Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

This topic is about
A Fable
Buddy Reads
>
A Fable by William Faulkner
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Sara, Old School Classics
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
May 31, 2025 07:53PM

reply
|
flag


I will try to start this one today, along with Childhoods End (well i started the latter, so continuing). I am sure these will take me into July though 😅🤷♀️

I always say I'm going to do what you are doing, Cynda, when it comes to a difficult book but I rarely end up going back because I have too many books to get to! As it is I won't be able to get the better understanding.

I am about halfway through two other books right now, so I will start this one when I have them finished. I don't think I could mix Faulkner with anything else...have to read him all alone.

Others seem to be composite characters, even combing the old and new testaments? Like the women with the bread maybe being the Samaritan woman/Rahab? General Gragnon is a puzzle for sure so far. A Pharisee? Pilot? Herod? I'm giving up on trying to figure it out for now but I'll be very interested in what others think. (view spoiler)
The feel so far is like that of a fever dream or something. It seems like it's in slow motion, especially when you have some sentences over a page long! There's definitely a clear fog of war feeling. (view spoiler)
I flipped through the chapters to see the headings and it looks like they will represent Christ's final week but not in order and going back and forth in time in some chapters. This will be a slow journey for me but I'm interested in it.




Remember Napoleon tried to put Catholiic Church in its place in France, in part by crowning himself in the presence of the pope who as highest-ranking cleric present at coronation would have in the usual order of things would have crowned the ruler of France.
So for me there is a strong connection between the cross Christianity and the simple white crosses of the graves at Verdun and other military burial grounds.

I haven't decided the dominant tone in this book yet, whether we are to lean toward the serious or or the humorous and Faulkner is so dark in his humor, it is hard to decide.



Me too, Cynda!
I am two chapters in and need a lot more reading before I can begin to put things together. As I have taught myself to do with Faulkner, I will not try to decipher too much before he begins to reveal it to me. I am trying to make copious notes, because the smallest of things might have huge significance later on. Sometimes I fall right into Faulkner, and sometimes it is a push. This one seems a push for me, because I have yet to nail down exactly who Gagnon is...he is as layered and mysterious as his origins.

I feel like Faulkner is trying to torture us. He goes back and forth in time both inside and outside of the chapters. In my copy the chapter numbers aren't even labeled and it's in an anthology so it's hard to even get a sense of where you are in the book. I think he intentionally wants us disoriented and it's working on me.
There is a strong theme now of the officer class against the soldiers with the officers being concerned with personal glory, secondary to even winning the war. I love the runner who demoted himself because he was disillusioned with the officers. (view spoiler)
I'm finding this harder and harder to get through but I'm going to keep going.
I was putting out fires all weekend and just stepped away from reading, but I will also be pushing forward, Sue. I am hoping this is one of those books you can really only appreciate looking back!

I think it will be that way, Sara. There are good themes and interesting dynamics but it's a slog.
You cannot sink into the narrative, because you must constantly be alert to what is actually happening and to whom. I have had to retrace my steps while reading today just to be sure who was speaking. I do find the characters are often only there briefly, but they imprint on your mind (like the sixty-year-old man who has joined so he can look for his missing son).
Keep reminding myself it is Faulkner --nobody ever accused him of being easy.
Keep reminding myself it is Faulkner --nobody ever accused him of being easy.

Ok, im gonna stop right there after the allegory and 13 apostles (message 8). I havent even gotten that far yet. Am i even reading the same book, i wonder? Because so far, it is just about a commanding officer. 😅 Well, and i think there was another story before his, maybe another "apostle"? But yeah right now i am seeing, perhaps, the closest to a moral dilemma, the having to lead innocent men to a sure failing thing and death, to win an award/title. Thats as far as i am, so unfortunately, havent been able to discuss actively this month.
Yeah, it is definitely a bit of a more difficult read, but moreso just that i havent had the time to keep reading yet. Trying to wrap up 3 books, then i can focus on this and Childhoods end, hopefully. 🙏😅🤷♀️

Think im about here in my reading, but it begs the question- how do we determine the chapter count for discussion sake, because it only has the days of the week and they are often repeated. I suppose it will be based more on the chapter content than the number, but that still seems difficult. 🤔

Ouch, this is not a good starting point for Faulkner. I hope you will read something like Light in August eventually, April, and not rest on this as defining him as a writer.



The 13 men are chained together in the truck. The story starts after the action (or inaction) where the General is deciding whether to execute them for refusing to fight. The second chapter goes into more detail. I probably wouldn't have thought anything about the 13 men if I hadn't read that it's a passion play.
I agree, as it goes on it's hard to talk about chapters since they aren't numbered and go back and forth in time. I personally put magnetic bookmarks in my copy for the start of each chapter but I could have made mistakes because the pages are very thin in my anthology copy. I'm trying to do a chapter a day (skipping days though) and I like to have a sense of how long it is because it's work for me getting through these!

I'm so envious that you are done Cynda! I think it helps to have military knowledge. I had to look up what a sentry was.
Have you by chance read the book Back Over There: One American Time-Traveler, 100 Years Since the Great War, 500 Miles of Battle-Scarred French Countryside, and Too Many Trenches, Shells, Legends, and Ghosts to Count? It's only a 300 page book but it's fascinating.
I read that awhile back and was floored by how much physical evidence from WWI is still there in the battlefields and villages of France. It's a great book. It makes me want to go back to France to visit the area.

What impressed me so far is how much of an influence this must have had on Heller when he wrote Catch-22. There are a lot of similarities I have seen so far. Heller turned up the humor when he wrote his but the absurity is about the same. I at at the Tuesday Wednesday section, a little over 100 pages in or roughly around 25%.

I am also going very slowly. Had intended a chapter a day, but only managed a partial chapter last night. I think it would be marvelous to have that reference to when it occurred, Sam. One thing that makes me need to go so slow is putting the current chapter in the proper reference to the events.
The comparison to Catch-22 is spot on. WWI was the most senseless (and perhaps the cruelest) war ever fought. Looking back it is impossible to identify anything worth fighting over for the average soldier and a whole generation of young men, and potential for the world, were lost.
I was thinking, Sue, about when I would have picked up on the allegorical connection if I had not known it was a Passion play going in. I think it would be fairly early on when the Old Porter and the Runner are talking and the OP says he should "go and look at him". The runner says "Him? So it's just one now" and the OP says, "Wasn't it just one before? Wasn't one enough to tell us the same thing all them two thousand years ago..."
Cynda, I am amazed at your prowess in getting through this so quickly. I wonder if Faulkner isn't saying to us that the military would be an unstoppable force if discipline were lost and the men decided to act on their own convictions instead of their orders. Especially in a war like WWI, it seems unfathomable that men just kept crossing the no man's land into the enemy and certain death without having any "reason" to hold on to. The more you know about WWI, the less sense it makes that so many nations contributed to the slaughter.
I find it interesting that this book was published in 1955, the year that the U.S. first sent advisors to Vietnam and began to involve us in that war. I wonder if Faulkner was aware of this and I also wonder what he thought of that war in light of this book. I might have to go and see if I can find any comments from him on Vietnam.
The comparison to Catch-22 is spot on. WWI was the most senseless (and perhaps the cruelest) war ever fought. Looking back it is impossible to identify anything worth fighting over for the average soldier and a whole generation of young men, and potential for the world, were lost.
I was thinking, Sue, about when I would have picked up on the allegorical connection if I had not known it was a Passion play going in. I think it would be fairly early on when the Old Porter and the Runner are talking and the OP says he should "go and look at him". The runner says "Him? So it's just one now" and the OP says, "Wasn't it just one before? Wasn't one enough to tell us the same thing all them two thousand years ago..."
Cynda, I am amazed at your prowess in getting through this so quickly. I wonder if Faulkner isn't saying to us that the military would be an unstoppable force if discipline were lost and the men decided to act on their own convictions instead of their orders. Especially in a war like WWI, it seems unfathomable that men just kept crossing the no man's land into the enemy and certain death without having any "reason" to hold on to. The more you know about WWI, the less sense it makes that so many nations contributed to the slaughter.
I find it interesting that this book was published in 1955, the year that the U.S. first sent advisors to Vietnam and began to involve us in that war. I wonder if Faulkner was aware of this and I also wonder what he thought of that war in light of this book. I might have to go and see if I can find any comments from him on Vietnam.
message 33:
by
Sara, Old School Classics
(last edited Jul 01, 2025 11:26AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
I have just completed the story of the three-legged horse. I am trying to put this into the perspective of the war and the contrasts and parallels. The horse can be seen as resilience, like the men who are surviving against all odds. Perhaps the black man and the trainer who save him are like the corporal who steps up to try and call a halt to the killing around him.
This section certainly was more in Faulkner's normal style and I could feel how much easier the reading and the storytelling seemed when Faulkner stepped off the battlefield and back into the South and a world he knows so intimately.
What is the significance of the old man and the rider (and perhaps even the rich lady) arriving to find the trainer? How is this going to affect the "runner" who has borne witness to the encounter of the two men and who now knows the story?
I always feel out of my depth when I am reading Faulkner and then toward the end of the book I generally have some epiphany. I am certainly hoping that happens here.
This section certainly was more in Faulkner's normal style and I could feel how much easier the reading and the storytelling seemed when Faulkner stepped off the battlefield and back into the South and a world he knows so intimately.
What is the significance of the old man and the rider (and perhaps even the rich lady) arriving to find the trainer? How is this going to affect the "runner" who has borne witness to the encounter of the two men and who now knows the story?
I always feel out of my depth when I am reading Faulkner and then toward the end of the book I generally have some epiphany. I am certainly hoping that happens here.

I am letting myself be confused. War is conducted in confusion: Confused military personnel working with incomplete information where decisions must be made and orders followed. This seems to part of the reason for what they called Shell Shock and we can PTSD--something some can partially heal through storytelling--such as Faulkner does. Sometimes parts of the story make better sense and some parts don't. The story may crack, yet it may be a better healing-from-war piece of literature we seem to have. . . .I may/not ever understand the horse story.

Of course, the story of the three-legged horse finds a place in the events later in the novel, as I assumed it would.
I have finished the book and have spent two days just pondering the ending and all the allegorical content and the myriad themes Faulkner has presented. I think Sam's reference to Catch-22 is perfect. After reading that comment, I could not help finding all kinds of parallels.
Faulkner is, of course, talking about war and the insanity of a war that has so little meaning and costs so many lives, and the political reasons that countries remain mired in such battles. WWI is the perfect example, but we have seen a few more in my lifetime. He is also, I think, talking about life itself. The incomprehensible way men are chained to professions, lifestyles, poverty, injustice...all the things in life that hold us back because we allow others to impose them upon us. Because we do not recognize that some of the choice and some of the power is ours if we were willing to face it together and just say "no".
I'm convinced Faulkner was trying to sort the moral issues out for himself and in the end was unsuccessful. I do not think there is a clear and certain interpretation of the allegory. I could, myself, make a case for at least two directly opposed philosophies. I think this is one book where you can view the themes in the light you chose and no one could prove you wrong.
I have finished the book and have spent two days just pondering the ending and all the allegorical content and the myriad themes Faulkner has presented. I think Sam's reference to Catch-22 is perfect. After reading that comment, I could not help finding all kinds of parallels.
Faulkner is, of course, talking about war and the insanity of a war that has so little meaning and costs so many lives, and the political reasons that countries remain mired in such battles. WWI is the perfect example, but we have seen a few more in my lifetime. He is also, I think, talking about life itself. The incomprehensible way men are chained to professions, lifestyles, poverty, injustice...all the things in life that hold us back because we allow others to impose them upon us. Because we do not recognize that some of the choice and some of the power is ours if we were willing to face it together and just say "no".
I'm convinced Faulkner was trying to sort the moral issues out for himself and in the end was unsuccessful. I do not think there is a clear and certain interpretation of the allegory. I could, myself, make a case for at least two directly opposed philosophies. I think this is one book where you can view the themes in the light you chose and no one could prove you wrong.


But I am fascinated with Faulkner's parallel story lines of this period and A Fable has some interesting ones. Sara brought up the racehorse rescue story. This has really interested me in relation to the main story line because it functions as an escape, an idyll from the harshness of the main allegory but because it is a tall tale, impossible in reality, it is probably also serving as an allegory drawing connections seems essential to understanding the novel. I think everyone else has either finished or moved on from this book . Anyone still reading?
I finished some time ago, Sam, and I agree that it is a book that begs to be read more than once and truly analyzed. I don't, however, think I have the stamina for that kind of scholarly pursuit anymore.
I found the horse story very interesting, since it seems to me to be the only part of the novel that seemed truly Faulknerian in style. He knew exactly where he wanted that portion of the story to go. I think he struggled himself with some of the themes and issues and I am unsure that, in the end, he ever completely sorted them.
As always seems to be the case for me when reading Faulkner, I find myself casting back to this from time to time and wondering about some detail or thread that hasn't quite tied itself up in my mind. I think your reference to Catch-22 was inspired! Both books left me with a similar sense of the unreal nature of the very real war.
I found the horse story very interesting, since it seems to me to be the only part of the novel that seemed truly Faulknerian in style. He knew exactly where he wanted that portion of the story to go. I think he struggled himself with some of the themes and issues and I am unsure that, in the end, he ever completely sorted them.
As always seems to be the case for me when reading Faulkner, I find myself casting back to this from time to time and wondering about some detail or thread that hasn't quite tied itself up in my mind. I think your reference to Catch-22 was inspired! Both books left me with a similar sense of the unreal nature of the very real war.
Books mentioned in this topic
Critical and Textual Study of Faulkner's a Fable (other topics)Catch-22 (other topics)
Catch-22 (other topics)
Back Over There: One American Time-Traveler, 100 Years Since the Great War, 500 Miles of Battle-Scarred French Countryside, and Too Many Trenches, Shells, Legends, and Ghosts to Count (other topics)
On the Trail of the Assassins (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Jim Garrison (other topics)Humphrey Cobb (other topics)
William Faulkner (other topics)