Blog post #2 topic #1

Our way of life has created a social system that permits the power of the patriarchy to flourish. Although each of us are not willing to proceed with this arrangement of the patriarchy, we still play a role in it. In “A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner shows a suspenseful, mysterious and melancholy toward the protagonist, Emily. She is the ideal example that symbolizes the tradition against the new changes while she facing with the patriarchal authority and control. Meanwhile, in “Shooting the Elephant”  by George Orwell portrays conflicting and frustrated tone, and the aspect of imperialism when he against the oppressor, British where he goes to Burma. Readers can get a sense of himself, as the main character who is weak and discomforting while he dealing with the Burma people. Faulkner illustrates the power of control more towards the traditional gender criticism, while Orwell demonstrates the idea of imbalance of power in colonialism with his interaction with the natives.

“A Rose for Emily”  is set in a small southern town that everyone know each other and Emily basically isolated after her father passed away. In the end of the story the narrator creates a situational irony that Emily killed her lover and eventually kept the dead body at her shady house. Throughout the story, Emily took into account the whims and needs of her father, who kept up inflexible control over her life and conduct. She was financially and mentally subject to her dad for everything and she completely feels insecure when her father died. Emily also affected by the town's male dominated society. For example, Faulkner says, “Alive, Miss Emily had been a tradition, a duty, and a care; a sort of hereditary obligation upon the town . . .” This demonstrates that even though Emily’s family represents an image whose family history and notoriety gained great respect, but at the same time, the townspeople being very judgmental and criticizes the unconventional relationship between Emily and Homer. Emily later was scandalized by the possibility that she is having a relationship with a man who does not serious about marriage. However, it leads Emily has an unstable mental condition and decides to poison Homer to “keep” him forever. Faulkner's critique on the role of women in the public eye is clear; he believes that women are submissive compared to men, nearly as peasants. Thus, men take control over women.

On the other hand, Orwell indicates the imperialism and the power dynamics. Despite the fact that he is a British officer himself at the time in Burma, he feels a certain hatred and hostile by the “evil-spirited little beasts,” the Burma people. He was conflicting whether to kill the elephant because the natives told him to do so. However, the native do not understand that Orwell thought that “imperialism was an evil thing,” which he actually against the oppressor. It also demonstrates that the Europeans sent manages as manager are simply operators of the domain and some of them doesn't care for what they are doing, yet the natives would not think about that as the anti- European sentiment as of now goes in their mindset already.The narrator's hate toward the empire is really obvious. He doesn't get any advantage from the empire. What he gets is the position where everyone hates him, with high risks and stresses from the Burma people. It shows that imperialism is for the most part the administration's advantage yet not the people's. Therefore, Orwell presents the power of control through the colonialism and imperialism.