a pleasure until she fell pregnant. I just wonder if he realized he was being a hypocrite.
This post is made by Madelyn Mendoza.
ReplyDeleteSutpen's "Absalom, Absalom!" is a book filled with harsh prejudices, ignorance, and the overall sense of perceptions and abandonment. When examining the at for mentioned text, it became prevalent that this book was one of the darkest I have ever read. The whole preface is a recollection of this dark encounter with the feeling of not being an individual. While the running theme of "innocence" and individualism is heavily sought after in this work, it only gets darker the farther you dive in.
Sutpen obviously has a huge flaw with personal commitment as well as with tricking people to believe he is this individual who can do no wrong, but when evaluating his abandonment of his built family as well as his biological parents it is clear that he is deep down a racist individual who's main goal in this life is for power and wealth. This assumption will thus, lead into lifetime of greed and incredible suffering based on the fact that he will never find true happiness or fulfillment in this made up manifesto he has created for himself.