The Sound and the Fury by William Faulkner

The Sound and the Fury stands as a hallmark of American literary modernism and remains one of the most influential works in this narrative style. Its title is inspired by Macbeth’s soliloquy in Shakespeare’s play of the same name—specifically the moment when Macbeth, recognizing the collapse of his reign, declares: life is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury.

In this way, The Sound and the Fury is celebrated as a defining work of twentieth-century literature, depicting a single event through a multifaceted narrative. This layering of perspectives allows events to unfold like pieces of a puzzle, gradually assembling the full picture.

William Faulkner masterfully weaves suspense and resolution directly through his method of storytelling, without relying on external plot devices. His technique of presenting altered versions of a single event generates questions in the reader’s mind. However, unlike traditional narratives, here the resolution of these questions is secondary; what matters most is the manner in which they are answered.

At its core, The Sound and the Fury tells a simple story: the decline of an aristocratic family, much like Anton Chekhov’s The Cherry Orchard. The family in question is the Compsons, and each chapter recounts their downfall from the perspective of a different family member.

A crucial aspect to note is the individuality of the narrators. Each narrator is not only a distinct character but also views the world through a unique and personal lens, shaped by their specific outlook and worldview.

This shift in narrative perspective from chapter to chapter invites the reader to compare the various viewpoints. On one hand, there is Benjy Compson, whose mentally challenged mind offers a simple, heartfelt, and childlike depiction of the family’s fall. Through Benjy’s eyes, the reader perceives the collapse in its most innocent and unfiltered form.

On the other hand, Quentin Compson narrates the second section. Quentin, deeply attached to his family’s legacy, views the collapse from a historical and emotional standpoint. Set against an era when movements like Nazism and Communism were challenging the traditional concept of family, Quentin’s reverence for family values raises philosophical and ideological questions.

Yet it is important to remember that Faulkner does not fully endorse Quentin’s perspective. Another narrative technique Faulkner employs here is a form of metafiction—stories within stories. Quentin’s narrative introduces another tale that recalls Absalom, Absalom!, another of Faulkner’s novels. Both works explore the patriarchal, land-centered, and family-focused culture of the American South.

Faulkner also introduces a third perspective through Jason Compson IV. Jason’s very name suggests he is meant to inherit and continue the legacy of his ancestors. However, Jason represents a materialistic outlook, seeing his family’s heritage purely through an economic lens. This materialism reflects the rise of Marxist and Darwinian philosophies during the twentieth century, a worldview prevalent at the time Faulkner was writing. Jason’s materialism stands in stark contrast to Quentin’s idealism, and once again, Faulkner maintains his distance, neither fully supporting Jason’s view.

The fourth narrator, Dilsey, represents another facet of American history and society. As a Black servant, she embodies the legacy of slavery in the South and also signals the social transformation that followed the decline of aristocracy. Her character alludes to both the painful past of servitude and the rise of a new, more equitable social order.

The Sound and the Fury is significant for two key reasons. First, it offers profound insight into the sweeping transformations of American society. The South, once defined by landownership, agriculture, slavery, and aristocracy, is shown here to be in irreversible decline, its values no longer fitting within twentieth-century America.

Second, the novel’s modernist elements distinguish it further. The fragmented narrative, the poetic and often chaotic prose, and the collapse of coherent language align closely with Dadaist and Modernist movements. In particular, the disintegration of narrative structure and language—especially through Benjy’s chapter—marks the novel as a quintessential modernist work.

Throughout all four sections, Faulkner deliberately maintains a distance between himself and his narrators, never fully endorsing any single point of view. This technique challenges the reader to navigate the diverse array of thoughts, opinions, and philosophies, forming their own judgments amidst the clamor of conflicting voices.