Talk of the town in Jefferson, Yoknapatawpha.

This is a lighter, more humorous Faulkner novel. However, it still retains the quirkiness and somewhat grotesque elements that are characteristic of his works.

The story unfolds in the small town of Jefferson, with its unique cast of characters and their strange behaviors.

Faulkner's writing style is as captivating as ever, drawing the reader into the lives and minds of the townspeople.

Overall, this novel earns a rating of 3.5 stars, and it could potentially be a 4-star read for those who appreciate Faulkner's unique brand of storytelling.

It offers a refreshing take on the traditional southern gothic genre, with its blend of humor and the macabre.

Whether you're a die-hard Faulkner fan or new to his work, this novel is definitely worth a read.

**"La Ciudad" by William Faulkner: A Deeper Dive**

"As Ratliff said, probably a great part of what people said behind Mr. Snopes' back escaped him, but what people didn't say to his face didn't escape him."


When I delved into this second novel of the Snopes series, I thought there wouldn't be much left to surprise me. Less than a month ago, I read "El Villorrio," and there a series of characters were already unfolding around the central figure of Flem Snopes, an arriviste, ambiguous, and amoral man who doesn't care who he steps on to achieve his goals, all centered around money. I've read elsewhere that in "La Ciudad," it is considered a minor novel, functioning as a satellite of the first in the series. However, for me, it has been quite the opposite. In "La Ciudad," Faulkner not only takes many of the themes presented in "El Villorrio" to their ultimate consequences but also isn't afraid to risk and turn two characters who had functioned as symbols or even metaphors into human beings (with their virtues and defects), and I'm referring to Eula Varner and Flem Snopes himself.



"-You spend too much time waiting. Don't wait. You simply exist, need, have to get and therefore act. That's all. Don't waste time waiting."


William Faulkner created "El Villorrio" as a metaphor for the fall of the South after the Civil War, and in "La Ciudad," he continues with his obsession for the symbolism that permeates the fictional county of Yoknapatawpha: phantom plantations, battlefields, and graves everywhere, slaves who, although no longer slaves, mentally remain so through a fidelity to what remains of the southern aristocracy. In short, phantoms that abound not only metaphorically but also through many characters who are unable to manage this change in times.



"...but the truth is that he put the idea in my head, just as he had done with Gowan, that the Snopes loomed over Jefferson like an invasion of snakes or wild animals from the forests, and that Uncle Gavin and he were the only ones who were aware of the danger and the threat they represented...".


In "La Ciudad," Faulkner continues with the story of Flem Snopes' social ascent. After his passage through Frenchman's Bend and having made a niche for himself, the little village becomes too small for him. He relocates and focuses on the larger city of Jefferson, which is the setting for this second novel in the series. Through 3 narrators, whose objectivity is sometimes rather ambiguous, the events of Flem Snopes' ascent are narrated, gradually taking possession of what surrounds him. A detail that fascinates me about Faulkner's narrative technique is that until now and from what I've read of him, he tells the story through several narrators, rumors, gossip, anecdotes from the past... and at a certain point, the reader has to wonder if what he is receiving narratively is really objective or just the result of these local rumors, stories that are transforming from one to another, losing the original story along the way. At a certain point, the reader knows that he has no choice but to believe what the unreliable narrator is telling him, and it is almost impossible to delve into this tangle of stories and versions of the same story, a detail that I think is essential in the narrative structure of his novels to understand the mentality and thinking of his people. The novel is divided into 24 chapters among these 3 narrators... which of them is the most objective when two of them hate Flem Snopes to death????



"It was her father, and if he hadn't let her go to college, it was because he loved her, since that seems to be the reason all fathers have for the things they don't let their children do..."


I won't dwell much more on this review because the most essential of this Snopes series I detailed in my review of "El Villorrio." But it's true that although in general the critics may say otherwise, in "La Ciudad," I notice that Faulkner has evolved because as I mentioned at the beginning, there are two central characters who functioned as symbols (on the one hand, Eula Varner, who represents the land, nature in its purest state, and on the other hand, the character of Flem Snopes, who represents the lack of morality and ideals). In this novel, Faulkner now abandons this symbolism and turns them into human characters, down to earth, capable of desperation and even moments of doubt. In short, once again, I have to bow down to William Faulkner in a novel where he dissects the essence of the human condition. The last chapter is fascinating because it becomes a kind of horror story about the human condition in its most perverse state. Genius.



"So when we first saw Mrs. Snopes cross the square, giving the terrible impression that in a second her very skin would burn the clothes she was wearing, leaving not even a veil of ashes between her and the daylight, it seemed to us that we were seeing with our own eyes the Destiny..."


https://kansasbooks.blogspot.com/2021...

Just finishing the book, it breaks my heart.

I wrote one scene and I almost cried.

I thought it was just a funny book but I was wrong.

Faulkner's words to Jean Stein convey the depth of his emotional connection to the work he has just completed.

The act of writing, for him, was not just a creative exercise but a journey that led him to unexpected emotional places.

The scene that brought him close to tears must have been particularly powerful, perhaps touching on themes or emotions that were deeply personal to him.

Faulkner's initial perception of the book as simply funny was clearly challenged as he delved deeper into its creation.

This shows that even the author himself may not always fully anticipate the emotional impact of his own work.

It also highlights the power of literature to evoke strong emotions in both the writer and the reader.

Faulkner's experience serves as a reminder that books have the ability to move us, to make us laugh, cry, and think in ways we never thought possible.

Though this book lacks the scope of "The Hamlet" which has an almost mythic quality about it,

I like that this book features the story told by three characters. Two of them, V.K. Ratliff and Stevens, are intimately connected with the action. The third one is Chick Mallison, Gavin Stevens' nephew, who is removed from the action. In fact, the first chapter which is narrated by Chick takes place before he is born. So his "version" of the events is entirely dependent on what Ratliff and his uncle Gavin told him.

It may be that we have the same event told by different people, with different intonations. Stevens, the Harvard and Heidelberg educated lawyer, is much more cerebral than his nephew, who will also go to Harvard, and than Ratliff, a merchant. We also have the story of the Snopes told by those who don't like them very well, but view their presence in Jefferson as a pollution or infestation. This multi-faceted narration adds depth and complexity to the story, allowing the readers to see different perspectives and interpretations. It makes the book more engaging and thought-provoking, as we try to piece together the true nature of the events and the characters involved.

Well... this is the first book I read from the Snope's trilogy and the first book I read from Faulkner. I must say I completely fell in love with him and with his style.

I must admit that I felt rather lost at times, especially in the first third of the book. However, I persisted because his style is so invigorating, even though the book is 70 years old. Moreover, I probably felt lost because this is the second book of the trilogy. (I just purchased the book without realizing it...).

But indeed, when I read certain sentences, I had to reread them three or four times as they were truly sublime! I haven't had that kind of experience in a long time now!

So I highly recommend this novel, but I recommend Faulkner even more than the book itself.

I am eagerly looking forward to delving into "Absalom Absalom".

The poets are wrong of course.

According to them, I should even have known the note was on the way, let alone who it was from. As it was, I didn't even know who it was from after I read it.

But then, poets are almost always wrong about facts. That's because they are not really interested in facts. They are only interested in truth.

And that's why the truth they speak is so true that even those who hate poets by simple natural instinct are exalted and terrified by it.

Poets have a unique way of seeing the world and expressing their thoughts and feelings. Their words can touch the deepest parts of our souls and make us see things in a different light.

Although they may not always be accurate in their descriptions of the physical world, their insights into the human condition are often profound and revealing.

We should not dismiss poets because they are wrong about facts. Instead, we should appreciate their ability to uncover the truth that lies beneath the surface of our everyday lives.

Well, chalk one up for "sticking with it," because I was truly on the verge of giving up on this one. It has been over a decade since I delved into "The Hamlet," the initial volume of the "Snopes Trilogy," and my recollection of it is extremely hazy, man, just so hazy. So it's fair to state that commencing the second volume was a rather dubious task, especially considering the possibility that I might not be able to progress far into it due to confusion. However, I persevered, and now I can assert that this is a quite solid entry by Faulkner from the later stages of his life and career.

"The Town" dates back to the Fifties, a time when Faulkner was finally receiving recognition for his unique talents, having been awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature during that decade. At first, it was somewhat intimidating, attempting to remember who each character was. Employing three distinct voices (the grandiose lawyer Gavin Stevens, his young nephew Chick Mallison, and V.K. Ratliff), Faulkner weaves the ongoing narrative of Flem Snopes and his endeavors to seize control of Jefferson, Mississippi, the county seat of Yoknapatawpha. It's a tale replete with strange, humorous, and unsettling details, all centered around Flem's efforts to make the town his own, driven by his rapacious greed and desire for status. And if Flem Snopes sounds awfully familiar in the year of our lord 2025, well...

This is Faulkner at his peak, filled with long-winded episodes about individuals who lead lives of quiet (and sometimes loud) desperation in a relatively small Southern town, and who intersect and meddle in each other's affairs. Gavin is determined to undermine Flem in some way or another, and Flem is well aware of his wife's long-standing "arrangement" with one of the pillars of Jefferson's society. It's all about who wields power in the town, and Flem is the embodiment of capitalism in all its least appealing forms. His thirst for power is insatiable, and he'll stop at nothing to bend the town to his will (again, does any of this sound familiar?). By the conclusion of the book, he might achieve more than he anticipated, but what will the cost be? I suppose I'll have to read "The Mansion" (the final book of the trilogy) to discover the answer.

Immersing myself deeply in the works of William Faulkner has truly been one of the redeeming features of the past couple of years. One simply cannot write about the South without at least being acquainted with his style and concerns, and even the lesser works I've perused had something meaningful to convey. "The Town" isn't a masterpiece, but it's damn entertaining and, once I became accustomed to it, a quick and gratifying read. And did I mention that Flem Snopes reminds me a great deal of a certain political figure in our modern era? Much like John Williams' "Augustus," this is a novel about a central character from whom we hear very little, if anything at all, but Flem Snopes is one of the more captivating characters in American literature, and only William Faulkner could have breathed life into him. I'm eager to see how the story concludes, and I might even return to the first book to refresh my memory of how it all began.

The Town is the second installment in Faulkner's Snopes trilogy. The first one, The Hamlet, which I read eight years ago, was extremely dark and gave me nightmares according to my notes. In contrast, The Town is much lighter, even humorous in some parts. Having read enough of Faulkner, I now feel less of a stranger in his fictional town of Jefferson and in Yoknapatawpha County.

The Snopes are a family of white trash degenerates who entered the county trading horses. One of them, Flem, was a shrewd trader in every aspect. He managed to marry into an established family and become the vice president of one of the two banks in Jefferson. He is wealthy and getting wealthier in The Town, but the Snopeses are regarded by the residents of Jefferson as a plague of locusts or a nest of vipers.

At its core, the novel is a love story between lawyer Gavin Stevens, who symbolizes virtue and integrity, and the wife of Flem Snopes, who represents something like the archetype of "woman". In the 1940s and 1950s time period, the Baptists and Methodists of the town represent the Southern version of hypocritical Puritan morality. I found this book as engaging in its plot as some of Faulkner's earlier novels, such as Absalom, Absalom.

No doubt everyone noticed this before I did, but while reading The Town, I realized that much of Faulkner's fiction is an allegory about the decline of America from its original lofty and idealistic ideals. People who are shocked by the current criminal antics of bankers can read The Town and learn that this is not a new phenomenon.

I almost removed this book from my 1957 list, thinking that I just couldn't handle another nightmare. If I had done so, I would have missed out on an excellent novel.

Recommended to me by a Faulkner aficionado on here, Dr Alan Powers.

Like most of Faulkner's oeuvre, this work takes place in the fictional Yoknapatawpha County. The characters move fluidly from one book to the next, which is part of a loose trilogy. It comes after The Hamlet (I found that I needed to look up a summary of that book's plot and still had trouble following) and is followed by The Mansion, focusing on the lives of the Snopes family.

The core of the book is about the scheming Flem Snopes and his growing empire. However, there are also numerous subplots about other family members, such as the wonderfully named \\"Wallstreet Panic\\" Snopes. There is shooting, cheating, adultery, suicide, and an artsy atelier that turns out to be a \\"dirty picture gallery\\". The book is narrated in turns by three characters with very different voices. While linguistically less experimental than novels like The Sound and the Fury, Faulkner's sentences and dialogue are rich and complex. The audiobook narrator (Joe Barrett) does a great job switching between a range of voices, including black and white, higher- and lower-class, male and female.

Faulkner was famously out of print in the US when he won the Nobel prize in 1949. The money from the Paul Newman film The Long Hot Summer (based on The Hamlet) as well as a 1959 adaptation of The Sound and the Fury finally brought him some financial success. His stories can sometimes seem overloaded with passion and restless dramatic energy, but at a sentence level, he is truly a master of his craft.

William Faulkner's The Town is a complex and multi-faceted work that delves into the Snopes family's impact on the town of Jefferson and Yoknapatawpha County.

It centers around Flem Snopes, who rises from a crude and calculating outsider to the president of the bank once controlled by the Sartoris and de Spain families.

Faulkner initially seems to have intended it as a funny book, and in some ways, it is. However, it also develops a tragic element with the stories of Eula and her daughter Linda.

Eula Varner Snopes, who dies in 1927, convincingly conveys Faulkner's characteristic darkness, while Linda represents his belief that one must escape the past yet is forever bound to it.

Among critics, The Town is not a popular book. The chapters are narrated by various participants in different tones and registers, which can be confusing.

Faulkner's tendency to describe things in a convoluted way also becomes tiresome at times. Additionally, Flem Snopes is not one of the narrators, which detracts from the book's central character and his internal passions and contradictions.

Despite these flaws, there are many fine moments in the book. The lawyer Gavin Stevens provides clear-headed analysis and falls in love with both Eula and Linda, but understands the doom they carry.

Eula makes a memorable offer to Stevens early in the book, and Linda later knows how he feels but he cannot act on it.

The story essentially shows Jefferson succumbing to Snopesism, which is a vulgar but hard-working commercialism that has no connection to the ante-bellum South.

While The Town may not be Faulkner's greatest work, it still has enough to remind readers of his writing at its best and is worth reading. However, if it is the first Faulkner novel a reader encounters, they may not finish it or pick up another, which would be a great pity.

Reread. The Town, an entr'acte in the Snopes trilogy, features some of the prose for which Faulkner is occasionally parodied. Take, for example, the scene of the first interview of Eula in Gavins' office. However, it is still a significant part of the overall design, even if it doesn't reach the masterpiece level he展现elsewhere.

There is a fine line between the love-struck Gavin Stevens in this novel, who romantically depends on Linda Snopes, and the tortured obsession of Labove with her mother Eula in The Hamlet. The novel quietly continues the inexorable permeation of Jefferson by the Snopeses and the creeping extension of tentacles by Flem Snopes.

The melodramatic morality that drives the story's conclusion, involving adultery and "bastard" children, is not as convincing as when it seizes the minds of characters in other novels like The Sound and the Fury. Melodrama itself is neither good nor bad. In Faulkner's works, it is an essential technique. But even on an off day, Faulkner is better than most writers at their peak. Meanwhile, the small details deposited in this book will assume greater significance later in The Mansion.

Insanity from start to finish…love it!

This simple yet powerful statement encapsulates a feeling that many of us have experienced at some point in our lives. It could refer to a wild and crazy adventure, a passionate relationship, or even a creative project that takes us to the brink of madness. The word "insanity" implies a lack of rationality or control, but in this context, it is embraced and celebrated. It's about throwing caution to the wind and fully immersing ourselves in something that makes our hearts race and our souls come alive. Whether it's skydiving, writing a novel, or falling in love, there's a certain magic in the moments when we let go of our inhibitions and embrace the insanity. These are the experiences that make life worth living and that we'll remember long after they're over. So the next time you feel a little bit crazy, don't fight it. Instead, embrace it and see where it takes you. You might just be surprised at what you discover.