Among the central thematic aspects of As I Lay Dying is the difference in between fact and interpretation of truth. Clearly, any unbiased reality can result in a wide range of subjective interpretations because the characters all have specific viewpoints. Their viewpoints of any empirical fact depends upon their prejudices and perceptions; as an outcome, nothing that is stated can be completely trusted or assumed to be pure in its objective truth. Though the book is structured on the basis of the truth that each character experiences the same events, they all vary in their analyses and point of views. Because each character has a point of view that the reader can not understand for sure is totally precise and honest, the theme of As I Lay Dying might be that there is no such thing as unbiased truth.
To raise this question of reality, William Faulkner presents 2 literary techniques in As I Lay Dying that draw into question the validity of the information being offered. Faulkner not just takes part in using a wide variety of narrators, however he likewise makes use of stream-of-consciousness to increase the inability to distinguish between truth and analysis. The method of stream-of-consciousness enables narrative to be presented as if the ideas are reading as the characters are believing them; ideas and memories develop without premeditation and as such bear the mark of immediacy. In addition, because it is the character’s ideas rather than discussion with another, the very first impulse is to think them, because thoughts are normally unfiltered.
The use of stream-of-consciousness also serves to obscure the journey towards finding an unbiased truth. For instance, Cora Tull’s perspective on the relationship in between Addie and Darl or Addie and Gem is significantly dissimilar than the viewpoints of those characters, themselves. Therefore, any apparently unbiased reality that exists in any scenario can not always be found in simply one specific point of view. Another instance of this moving perspective remains in how Jewel and Peabody think about Addy in terms of being victimized, where as Anse holds on to his reality that locations him as a victim.
Another technique that Faulkner utilizes is to structure the book in the kind of disconnected monologues. For instance, think about the problem of constructing a precise timeline of occasions from the monologue in which Dewey Dell faces off with Vardman in the shed. Faulkner composes: “”You durn little sneak!” My hands shake him, hard. Maybe I could not stop them. I didn’t understand they could shake so hard. They shake both of us, shaking. “I never done it,” he says. “I never touched them””(Faulkner 383). Both characters firmly insist and think in their own innocence, however plainly both can not be innocent. In addition, they are each so involved insisting upon their variation of the story that the sequence of the real circumstances is puzzled within their own awareness. Dewey Dell believed that Vardaman was discreetly viewing her, whereas Vardaman labored under the impression that Dewey Dell was going to tell him off. The result is a mixing of the past and the present and the inability to come to anything even near an unbiased truth. In another circumstances, the reality of precisely what was happening between Cora and Darl stays permanently secured mystery since the point of views presented are inconsistent. As Faulkner writes, “He did not address. He simply stood and looked at his passing away mom, his heart too full for words” (Faulkner 355). Cora views Darl through the rosy lens of being a caring mother; she also believes he is Addie’s preferred. From Darl’s viewpoint, nevertheless, he seems to be completely unresponsive to his mom and the three dollar load. Moreover, most of the others believe that it is Gem who is the preferred. This utter disconnect serves to bring into question the reliability of the storytellers.
What the characters think and which words they speak, on the other hand, produce a foundation upon which to develop yet another subjective reality: the reader’s. Faulkner also develops the reader’s sense of his/her own, specific viewpoint by using figurative language in explaining surroundings and characters. Characters typically turn to using metaphors and similes in addition to other stylistic turns of expression. For instance, when Darl looks for to prompt Dewey Dell, his attempt is not specific. Rather, it is accomplished through making use of double entendres. The double entendre is a microcosm of the moving realities of the story: The expressions have factual significance, however can be interpreted in different methods. For example, Darl remarks, “Those cakes will remain in great shape by the time we get to Jefferson” (Faulkner 483). “Cakes” serves as a metaphor for Dewey’s pregnancy. It is Darl, in particular, who employs these detailed flourishes in his story; his skill triggers some to consider him weird. Therefore, Faulkner uses word option not only to allude to the moving realities of the novel, however, also, to mark the differences between the characters.
The special language used by characters in the novel typically is a revelation more profound than the textual content of their stories. Certainly, the words that each character speaks provide the only real insights into the objective reality of the novel. For example, there are Tull’s several references to religious beliefs and bible. It is very important in comprehending her to focus not just to the reality that she is referencing spiritual iconography, but to how she makes those referrals. Her way is to voice them almost like a kid would repeat a catechism he does not fully comprehend. It ends up being obvious that Tull herself does not completely understand the profundity of the religious beliefs she clings to. Neither does she appear to fully comprehend what is happening among her household. In contrast, Jewel regularly utilizes profane language and speaks rather insensitively, and his quick temper is mirrored by the violence of his language.
The Bundren household can not settle on an objective truth because they make little effort at arriving at any real understanding of each other. Just as the novel is a collection of individual narratives and memories, the Bundren household declines to be a cohesive system; they are simply a set of disconnected individuals who take place to share a typical origins. The excellent paradox is that what appears to at last bring about their unity is not a celebration of life, however an event of death. Yet even this effort at a last reconciliation is only rare, as each relative has their own individual and personal inspirations that they refuse to show each other. Generally, in truth, they seem to be callously overlooking the fact that Addy is merely a rotting remains. In maybe the most perverse reversal of subjective reality, some of them are repulsed by the smell of death– yet the buzzards flying overhead are drawn to the scene precisely for that stink. Goal reality is merely the result of extremely personal subjectivity; what is appalling to someone will be appealing to another.
Thus, As I Lay Dying presents even the dead member of its cast of characters in a subjective light by questioning whether objective truth can exist. Addie’s true qualities as a human being remain a mystery; some may view her as a character treading in the icy waters of evil, while others might arrive at the conclusion that she is the only character worthwhile of any affection. The multiple perspectives and the stream-of-consciousness strategy all produce a work that is deliberately subject to interpretation. There is no objective truth to the unique any more than there is any objective truth to the occasions that take place within it. Faulkner’s engagement of numerous stories likewise serves to become a filter that is necessary for sorting out lies and opinions from accurate occasions. The result is naturally upsetting and complicated– but, as Faulkner desires to make individuals ask difficult concerns about the nature of reality and the look for an unbiased fact, that is exactly his intent.