Saturday, March 11, 2017
Job 1- Line Illuminator
"An hour later, after nightfall, he repassed the plantation, going northward in the direction from which he had come. He was a Federal scout"(Chapter 2, An Occurrence at Owl Creek Brige)
This quote is an excerpt following the conversation between Fahrquhar and the "confederate soldier"
In an earlier paragraph, the author describes Fahrquhar as a plantation owner who is passionate about pro-slavery rights. Due to mysterious circumstances, Fahrquhar is not actually a soldier but does what he cans to defeat the Federalists.
What confuses me, is why a Federal scout would go to all this trouble to get into a grey uniform and travel many miles just to talk to a passionate plantation owner. Could it be that the scout was purposely trying to set Fahrquhar up to be hanged? If so, why? How is Fahrquhar different from other plantation owners? Or did the scout have other buisness in the south and was just making small talk, knowing the plantation owner would never be able to destroy Owl Creek Bridge?
I mean I know it's a short story, but Bierce probably could have expanded on this a little bit. Any thoughts on why Farhrquhar was being "hunted out" by the Union?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Was Farquhar purposely hunted, as you are wondering? Or was the Federal Scout's happening upon Farquhar's plantation just by chance? If so, did the scout then take advantage of the situation by planting ideas in Farquhar's mind? What does everyone think? (Good post Anne!)
ReplyDeleteI think the scout was just scoutin' around, and when he realized how pro-Confederacy Farquher was, he tried to get him out of the way. So I don't think he was purposefully hunted, though he could have been, if he'd made a reputation for himself. But what's also possible it that there is no real answer. I don't know if anyone else thinks this, but I feel like even the snippets of the story that I think are reality are rather detached. Bierce is so descriptive, down to how the soldiers are holding their guns,but at the same time, everything is hazy. So maybe there isn't an answer. I hope that made sense! :)
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Bethany. Also, thanks Susie! I couldn't figure out how to phrase my post quite right ;D
ReplyDeleteThe whole story is very detailed at certain "unnessecary" parts, but is very unclear on others! Do you think this could be an analogy of how death is a very foggy concept? After all, the author himself has never experienced death before...
Just a thought :)
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThat is true, Beirce is trying to show the reader an example of what death would feel like, without ever experiencing it for himself. But I guess you couldn't write a story about death if you experience it... Soooooooo I guess this will have to do...
DeleteThat is a very good point Anne. It could very well be an analogy of death. Especially because as you just stated the author has not experienced death. When talking about death it can become a very confusing and questioning topic for some people.
ReplyDeleteI hadn't thought of it that way, Annie, but I think you're right! Death is something that stays hazy until you experience it for yourself, so perhaps the blurriness is meant to enhance this point. It certainly does lend a mysterious air to the story, making it dreamlike, and also difficult to see the line between reality and imagination.
ReplyDeleteThose are all good points. I think that maybe he owed someone money or something and he was trying to set Farquhar up? Maybe he didn’t even owe him money, maybe there was a brother who wanted some of the family inheritance but Farquhar kept all of it because he was the eldest, even if it wasn’t fair. The brother then got mad, and sent someone after him to trick him into being hanged. Does anyone get why he went to the bridge in the first place? The only thing I could come up with is for tinder, and I think the fear of being hanged would win over the need for tinder.
ReplyDeleteHmm. I thought he was a Federal Scout, but maybe he did have another motive. Interesting thought!
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty sure Peyton went to the bridge to burn it, as a way to sabotage the Union. The idea is that the driftwood will burn easily, and then burn down the bridge, which would make a break in the Union's railroad line.
Nice theory Selah! Bierce really does leave that part of the book to the readers imagination. Brace yourselves for another odd theory of mine.
ReplyDeleteDo you think Bierce's lack of clarity on the reason the scout visited Peyton was to illustrate something else? Such as how the reason for death after life is less important than the reason of life after death... Hint: 2 Corinthians 4:18
And everyone says: "What even are you talking about Annie"
And I say "it sounded good in my head people!"
If your too confused you don't have to answer ;)
Also I do realize that Bierce himself wasn't a christian. However, I think that as Christians we can learn a lot from other peoples views, christian or not. :)
DeleteI understand you, Annie! :) Since Bierce wasn't a Christian, I find it unlikely that he would be illustrating such a point, but you never know!
DeleteWe definitely can learn from other people's views. You can learn so much just by listening and talking to other people. Even if they are supporting something that you yourself don't believe in you still learn more about that person and why they support their beliefs.
DeleteBethnay, I think that even though Bierce wasn't a christian, he could still believe that death was one of the most scariest, yet important factors of life. So I think he could agree with the above statement. Perhaps his reluctance to give his life to God was because he chose not to follow God. I met a woman before (a cousin's mother-in-law) who beleived there was a God, but refuused to follow him saying "Christianity just isn't for me, so I'll just not go to heaven". It was really sad to hear her say something like that, but nonetheless she did.
ReplyDeleteSo perhaps Bierce could have believed in an after-life, but chose not too do anything about his salvation because it wasn't for him. This seems like a silly decision to me, but different people have different views.
Of course your opinion could be right, and mine is more likely wrong then yours. And I see your point: In order to fully understand the book, we must fully understand the author.
:)
haha, "Bethnay" woopsy
DeleteAlso why can't you edit your comments!?
2 Corinthians 4:18 pointed me in the direction that maybe because he wasn't a Christian he was even more scared of death? Bierce knew of God, but maybe he had some personal theory of the universe and an after-life that didn't include God. I've read books where people believe that. Like the universe uses karma and it rules over everything.
ReplyDeleteAlso another good theory Selah! Reincarnation is definitely one such belief.
ReplyDeleteIt is pretty clear the Beirce wasn't a christian. (I found that out after posting my "3:56" comment. So I suppose the author did not mean to make any connection with the bible (thus making my 2 Corinthians 4:18 quote a tad bit unreasonable) However, Bierce still could have been telling the reader how little life's details matter when all ends in death.
Any thoughts? Feel free to disagree! I'll probably be persuaded to change my mind about it, since I often end up putting my foot in my mouth, Surprise, Surprise ;)
Those are my thoughts exactly... I believe Beirce was trying to portray to everyone, what the final thoughts of life would have been like.
Delete