"A Rose for Emily"-- Townspeople vs. Homer

If “A Rose for Emily” were narrated in first person singular by Homer, the contractor and Emily's love interest, there would be drastic changes in overall story line, such as the background of Jefferson, which is the townspeople's thought regarding to Emily. The background is essential to the original story line because it brings up pre-existing relationship between the Grierson and townspeople, leading us to believe that the connection between these two provides some sort of clue that the readers can apply to solve what is going on in the story. Similarly, the relationship between Emily and her father creates townspeople's assumptions, which become the readers' clue as well. In addition, there will be much more background information regarding to Homer.

More subtle change can be made if the new narrator were from Jefferson, like Tobe, Emily's servant, or the druggist. Although Tobe is much closer to Emily than any other characters in the story so Tobe's relatively close relationship with Emily may affect the original pov. of story line, the effect of Tobe as narrator depends on Tobe's characteristic. If he cared for Emily and felt interested in her personal life, story may change; otherwise, Tobe would be just other townspeople.

Going back to Homer as the narrator, Emily's true character will become more visible because Homer would spend more time with Emily getting to know who she really is. On the other hand, the background between Emily and townspeople prior to Homers arrival in Jefferson will be hidden because Homer is outsider who came to Jefferson for his work.

The change in narrator would affect the theme, Emily's madness towards her love, because the townspeople may see that her father might has to do with the cause of her madness but Homer would just think he is just crazy person.

Machines of "Loving Grace"

Without giving much thought reading the poem, Richard Brautigan's All Watched Over By Machines Of Loving Grace, it can be summarized as a wishful poem about the coexistence of machines and nature. However, there are several factors that make the poem to be more of an satire, rather than genuine hope of coexistence between technology and organic components.

Brautigan's poem is divided into 3 short paragraphs and the first two lines of each paragraph begins with “I like to think,” immediately followed by “(and the sooner the better!)” for first paragraph, “(right now, please!)”, for second, and “(it has to be!)” for last. The phrase “I like to think” is a wishful remark but it is used as a sarcasm, because of the parenthesized phrases. The purpose of parentheses are to send the message or meaning of previously mentioned word or phrase as direct as possible. However, In poems, poets use more clever way to express their thoughts or feelings into their work, yet, Brautigan uses parentheses to further emphasize the phrase, “I like to think” shows that Brautigan actually does not want or believe in coexistence of machines and nature.

Although the parentheses might be deliberate part of Brautigan's poem, the description of machine and nature are clearly shown. First paragraph take place in “cybernetic meadow,” “cybernetic forest” in second, and “cybernetic ecology” for the last. There is clear progression in the scale of place where “mammals and computers/ live together in mutually” and “deer stroll peacefully/ pass computers.”

Up until this point, Brautigan's poem can be viewed either pro-coexistence or con-coexistence between machine and nature. However, the last two lines of the poem, “and all watched over/ by machines of loving grace.” which is also the title of this poem brings more negative side of relationship between machine and nature. The last two lines give the feeling of restriction, control, and dominance by the machines. Brautigan brings the possibilities of machines and nature being together and pursuit of peace and harmony; however, natures are “watched over” like they have been checked by surveillance camera throughout this poem. In the end, the wishfulness of coexistence is crushed and nature is full of “machines of loving grace.”