Faulkner’s “Barn Burning”:

Re-read the following passage from Faulkner’s “Barn Burning”: This time his father didn’t strike him. The hand came even faster than the blow had, the same hand which had set the can on the table with almost excruciating care flashing from the can toward him too quick for him to follow it, gripping him by the back of his shirt and on to tiptoe before he had seen it quit the can, the face stooping at him in breathless and frozen ferocity, the cold, dead voice speaking over him to the older brother who leaned against the table, chewing with that steady, curious, sideways motion of cows: “Empty the can into the big one and go on. I’ll catch up with you.” (1474) In a blog post between 500 and 700 words, discuss how the style of the sentence beginning with the phrase “The hand” registers as experimental in modernist terms: that is, as a challenge to conventional ways of representing reality. What is new, even difficult, about the way in which Faulkner enacts the events in this sentence? And how does that decision on his part relate to the broader social conflicts the story explores? Be sure to draw on specifics from the passage itself in your response. Note: In this class, blog posts are an informal genre of academic writing serving the purposes of virtual class discussion, so don’t worry about making an argument and supporting it at every turn. Instead, focus on developing interesting observations based on my prompt that others can respond to—observations that can be speculative and loosely connected. In short, blog posts, like your comments during class discussion, are examples of thinking aloud. Rubric Good: The blog post uses between 500 and 700 words to think aloud about how the passage registers as experimental, developing observations well by drawing on details from the passage itself. It is proofread well for errors and clarity. Average: The blog post uses between 500 and 700 words to think aloud about how the passage registers as experimental, partially developing observations by drawing on few details from the passage itself. It is proofread passably for errors and clarity. Poor: The blog post uses less than 500 words to think aloud about how the passage registers as experimental, hardly developing observations and failing to draw on details from the passage itself. It is proofread poorly for errors and clarity.