What do you think?
Rate this book
Soldiers' Pay
A wounded aviator returns home after his time in World War One. Escorted to his small hometown in Georgia by another wounded veteran of the war and a widow, he faces the many realities that come with his his anything-but-loyal fiancée, the silence he lives in because of his head injury, and the widow who plans to marry him herself.
265 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1926
About the author
William Faulkner
1,574 books11.4k followersWilliam Cuthbert Faulkner was an American writer. He is best known for his novels and short stories set in the fictional Yoknapatawpha County, Mississippi, a stand-in for Lafayette County where he spent most of his life. A Nobel laureate, Faulkner is one of the most celebrated writers of American literature and often is considered the greatest writer of Southern literature.
Faulkner was born in New Albany, Mississippi, and raised in Oxford, Mississippi. During World War I, he joined the Royal Canadian Air Force, but did not serve in combat. Returning to Oxford, he attended the University of Mississippi for three semesters before dropping out. He moved to New Orleans, where he wrote his first novel Soldiers' Pay (1925). He went back to Oxford and wrote Sartoris (1927), his first work set in the fictional Yoknapatawpha County. In 1929, he published The Sound and the Fury. The following year, he wrote As I Lay Dying. Later that decade, he wrote Light in August, Absalom, Absalom! and The Wild Palms. He also worked as a screenwriter, contributing to Howard Hawks's To Have and Have Not and The Big Sleep, adapted from Raymond Chandler's novel. The former film, adapted from Ernest Hemingway's novel, is the only film with contributions by two Nobel laureates.
Faulkner's reputation grew following publication of Malcolm Cowley's The Portable Faulkner, and he was awarded the 1949 Nobel Prize in Literature for "his powerful and unique contribution to the modern American novel." He is the only Mississippi-born Nobel laureate. Two of his works, A Fable (1954) and The Reivers (1962), won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction. Faulkner died from a heart attack on July 6, 1962, following a fall from his horse the month before. Ralph Ellison called him "the greatest artist the South has produced".
Faulkner was born in New Albany, Mississippi, and raised in Oxford, Mississippi. During World War I, he joined the Royal Canadian Air Force, but did not serve in combat. Returning to Oxford, he attended the University of Mississippi for three semesters before dropping out. He moved to New Orleans, where he wrote his first novel Soldiers' Pay (1925). He went back to Oxford and wrote Sartoris (1927), his first work set in the fictional Yoknapatawpha County. In 1929, he published The Sound and the Fury. The following year, he wrote As I Lay Dying. Later that decade, he wrote Light in August, Absalom, Absalom! and The Wild Palms. He also worked as a screenwriter, contributing to Howard Hawks's To Have and Have Not and The Big Sleep, adapted from Raymond Chandler's novel. The former film, adapted from Ernest Hemingway's novel, is the only film with contributions by two Nobel laureates.
Faulkner's reputation grew following publication of Malcolm Cowley's The Portable Faulkner, and he was awarded the 1949 Nobel Prize in Literature for "his powerful and unique contribution to the modern American novel." He is the only Mississippi-born Nobel laureate. Two of his works, A Fable (1954) and The Reivers (1962), won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction. Faulkner died from a heart attack on July 6, 1962, following a fall from his horse the month before. Ralph Ellison called him "the greatest artist the South has produced".
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 244 reviews
August 12, 2020
This work is Faulkner's very first novel, published in 1926. The war of 14-18 hangs over the whole story, not evoked directly, but through the influence it may have had on the fate and inner world of the characters, whether they were those who made it or others, civilians or young people just a little too young. An aviator disfigured by a terrible scar at the book's center, Donald Mahon becomes blind and gradually moves towards inevitable death. Around him were three women who somehow attached themselves to him. And then a whole series of portraits of inhabitants of a small American town, former soldiers demobilized, relatives of the disappeared. It is a book of great richness, complex situations, and endearing characters; the writing is undoubtedly more straightforward than in later works. Nevertheless, I had the impression of something not quite accomplished, of a draft genius; I could not help but imagine what the Faulkner of Maturity could have done with these themes and characters.
January 31, 2026
یه مدل تنهایی هست که کتاب فوق العاده ای رو خوندی و کسی نیست که درموردش باهاش حرف بزنی ، حرف زدنی که بتونه بفهمه چی میگی.
آخرین باری که کتابی باهام اینکارو کرد وقتی بود که نخل های وحشی رو تموم کرده بودم و حالا باز هم فاکنر انجامش داد.
این کتاب اولین رمان ویلیام فاکنر هست که سال ۱۹۲۶ منتشر شد. از نظر منتقدها کتاب متوسطی بود ولی بهش فرصت داد تا وارد دنیای نویسندگی به صورت جدی بشه. بر خلاف آثار بعدی فاکنر Soldiers' pay ، روایت خطی تر و ساده تری داره و هنوز سبک معروف جنوب می‌سی‌سی‌پی و تکنیک های جریان ذهنی که امضای فاکنره، توی متن به اون صورت دیده نمیشه.
ولی چرا این کتاب به این اندازه اندرریتده و بهش کم لطفی میشه؟ در صورتی که محتوا و توصیف ها و شخصیت ها فوق العاده‌ن؟
از اسم کتاب مشخصه که قراره با زندگی سربازها و زندگی بعد از جنگ سروکار داشته باشیم: تجربه ی انسان بعد از جنگ جهانی اول، شکست ها و
زخم های روحی، ترس از آینده و تلاش برای زندگی دوباره.
روایت با چندتا سرباز شروع میشه که دارن به خونه برمیگردن، جو گیلیگن و مارگارت پاورز که همدیگه رو توی قطار ملاقات میکنن و تصمیم میگیرند سربازی به اسم دونالد ماهون (پسر ِ یک کشیش)رو که نسبت به گیلیگن وضعیت وخیم تری داره رو به خونه برسونن و بهش کمک کنن (هرکدوم به دلایل شخصی و گذشته ای که داره این کار پرریسک و زحمت رو به عهده میگیره) و بعد از رسیدن به خانه ی کشیش تجارب ِانسانی مختلفی برای اون ها رقم میخوره.
دونالد ماهون که به خاطر تجربه ی جنگ از نظر روحی فریز شده: همه میدونن قراره بمیره، ولی برای زنده نگه داشتنش دنبال مرهم روحی و روانی میگردن، کسی که از نظر جسمی سالمه ولی از نظر روحی اونجا حضور نداره، کسی که زمان و مکان و انسان ها واسش بی رنگ و بی معنیه و فقط خودش و زمان رو به صورت مفهوم مجرد و خالص احساس میکنه (کاری که تجربه ی جنگ با انسان میکنه)
مارگارت پاورز که بیوه ی یک سرباز کشته شده در جنگ هست که شوهر مرحومش رو دوست نداشته و با یه نامه رابطه ش باهاش رو تموم میکنه. نامه ای که هیچوقت به دست شوهر نمیرسه چون توی جنگ کشته شده. و مارگارت با احساس عذاب وجدان ِبی خبر مردن ِشوهر تصمیم میگیره خودشو با کمک کردن به دونالد و درگیر شدن با زندگی اون ببخشه و از بار عذاب وجدانش کم کنه ( خوبی و دلسوزی ای که اخلاقی نیست بلکه خودخواهانه و برای کفاره ی اشتباهات گذشته ست)
جو گیلیگان سرباز از جنگ برگشته ای که هنوز به عشق و امید و مهربانی باور داره. کسی که به خاطر عشقش به مارگارت حاضره هرکاری بکنه. ولی آیا موفق میشه؟
کرکترهای داستان نه فقط روی کاغذ بلکه آدم هایی هستن که نفس میکشن، فکر میکنن، عاشق میشن، اشتباه میکنن، قضاوت میشن، حسرت میخورن و گاها توی گذشته زندگی میکنن، طوری که با خوندنشون احساس میکنی داری باهاشون زندگی میکنی و غمشون رو تجربه میکنی و باعث میشه مفاهیم عشق، امید، مرگ، گذشته و آینده نه به شکل فلسفه انتزاعی بلکه با لمس و دیدن و شنیدن و حس خنکی و گرمی بهمون منتقل بشه.
نمادهایی که فاکنر توی کتاب هاش به جا میذاره رو خیلی دوست دارم (مثل چکمه ها توی کتاب پایلن) اینجا هم نامه ی برگشت خورده روی میز کشیش در انتهای داستان یه نشونه‌ست: یه سمبل قوی از عبث بودن تلاش های ما برای جبران گذشته. مارگارت پاورز که به خاطر نرسیدن نامه ش به شوهر کشته در جنگ و عذاب وجدانش همه ی این راه ها رو اومده و تلاش کرده بود در انتها یه نامه ی برگشت خورده از معشوق ِ دیگرش روی میز به ما نشون داد که حتی بهترین اعمال و نیت های ما اگه در جهت جبران گذشته و اصلاح اون باشه بی‌فایده ست. سرنوشت و اتفاقات راه خودشون رو میرن و ما باز هم با مشکلات و شکست هایی که داشتیم روبه رو خواهیم شد.
به نظرم این کتاب باید مثل خشم و هیاهو، مثل گوربه گور و خیلی کتابهای دیگر فاکنر معروف میشد. چون حیفه اثری به این قشنگی رو کسی نشناسه و نخونه.
"Freedom comes with the decision: it does not wait for the act. She felt freer, more at peace with herself than she had felt for months. But I won't think about that, she decided deliberately. it is best just to be free, not to let it into the conscious mind. to be consciously anything argues a comparison, a bond with antithesis. live in your dreams, do not attain it - else comes satiety. Or sorrow, which is worse? I wonder?
- God is circumstance, Joe. God is in this life. We know nothing about the next. that will take care of itself in good time. *The Kingdom of God is in man's own heart* the book says. We make our own heaven or hell in this world. Who knows; perhaps when we die we may not be required to go anywhere nor do anything at all. that would be heaven."
از متن کتاب
بهمن ماه ۱۴۰۴
آخرین باری که کتابی باهام اینکارو کرد وقتی بود که نخل های وحشی رو تموم کرده بودم و حالا باز هم فاکنر انجامش داد.
این کتاب اولین رمان ویلیام فاکنر هست که سال ۱۹۲۶ منتشر شد. از نظر منتقدها کتاب متوسطی بود ولی بهش فرصت داد تا وارد دنیای نویسندگی به صورت جدی بشه. بر خلاف آثار بعدی فاکنر Soldiers' pay ، روایت خطی تر و ساده تری داره و هنوز سبک معروف جنوب می‌سی‌سی‌پی و تکنیک های جریان ذهنی که امضای فاکنره، توی متن به اون صورت دیده نمیشه.
ولی چرا این کتاب به این اندازه اندرریتده و بهش کم لطفی میشه؟ در صورتی که محتوا و توصیف ها و شخصیت ها فوق العاده‌ن؟
از اسم کتاب مشخصه که قراره با زندگی سربازها و زندگی بعد از جنگ سروکار داشته باشیم: تجربه ی انسان بعد از جنگ جهانی اول، شکست ها و
زخم های روحی، ترس از آینده و تلاش برای زندگی دوباره.
روایت با چندتا سرباز شروع میشه که دارن به خونه برمیگردن، جو گیلیگن و مارگارت پاورز که همدیگه رو توی قطار ملاقات میکنن و تصمیم میگیرند سربازی به اسم دونالد ماهون (پسر ِ یک کشیش)رو که نسبت به گیلیگن وضعیت وخیم تری داره رو به خونه برسونن و بهش کمک کنن (هرکدوم به دلایل شخصی و گذشته ای که داره این کار پرریسک و زحمت رو به عهده میگیره) و بعد از رسیدن به خانه ی کشیش تجارب ِانسانی مختلفی برای اون ها رقم میخوره.
دونالد ماهون که به خاطر تجربه ی جنگ از نظر روحی فریز شده: همه میدونن قراره بمیره، ولی برای زنده نگه داشتنش دنبال مرهم روحی و روانی میگردن، کسی که از نظر جسمی سالمه ولی از نظر روحی اونجا حضور نداره، کسی که زمان و مکان و انسان ها واسش بی رنگ و بی معنیه و فقط خودش و زمان رو به صورت مفهوم مجرد و خالص احساس میکنه (کاری که تجربه ی جنگ با انسان میکنه)
مارگارت پاورز که بیوه ی یک سرباز کشته شده در جنگ هست که شوهر مرحومش رو دوست نداشته و با یه نامه رابطه ش باهاش رو تموم میکنه. نامه ای که هیچوقت به دست شوهر نمیرسه چون توی جنگ کشته شده. و مارگارت با احساس عذاب وجدان ِبی خبر مردن ِشوهر تصمیم میگیره خودشو با کمک کردن به دونالد و درگیر شدن با زندگی اون ببخشه و از بار عذاب وجدانش کم کنه ( خوبی و دلسوزی ای که اخلاقی نیست بلکه خودخواهانه و برای کفاره ی اشتباهات گذشته ست)
جو گیلیگان سرباز از جنگ برگشته ای که هنوز به عشق و امید و مهربانی باور داره. کسی که به خاطر عشقش به مارگارت حاضره هرکاری بکنه. ولی آیا موفق میشه؟
کرکترهای داستان نه فقط روی کاغذ بلکه آدم هایی هستن که نفس میکشن، فکر میکنن، عاشق میشن، اشتباه میکنن، قضاوت میشن، حسرت میخورن و گاها توی گذشته زندگی میکنن، طوری که با خوندنشون احساس میکنی داری باهاشون زندگی میکنی و غمشون رو تجربه میکنی و باعث میشه مفاهیم عشق، امید، مرگ، گذشته و آینده نه به شکل فلسفه انتزاعی بلکه با لمس و دیدن و شنیدن و حس خنکی و گرمی بهمون منتقل بشه.
نمادهایی که فاکنر توی کتاب هاش به جا میذاره رو خیلی دوست دارم (مثل چکمه ها توی کتاب پایلن) اینجا هم نامه ی برگشت خورده روی میز کشیش در انتهای داستان یه نشونه‌ست: یه سمبل قوی از عبث بودن تلاش های ما برای جبران گذشته. مارگارت پاورز که به خاطر نرسیدن نامه ش به شوهر کشته در جنگ و عذاب وجدانش همه ی این راه ها رو اومده و تلاش کرده بود در انتها یه نامه ی برگشت خورده از معشوق ِ دیگرش روی میز به ما نشون داد که حتی بهترین اعمال و نیت های ما اگه در جهت جبران گذشته و اصلاح اون باشه بی‌فایده ست. سرنوشت و اتفاقات راه خودشون رو میرن و ما باز هم با مشکلات و شکست هایی که داشتیم روبه رو خواهیم شد.
به نظرم این کتاب باید مثل خشم و هیاهو، مثل گوربه گور و خیلی کتابهای دیگر فاکنر معروف میشد. چون حیفه اثری به این قشنگی رو کسی نشناسه و نخونه.
"Freedom comes with the decision: it does not wait for the act. She felt freer, more at peace with herself than she had felt for months. But I won't think about that, she decided deliberately. it is best just to be free, not to let it into the conscious mind. to be consciously anything argues a comparison, a bond with antithesis. live in your dreams, do not attain it - else comes satiety. Or sorrow, which is worse? I wonder?
- God is circumstance, Joe. God is in this life. We know nothing about the next. that will take care of itself in good time. *The Kingdom of God is in man's own heart* the book says. We make our own heaven or hell in this world. Who knows; perhaps when we die we may not be required to go anywhere nor do anything at all. that would be heaven."
از متن کتاب
بهمن ماه ۱۴۰۴
June 11, 2022
This is the story of life, death, love, and fate.
This the story of tears, fears, and bloods, fleeing aimlessly from the heaviness of loss.
This is the story of a wounded, helpless, and dying officer returning home to his father in Georgia.
This is the story of soldiers’ pay. Soldiers who never came back from the Great War. Part of them died forever in the mud and dust and gas. Part of them rest forever in the Flanders flickering-out Fields, doomed to be lost forever in the smoky trenches.
Soldier’s Pay is the first novel of William Faulkner and my first book from him. I have to admit that the Faulkner’s prose bewitched me.
Every line foreshadows a deep personal sorrow. In the beautiful rhythm of his prose, a warm breeze of the South hissingly crawls beneath the lakes and grass. South, Sorrow, Silence, Salvation at last.
This the story of tears, fears, and bloods, fleeing aimlessly from the heaviness of loss.
This is the story of a wounded, helpless, and dying officer returning home to his father in Georgia.
This is the story of soldiers’ pay. Soldiers who never came back from the Great War. Part of them died forever in the mud and dust and gas. Part of them rest forever in the Flanders flickering-out Fields, doomed to be lost forever in the smoky trenches.
Soldier’s Pay is the first novel of William Faulkner and my first book from him. I have to admit that the Faulkner’s prose bewitched me.
Every line foreshadows a deep personal sorrow. In the beautiful rhythm of his prose, a warm breeze of the South hissingly crawls beneath the lakes and grass. South, Sorrow, Silence, Salvation at last.
October 12, 2016
This is an early piece from Faulkner, the first one he ever published in fact thanks to his friend Sherwood Anderson (author of the extremely influential Winesburg, OH), and one of the rare ones about the war and not taking place in his own southern middle earth, Yoknapatawpha County, Mississippi. For fans of Metallica, it is similar to the story of One but featuring a WWI aviator who returns to his native Georgia, mute and blind. There is, naturally, a tragic love story wrapped around this return. It is not his greatest work, but one sees the unique Faulknerian style develop and bloom.
The story is surprisingly complex and interesting and I saw a bit of what would come later in Faulkner's more mature stream of consciousness style. It was a bit shocking to see several rather banal mentions of the KKK and I felt there was some ambiguity of the race of the female protagonist because she is sometimes referred to as "black" and sometimes "black-haired" because if she was black, it wouldn't make much sense in the plot because of her multiple relations with white men. But, this was an initial novel and things are definitely less ambiguous later on in the Faulkner canon. I really enjoyed the dialogs and the evolving relationships.
The story is surprisingly complex and interesting and I saw a bit of what would come later in Faulkner's more mature stream of consciousness style. It was a bit shocking to see several rather banal mentions of the KKK and I felt there was some ambiguity of the race of the female protagonist because she is sometimes referred to as "black" and sometimes "black-haired" because if she was black, it wouldn't make much sense in the plot because of her multiple relations with white men. But, this was an initial novel and things are definitely less ambiguous later on in the Faulkner canon. I really enjoyed the dialogs and the evolving relationships.
October 6, 2024
William Faulkner’s debut novel feels fairly predictable: a broken hero returns from war, surrounded by people who cannot understand the depth of his trauma. The protagonist, Donald Mahon, is often viewed more as a symbol of war’s devastation than as a fully realized, complex individual. Because of this, certain parts of the narrative come across as forced, lacking genuine emotional impact.
The story’s artificiality becomes clear through its reliance on familiar clichés, like the returning soldier unable to adjust to civilian life and the inevitable tragedy that follows. Many of the characters feel like stock figures, with their actions following predetermined paths. For example, the romantic subplot between the wounded veteran and the woman trying to save him unfolds along familiar lines, offering little in terms of new emotional insight. As a result, the plot can feel formulaic, despite its serious themes.
Still, this early work is notable as Faulkner’s first significant step toward developing his own voice and style. It offers valuable insight into the progression of his talent as a writer.
The story’s artificiality becomes clear through its reliance on familiar clichés, like the returning soldier unable to adjust to civilian life and the inevitable tragedy that follows. Many of the characters feel like stock figures, with their actions following predetermined paths. For example, the romantic subplot between the wounded veteran and the woman trying to save him unfolds along familiar lines, offering little in terms of new emotional insight. As a result, the plot can feel formulaic, despite its serious themes.
Still, this early work is notable as Faulkner’s first significant step toward developing his own voice and style. It offers valuable insight into the progression of his talent as a writer.
February 25, 2019
The most interesting thing about this book for me is that I bought it at the house (now bookstore) where Faulkner lived while he was writing it: http://faulknerhouse.net/
That mundane fact is even more interesting to me than spotting some of the elements Faulkner would use later to much greater effect: the ticking of clocks; a section of dialogue set out as if the characters are in a play; words inside parentheses to indicate thought, including that belonging to a collective society.
While some of its descriptive writing is beautiful, I’m not sure of the book’s point (the question of who will marry the damaged Donald isn’t compelling); and all that jumped out at me is its misogyny. (Yes, there’s a horrible male character who I think is supposed to be comic, but that doesn’t take away from the misogyny.)
I was so frustrated by this book that I set it aside for a long while, and I’m not sure why I finished it. Oh, right, because it’s Faulkner.
That mundane fact is even more interesting to me than spotting some of the elements Faulkner would use later to much greater effect: the ticking of clocks; a section of dialogue set out as if the characters are in a play; words inside parentheses to indicate thought, including that belonging to a collective society.
While some of its descriptive writing is beautiful, I’m not sure of the book’s point (the question of who will marry the damaged Donald isn’t compelling); and all that jumped out at me is its misogyny. (Yes, there’s a horrible male character who I think is supposed to be comic, but that doesn’t take away from the misogyny.)
I was so frustrated by this book that I set it aside for a long while, and I’m not sure why I finished it. Oh, right, because it’s Faulkner.
October 18, 2023
SEX AND DEATH: the front door and the back door of the world. How indissolubly are they associated in us!
This is Faulkner's first novel and it's one of the few not set in his mythical Yoknapatawpha County, Mississippi. Instead, it starts with Lt. Donald Mahon, a badly wounded American who flew for the RAF in World War I, returning by train to his home in Georgia, accompanied by a couple of heavy-drinking fellow veterans and an attractive young war widow.
He'd been presumed killed in the war, so his arrival is a surprise, a happy one to his father, an Episcopal priest, who initially denies the severity of the son's injuries, but a disorienting one to his fiance, a flapper who's moved on and has been enjoying a life of playing the field and partying, and is revolted by the deep scar on the forehead and near catatonic presence of the former heartthrob.
An intricate dance among these and a few other local characters, mostly to determine who will pair up with whom, provides such plot as there is, and the novel adds Faulkner's perspective to the literature of the Lost Generation. At least as interesting to me were the first intimations of his later rich literary style, overwrought and intrusive as it sometimes is.
They paced slowly beneath arched and moon-bitten trees, scuffing their feet in shadows of leaves. Under the moon lights in houses were yellow futilities.
This is Faulkner's first novel and it's one of the few not set in his mythical Yoknapatawpha County, Mississippi. Instead, it starts with Lt. Donald Mahon, a badly wounded American who flew for the RAF in World War I, returning by train to his home in Georgia, accompanied by a couple of heavy-drinking fellow veterans and an attractive young war widow.
He'd been presumed killed in the war, so his arrival is a surprise, a happy one to his father, an Episcopal priest, who initially denies the severity of the son's injuries, but a disorienting one to his fiance, a flapper who's moved on and has been enjoying a life of playing the field and partying, and is revolted by the deep scar on the forehead and near catatonic presence of the former heartthrob.
An intricate dance among these and a few other local characters, mostly to determine who will pair up with whom, provides such plot as there is, and the novel adds Faulkner's perspective to the literature of the Lost Generation. At least as interesting to me were the first intimations of his later rich literary style, overwrought and intrusive as it sometimes is.
They paced slowly beneath arched and moon-bitten trees, scuffing their feet in shadows of leaves. Under the moon lights in houses were yellow futilities.
November 19, 2010
I loved this book and would recommend it to anyone who adores powerful and poetic imagery. The plot of the story is a little bland, it's almost soap operaish, but the characters who drive the narrative are anything but your typical soap stars. They are real and engaging individuals and you find yourself amazed at how their plights tug at your heart. The skillful way in which Faulkner uses language to tell this story will impress even the least literary individual. If you are to read only one book this winter this should be it.
July 14, 2021
Sfolgorante esordio di un grande scrittore. Stati Uniti, Georgia, 1919, i reduci della Prima Guerra Mondiale tornano a casa. Quelli fortunati. Una societa' indolente e benpensante li accoglie nuovamente. Partiti come giovani leoni, tornano indietro a pezzi, talvolta letteralmente, o nella migliore delle ipotesi, disillusi e ferocemente critici. Uno di loro, il tenente Mahon, gravemente ferito, dato inizialmente per morto, torna alla casa paterna. Una primavera colorata e profumata lo circonda, in una atmosfera tanto sensuale e disinibita quanto ipocrita e perbenista. Scrittura ricca, elaborata, non sempre semplice e lineare, ma appagante e sorprendentemente moderna a quasi un secolo di distanza.
December 6, 2017
It'd be easy to deride this, Falky's first novel, as mere prologue to later genius and dismiss it out of hand, as many seem to. Fact is, this is so much better than most first efforts or, let's face it, 90% of fiction out there today, that it hardly seems to matter that it is Falky's most juvenile work. It has all the hallmarks of his greatness (the wit, the poetics) and is actually refreshing since it doesn't feel weighted down with intense, Attican symbolism and southern woes, whether black or white. It's a simple straightforward story about a WWI veteran, horribly disfigured who comes home to Georgia to die. Oh, yes, and the people who gather about him as he dies. It's about them, too.
November 18, 2017
Faulkner pretendeu fazer um retrato psicológico de um grupo de indivíduos americanos que (sobre)vivem após a IGG e esse aspeto foi bem conseguido. No entanto, esta primeira obra do escritor parece-me que tem algumas falhas na sua concepção.
Mahon, o soldado moribundo, Margaret , uma viúva da guerra e Gilligan , o soldado amável, conhecem-se numa viagem de comboio. É a condição física do primeiro que irá determinar o modo como as pessoas se relacionam com ele e entre si. Ainda assim, considero que Faulkner falhou no modo como coloca este trio a conviver debaixo do mesmo teto. Não me tendo convencido de todo, este aspeto perturbou desde sempre a minha adesão à história. Por outro lado, Mahon, o personagem principal desaparece do radar do leitor ao longo de muitas páginas. Se estivesse a representar , Mahon apareceria no primeiro ato para se eclipsar, sem aviso, no segundo e terceiro. Voltaria a surgir esporadicamente no ato seguinte e teria todos os holofotes virados para ele no último ato. Seria substituído por personagens que giram ao seu redor como a caprichosa e superficial Cecily, a fiel e resignada Emmy ou Jones , o stalker desta história. Não percebo porque teve Mahon que desaparecer por completo.
Gostei das descrições, em particular aquelas que marcam a passagem do tempo e as que se detêm nos vestidos da mulheres. Nelas apercebemo-nos que estamos perante um escritor talentoso. (...viu Cecily delicadamente vestida num vestido prateado, frágil como vidro fundido. Tinha um leque de penas verdes e o seu corpo esguio , animado e torneado... . Conseguiria desenhar um vestido festivo à anos 20 apenas com esta breve descrição.
O tema desta obra foi exposto magnificamente por Hemingway ou Fitzgerald . Faulkner escreveu uma obra mediana.
June 4, 2020
Exquisite and coarse at the same time, this book is a perfect combo of heart-rending pathos and dark irony that Faulkner is so famous for. The beauty if his style is surreal. I am once again assured that he had a godly spark in him. In my books, Faulkner stands high above all the fiction written before and after him
March 11, 2013
William Faulkner's novels have long been a serious reading gap for me, one I intended to fill as I worked my way through Time Magazine's list of the greatest 100 English-language novels published since 1923. Faulkner is represented twice on that list (The Sound and the Fury and Light in August), but of course, Faulkner comes with a reputation of being "difficult" and "intimidating." I figured it might be constructive if I just started at the beginning, with Faulkner's first novel, and work my way through his ouevre that way, so I might be better equipped to handle his meatier books.
This raises a strategic question, however: When reading and reflecting on Soldiers' Pay, am I supposed to take into consideration Faulkner's future work, which I haven't read, or do I take this novel on its own terms? Going through a lot of the 1- and 2-star reviews here, it seems most people are indeed holding this book up against his later novels (and inevitably falling short), but since I cannot do that, I can only judge this one as if it were Faulkner's only work, possibly revisiting it later as I move through his catalog. And I have to say, I enjoyed it quite a bit, even with its flaws.
(First, I should say how heartening it is that even someone widely considered to be America's greatest novelist stumbled out of the gate trying to find a unique voice and narrative style. It should give the rest of us poor schmucks hope.)
Let's just say that Faulkner's Nobel prize was not awarded to him because of Soldiers' Pay, which feels like a patchwork of ideas and genres sewn together. There's a bit of Southern gothic, a pulpy love story, often tangential war commentary, and a whole lot of religious imagery all put in the blender. You can see Faulkner try stuff out in real time, seeing what works, abandoning what doesn't. A couple times he stops the narrative to go around the world he's created and see what each character is thinking, as if in stage direction. Most successfully, he also throws in parenthetical asides to tell us what a character is really thinking as he's speaking. And there's a healthy dosage of humor sprinkled in, something else I'm not sure Faulkner is known for, so that was a pleasant surprise.
I guess my biggest gripe is that the central story (who will marry Donald Mahon, the dying soldier the entire narrative hinges upon) isn't always that compelling, and there are a couple characters whose presence is never fully explained (none more so than Januarius Jones).
But it works. Yes, this book feels overwritten, and there's a good chance it would have been entirely lost to time if William Faulkner's name wasn't on it. But if you want to get a taste of Faulkner without having to put in the heavy work that his future novels demand, Soldiers' Pay may be worth your time.
On to Mosquitoes!
This raises a strategic question, however: When reading and reflecting on Soldiers' Pay, am I supposed to take into consideration Faulkner's future work, which I haven't read, or do I take this novel on its own terms? Going through a lot of the 1- and 2-star reviews here, it seems most people are indeed holding this book up against his later novels (and inevitably falling short), but since I cannot do that, I can only judge this one as if it were Faulkner's only work, possibly revisiting it later as I move through his catalog. And I have to say, I enjoyed it quite a bit, even with its flaws.
(First, I should say how heartening it is that even someone widely considered to be America's greatest novelist stumbled out of the gate trying to find a unique voice and narrative style. It should give the rest of us poor schmucks hope.)
Let's just say that Faulkner's Nobel prize was not awarded to him because of Soldiers' Pay, which feels like a patchwork of ideas and genres sewn together. There's a bit of Southern gothic, a pulpy love story, often tangential war commentary, and a whole lot of religious imagery all put in the blender. You can see Faulkner try stuff out in real time, seeing what works, abandoning what doesn't. A couple times he stops the narrative to go around the world he's created and see what each character is thinking, as if in stage direction. Most successfully, he also throws in parenthetical asides to tell us what a character is really thinking as he's speaking. And there's a healthy dosage of humor sprinkled in, something else I'm not sure Faulkner is known for, so that was a pleasant surprise.
I guess my biggest gripe is that the central story (who will marry Donald Mahon, the dying soldier the entire narrative hinges upon) isn't always that compelling, and there are a couple characters whose presence is never fully explained (none more so than Januarius Jones).
But it works. Yes, this book feels overwritten, and there's a good chance it would have been entirely lost to time if William Faulkner's name wasn't on it. But if you want to get a taste of Faulkner without having to put in the heavy work that his future novels demand, Soldiers' Pay may be worth your time.
On to Mosquitoes!
August 10, 2025
me ha acabado gustando mucho más de lo que llegué a pensar durante gran parte de la novela
después de leer "mientras agonizo" el verano pasado, decidí leer toda la obra de faulkner en orden cronológico
esta es su primera novela, escrita hace 99 años e hija de su tiempo: ambientada en un pueblo de Georgia después de la primera guerra mundial, el racismo y la misoginia campan a sus anchas. las mujeres son malas y superficiales, los hombres sufren y beben mucho y los pocos negros que aparecen son unos niños tontos que molestan con sus tonterías. gótico sureño en vena
tiene muchísimo diálogo, que me ha resultado pesado muchas veces; y la novela mejora mucho cuando entra en escena el narrador. hay párrafos realmente muy bonitos. también empieza a introducir poco a poco otros géneros, que van desde las cartas hasta el teatro en mitad del texto. es una novela al uso, conservadora en forma y fondo, que intenta, sin demasiado éxito, ir un paso más allá. tuvo que esperar unos años y unos cuantos intentos más para cambiar la forma de escribir de toda una generación. es normal
es curioso ver cómo Faulkner, tal vez el Nobel favorito de los escritores, pasó de escribir Esto a escribir Aquello, tengo ganas de seguir viendo su evolución. he pensado mucho en cómo se escribe mientras leía "la paga del soldado"
pd: la traducción es realmente espantosa. en un mundo donde se prefieren publicar 30 novedades que no aportan nada a la semana en vez de reeditar la obra de un autor de esta categoría; si os interesa y leéis en inglés, hacedlo así. seguro que la experiencia mejora
después de leer "mientras agonizo" el verano pasado, decidí leer toda la obra de faulkner en orden cronológico
esta es su primera novela, escrita hace 99 años e hija de su tiempo: ambientada en un pueblo de Georgia después de la primera guerra mundial, el racismo y la misoginia campan a sus anchas. las mujeres son malas y superficiales, los hombres sufren y beben mucho y los pocos negros que aparecen son unos niños tontos que molestan con sus tonterías. gótico sureño en vena
tiene muchísimo diálogo, que me ha resultado pesado muchas veces; y la novela mejora mucho cuando entra en escena el narrador. hay párrafos realmente muy bonitos. también empieza a introducir poco a poco otros géneros, que van desde las cartas hasta el teatro en mitad del texto. es una novela al uso, conservadora en forma y fondo, que intenta, sin demasiado éxito, ir un paso más allá. tuvo que esperar unos años y unos cuantos intentos más para cambiar la forma de escribir de toda una generación. es normal
es curioso ver cómo Faulkner, tal vez el Nobel favorito de los escritores, pasó de escribir Esto a escribir Aquello, tengo ganas de seguir viendo su evolución. he pensado mucho en cómo se escribe mientras leía "la paga del soldado"
pd: la traducción es realmente espantosa. en un mundo donde se prefieren publicar 30 novedades que no aportan nada a la semana en vez de reeditar la obra de un autor de esta categoría; si os interesa y leéis en inglés, hacedlo así. seguro que la experiencia mejora
July 13, 2019
SOLDIER'S PAY (1926) is William Faulkner's first novel, generally considered his literary apprenticeship. In this book he tends to use traditional narrative forms and techniques and his characters seem like types most of the time.
The subject of the novel is post-war disillusionment. American post-war society, described in very bitter strokes of comedy, collides with the group of war veterans who are now returning home, quite unable to forget the violence of war. The plot revolves around Donald Mahon, a war pilot, who has returned from the war blind, with a withered arm and a disfiguring scar on his forehead. He is now apathetic, barely conscious of what goes on around him.
Before the war he became engaged to Cecily Saunders, a beautiful, fickle, young girl who fell in love with the flier's aura of romance, danger and fame. As expected, she shrinks from marrying the horribly disfigured Donald and she wishes to escape the past and its obligations.
Even in this early novel Faulkner appears concerned with time as a source of motives and with situations which are revealed rather than developed. SOLDIER'S PAY provides a limited insight into the preoccupations which are associated to his mature work. It is not a great novel, but it might be a good place to start if you haven't read Faulkner before because it has none of the stylistic complexity of his best novels.
The subject of the novel is post-war disillusionment. American post-war society, described in very bitter strokes of comedy, collides with the group of war veterans who are now returning home, quite unable to forget the violence of war. The plot revolves around Donald Mahon, a war pilot, who has returned from the war blind, with a withered arm and a disfiguring scar on his forehead. He is now apathetic, barely conscious of what goes on around him.
Before the war he became engaged to Cecily Saunders, a beautiful, fickle, young girl who fell in love with the flier's aura of romance, danger and fame. As expected, she shrinks from marrying the horribly disfigured Donald and she wishes to escape the past and its obligations.
Even in this early novel Faulkner appears concerned with time as a source of motives and with situations which are revealed rather than developed. SOLDIER'S PAY provides a limited insight into the preoccupations which are associated to his mature work. It is not a great novel, but it might be a good place to start if you haven't read Faulkner before because it has none of the stylistic complexity of his best novels.
June 28, 2021
Δεύτερη επαφή με το έργο του Γουίλιαμ Φώκνερ, μετά το πολύ ενδιαφέρον και καλογραμμένο διήγημα "Ο αχυρώνας φλέγεται" που διάβασα τον Απρίλιο του 2018, και δηλώνω ξανά αρκετά ικανοποιημένος, αν και καταλαβαίνω ότι σαν πρωτόλειο μυθιστόρημα που είναι δεν φτάνει σε ποιότητα και δύναμη τα επόμενα μυθιστορήματα που έγραψε ο μεγάλος αυτός συγγραφέας. Όμως θα ήθελα να έχω μια όσο γίνεται πιο ομαλή πορεία στο έργο του Φόκνερ, και να μην πέσω κατευθείαν στα βαθιά. Λοιπόν, το "Η πληρωμή του στρατιώτη" είναι σίγουρα ένα καλογραμμένο μυθιστόρημα, με ωραίες περιγραφές και φυσικούς διαλόγους, με αρκετά καλή σκιαγράφηση χαρακτήρων, με την πλοκή όμως να θυμίζει λίγο από σαπουνόπερα ή μελόδραμα και να μην καταφέρνει να με καθηλώσει σε όλη της διάρκεια, παρά μονάχα σε ορισμένα σημεία εδώ και κει. Δηλαδή η ιστορία αυτή καθαυτή δεν μου είπε και πολλά πράγματα, όμως οι χαρακτήρες και οι σκέψεις τους είχαν το ενδιαφέρον τους, ενώ σίγουρα μου άρεσε πολύ ο τρόπος γραφής. Επίσης μου άρεσε η ατμόσφαιρα, έστω κι αν ήταν μάλλον καταθλιπτική και μελαγχολική. (7.5/10)
January 21, 2017
It's always interesting to read a debut novel of such a big literary name. Someone that stood a test of time and produced at least 4 novels (The Sound and the Fury, Light in August and As I Lay Dying, Absalom, Absalom) that are considered to be among absolute best of 20 century.
However Soldier's Pay proves that Faulkner worked his way to genius, as his debut has lots of flows and the merit doesn't really strike strongly enough through melodramatic plot.
There are moments when you think, yes, the guy was brilliant so early on (some gothic and disturbing characterisation, quite informative picture of post war trauma and post war society) and others when you are rolling your eyes at absurdly dramatic plot.
Having said that I did enjoy it, it's a page turner as you want to find out, like in every soap opera, who will marry whom.
However Soldier's Pay proves that Faulkner worked his way to genius, as his debut has lots of flows and the merit doesn't really strike strongly enough through melodramatic plot.
There are moments when you think, yes, the guy was brilliant so early on (some gothic and disturbing characterisation, quite informative picture of post war trauma and post war society) and others when you are rolling your eyes at absurdly dramatic plot.
Having said that I did enjoy it, it's a page turner as you want to find out, like in every soap opera, who will marry whom.
November 10, 2017
Castaways
In literature, flotsam and jetsam always seem to travel together, like Mutt and Jeff. But in life, human flotsam (or jetsam) washes up alone, on strange beaches. Perhaps it is too easy to compose a novel like this---that the simple reason that disparate people come together is that they just happened to wash up on the same beach. OK, but SOLDIER'S PAY was Faulkner's first novel, and it's still excellent, so he might be excused from accusations of "unlikely combinations". Fate brings eight or nine people together: the deep, the shallow, the naive, the world weary, the lucky and the unlucky. You can criticize this novel, but it's still better than most of the stuff that was written then or now either.
A badly-wounded soldier is returning home from WW I to Georgia by train. Three unrelated strangers befriend the luckless soldier. They all drink copious amounts and the more mature duo--a Mrs. Powers (young widow whose marriage had lasted three days before her husband was sent overseas and killed). and a certain Gilligan, wise beyond his years and wise guy as well---decide that they must make sure the soldier, Donald Mahon, gets home safely. Meanwhile, the wounded soldier's fiancée, a weak reed named Cecily, is, like "Runaround Sue", going out with all the guys. When the duo arrive with Donald in tow, the small town buzzes with gossip and rumors. Donald's minister father assures everyone that his son will recover. The weak reed repudiates the badly-scarred fiancé. A servant girl remembers a certain night in the woods with the same Donald and a creepy fellow named Januarius insinuates himself into nearly all the relationships. Two soulmates who don't mate. What is the upshot of all this ? Well, you might refer to it as 'soldier's pay'. What does Donald get for his sacrifice ? What about others who sacrificed ? Faulkner's idea about war is bleak and he definitely doesn't go in for Hollywood endings, even if the story resembles a soap opera to some extent. (But then novels with actual stories can always be accused of this.) Character development is excellent, the prose is marvelous, you see the Nobel Prize winning author in his youth (he was 29 when he wrote this). I won't say this is the best of Faulkner's work, not by a long shot, but it's a great book nonetheless, espccially if castaway style appeals to you.
In literature, flotsam and jetsam always seem to travel together, like Mutt and Jeff. But in life, human flotsam (or jetsam) washes up alone, on strange beaches. Perhaps it is too easy to compose a novel like this---that the simple reason that disparate people come together is that they just happened to wash up on the same beach. OK, but SOLDIER'S PAY was Faulkner's first novel, and it's still excellent, so he might be excused from accusations of "unlikely combinations". Fate brings eight or nine people together: the deep, the shallow, the naive, the world weary, the lucky and the unlucky. You can criticize this novel, but it's still better than most of the stuff that was written then or now either.
A badly-wounded soldier is returning home from WW I to Georgia by train. Three unrelated strangers befriend the luckless soldier. They all drink copious amounts and the more mature duo--a Mrs. Powers (young widow whose marriage had lasted three days before her husband was sent overseas and killed). and a certain Gilligan, wise beyond his years and wise guy as well---decide that they must make sure the soldier, Donald Mahon, gets home safely. Meanwhile, the wounded soldier's fiancée, a weak reed named Cecily, is, like "Runaround Sue", going out with all the guys. When the duo arrive with Donald in tow, the small town buzzes with gossip and rumors. Donald's minister father assures everyone that his son will recover. The weak reed repudiates the badly-scarred fiancé. A servant girl remembers a certain night in the woods with the same Donald and a creepy fellow named Januarius insinuates himself into nearly all the relationships. Two soulmates who don't mate. What is the upshot of all this ? Well, you might refer to it as 'soldier's pay'. What does Donald get for his sacrifice ? What about others who sacrificed ? Faulkner's idea about war is bleak and he definitely doesn't go in for Hollywood endings, even if the story resembles a soap opera to some extent. (But then novels with actual stories can always be accused of this.) Character development is excellent, the prose is marvelous, you see the Nobel Prize winning author in his youth (he was 29 when he wrote this). I won't say this is the best of Faulkner's work, not by a long shot, but it's a great book nonetheless, espccially if castaway style appeals to you.
August 6, 2014
This early Faulkner novel was the first I've read by him, but I'll definitely go on to more. I was attracted to this by its subject matter, as I've been reading a lot about the First World War lately, and this is an account of a wounded, dying soldier who returns to his home in Georgia and his unfaithful sweetheart.
I found the story moving, but the book really exerts a grip because of its writing style and intense, overheated atmosphere. 'Soldiers' Pay' can be confusing at times, as some of it is written in stream of consciousness, but you can feel the writer's intoxication with language, which makes it exciting to read. As I read, I was aware that this was early and uneven work, with an intrusive "comic" character, Januarius Jones, getting in the way of the story at times. But I still found the book compelling and it was hard to tear myself away from it.
I found the story moving, but the book really exerts a grip because of its writing style and intense, overheated atmosphere. 'Soldiers' Pay' can be confusing at times, as some of it is written in stream of consciousness, but you can feel the writer's intoxication with language, which makes it exciting to read. As I read, I was aware that this was early and uneven work, with an intrusive "comic" character, Januarius Jones, getting in the way of the story at times. But I still found the book compelling and it was hard to tear myself away from it.
November 22, 2024
Another try at Faulkner; another failure at Faulkner. I chose this one because it was written in New Orleans, at a house I visited. The house was nice, but I detested this. You get Faulkner's classic wandering sentences and bizarre word usages that I know are meant to show some sort of literary merit, but what do they actually convey? Then there's just the purely bad writing: a character is said to perform an action "fatly" twice within three pages (and numerous other times throughout the book besides). And the repellent character choices: the Black characters are all minstrel cliches; a committer of multiple sexual assaults is treated like a lovable scamp and rewarded for his behavior.
Scattered in between, there are moments of beauty and maybe brilliance -- but at what cost?
Scattered in between, there are moments of beauty and maybe brilliance -- but at what cost?
June 20, 2012
Wow, two really good Faulkner books in a row (this and The Reivers) - I could get used to this! Here we find one of Faulkner's earliest books, one free of the pomposity and obscurity of his later works and also one that offers some genuinely noble and likable characters. Going into another WWI-themed novel, I admit was cringing a bit in fear that it would turn out to be another Fable, but not so. Here, he gives a compelling and touching look at the men and women whose lives were touched - and more often than not, wrecked - by the war, and he does it with accessible depth and passion.
February 21, 2025
A complex debut novel. You can tell Faulkner’s genius is prevalent. Even in this, his first published novel. The relationships are complex and the description of a small, southern town is atmospheric.
May 25, 2023
With a debut novel, an author is just finding his style. I could see that happening here, though the novel has in no way the strength that was to become the Nobel Prize winner. The following struck me at the time, though I can see it only gives us a tiny glimpse of what we can expect from Faulkner. Afternoon lay in a coma in the street, like a woman recently loved. Quiet and warm: nothing now that the lover has gone away.
The novel simply doesn't hold together. Was he trying too hard? Perhaps. And yet, there is definitely something here. I want to be a Faulkner completist and I'm not sorry I read this. But for those who only want to read his truly great works, this should be skipped.
On the other hand, I was very glad for the inclusion of the Introduction by Michael Gorra. I had known Faulkner was friends with Sherwood Anderson, who encouraged Faulkner. I learned how they met and how their friendship developed into encouraging each other, that they took walks together in New Orleans making up stories or characterizations about the people they passed. There is more to the short biography, but I was pleased with even that small bit.
The novel simply doesn't hold together. Was he trying too hard? Perhaps. And yet, there is definitely something here. I want to be a Faulkner completist and I'm not sorry I read this. But for those who only want to read his truly great works, this should be skipped.
On the other hand, I was very glad for the inclusion of the Introduction by Michael Gorra. I had known Faulkner was friends with Sherwood Anderson, who encouraged Faulkner. I learned how they met and how their friendship developed into encouraging each other, that they took walks together in New Orleans making up stories or characterizations about the people they passed. There is more to the short biography, but I was pleased with even that small bit.
February 8, 2014
William Faulkner's debut novel is a melodrama about World War I soldiers returning to a small town in Georgia, where the women they left behind struggle, like them, to put the pieces back together. Similar to all Faulkner's work, the structure is experimental, jumping around places and points-of-view, juxtaposing dialogue with parenthetical asides to relate unspoken thought processes, and in one chapter, attempting to sententiously capture the perspective of multiple characters at once, including the gossipy townspeople. The author, then an incipient genius, hadn't yet ironed-out the wrinkles in his narrative style. He sometimes loses track of the dramatic focus or occasionally uses dialogue to clarify characterizations that would henceforth be subtly suggested in subsequent novels. Despite all that, Soldier's Pay speaks to the fledgling storyteller's auspicious brilliance, signaling tropes and themes Faulkner would explore more fully later on: like the mindset of the mentally incapacitated, the physical or psychological absence of pivotal characters, and the tense racial, religious, sexual, and moral undercurrents prevalent in the post-Civil War Deep South. Taken on its own terms, however, the book is above all a potent elegy to all that was lost in the war, on the battlefield and at home.
April 5, 2025
A very somber and bittersweet read. Features an ensemble cast, and focuses on how a small, perfectly Southern Gothic town is affected by the Great War, directly and indirectly. There are some strong themes of loyalty, honesty, and the interplay of sex and death. A little impenetrable at times, it’s easy to see how this was a commercial failure. Still, a very rewarding read and you can see the development of Faulkner’s stream-of-consciousness style through glimpses of characters’ inner monologues. One particular flashback near the end of the story is unforgettable.
Would recommend if you’re interested in character studies, Southern US circa 1920s, Southern Gothic, or war-related tragedies.
Would recommend if you’re interested in character studies, Southern US circa 1920s, Southern Gothic, or war-related tragedies.
June 3, 2023
The start of this novel was interesting—drunk and belligerent soldiers on a train returning from the First World War. Soon these veterans and a woman come together to help a severely injured veteran (Donald) return to his rural home in Georgia. This would have been a great Novella but it quickly dissolved into a soapy mess after they get Donald home. The second half of this book is pretty awful as we are introduced to undynamic and ridiculous characters like Cecily (the village tramp) and a dirtbag named Jones (who has yellow goat's eyes) who tries to seduce every woman he meets.
Mrs. Powers soon becomes unbearable in this. She leads several romantic suitors along even though her intentions are clear in her own mind. Gilligan follows Mrs. Powers like a lost puppy and he is pretty pathetic in his pursuit of Mrs. Powers. This really feels like a daytime soap opera at times.
Mrs. Powers soon becomes unbearable in this. She leads several romantic suitors along even though her intentions are clear in her own mind. Gilligan follows Mrs. Powers like a lost puppy and he is pretty pathetic in his pursuit of Mrs. Powers. This really feels like a daytime soap opera at times.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 27, 2026
«—¿Cómo puedo casarme con él si tiene esa cicatriz? ¿Cómo puedo? Dímelo.»
Esta es la primera novela que publicó Faulkner y si, lo que está en esa pequeña cita es el núcleo del drama en el que gira la obra: el soldado Donald regresa a casa tras la Primera Guerra Mundial ciego, gravemente herido y marcado en el rostro por una cicatriz imborrable. Su familia y prometida, que lo daban por muerto, se enfrentan a la desconcertante realidad de su supervivencia. Sin embargo, bajo este conflicto aparente, Faulkner teje una red de tramas secundarias donde la guerra opera como una excusa poderosa para indagar en las relaciones humanas (entre hombres y mujeres, padres e hijas, novios y prometidas) revelando cómo el trauma histórico resquebraja los cimientos íntimos de la sociedad.
Los conflictos que surgen en torno a las mujeres, y los conflictos internos de estas mismas, constituyen a mi juicio lo más logrado de la obra. Faulkner presenta a sus personajes femeninos en un estado de desesperanza, como seres con pocas vías de comunicación auténtica, incapaces de encontrar un lugar donde sentirse valiosas en una sociedad rígida. El autor sugiere cómo las estructuras de dominio masculino, cimientos de la sociedad occidental, han buscado atrofiar los vínculos entre mujeres. No es casual que entre los personajes femeninos reine la desconfianza, como ocurre entre Margaret Powers y Cecily Saunders, las dos figuras centrales, que se odian mutuamente pero parecen dos caras de una misma moneda: se rechazan porque en la otra se reconocen a sí mismas. Faulkner parece preguntarse —y responde con crudeza— hasta qué punto el patriarcado ha mutilado la naturaleza femenina. La respuesta, encarnada en Cecily, la prometida del soldado desfigurado, es desoladora: atrapada entre la presión familiar y las expectativas sociales, esta joven belleza estalla en una histeria causada por el peso de las apariencias. Se convierte en víctima de manipulaciones que buscan convertirla en la doncella sacrificada, un bálsamo simbólico para la herida del héroe mutilado
A través del personaje de Cecily, dotado de juventud y belleza, Faulkner reflexiona también sobre el encanto femenino y el misterio de su belleza. Explora el porqué de ese gesto íntimo en el que las mujeres se miran las uñas y las liman hasta la perfección. ¿Por qué les importa tanto tener unas uñas hermosas? Porque saben que sus manos serán observadas; porque el hombre no puede resistirse a mirar las manos de una mujer bella.
Frente a ella se alza el que es, a mi gusto, el mejor personaje de la obra: Margaret Powers, la joven viuda de guerra que conoce a Donald en el tren de regreso y, conmovida por su destino, lo acompaña a su pueblo. Margaret, cargada de una culpa íntima por la muerte de su esposo y movida por una piedad profundamente femenina, decide casarse con el soldado ciego. En ella Faulkner explora la otra cara del sacrificio femenino, casi un eco de la Tía Tula unamuniana, pero también algo más: la piedad como fundamento civilizatorio. Margaret encarna la posibilidad de un orden social distinto, menos cruel, basado en la compasión y el cuidado. Quizá por eso, sugiere Faulkner, los hombres encuentran a las mujeres indescifrables: porque mientras la lógica masculina tiende a resolver los conflictos mediante la fuerza y la imposición, esa misma que desata guerras y convierte a jóvenes en despojos, la femenina opera en un registro que desafía la simple transacción del poder.
El soldado Donald, ciego, moribundo y marcado por una cicatriz que le cruza el rostro, funciona como una alegoría potente de un Estados Unidos que perdió su inocencia infantil tras la Gran Guerra. Es el país que emerge como potencia mundial pero que, como Donald, ha dejado parte de su alma en las trincheras europeas, regresando a casa transformado, irreconocible incluso para los suyos. Faulkner, demuestra la profundidad de su mirada, semejante a Balzac, pues no se conforma con el realismo superficial; hurga en las heridas sociales con la misma precisión con que describe las cicatrices físicas.
Esta es la primera novela que publicó Faulkner y si, lo que está en esa pequeña cita es el núcleo del drama en el que gira la obra: el soldado Donald regresa a casa tras la Primera Guerra Mundial ciego, gravemente herido y marcado en el rostro por una cicatriz imborrable. Su familia y prometida, que lo daban por muerto, se enfrentan a la desconcertante realidad de su supervivencia. Sin embargo, bajo este conflicto aparente, Faulkner teje una red de tramas secundarias donde la guerra opera como una excusa poderosa para indagar en las relaciones humanas (entre hombres y mujeres, padres e hijas, novios y prometidas) revelando cómo el trauma histórico resquebraja los cimientos íntimos de la sociedad.
Los conflictos que surgen en torno a las mujeres, y los conflictos internos de estas mismas, constituyen a mi juicio lo más logrado de la obra. Faulkner presenta a sus personajes femeninos en un estado de desesperanza, como seres con pocas vías de comunicación auténtica, incapaces de encontrar un lugar donde sentirse valiosas en una sociedad rígida. El autor sugiere cómo las estructuras de dominio masculino, cimientos de la sociedad occidental, han buscado atrofiar los vínculos entre mujeres. No es casual que entre los personajes femeninos reine la desconfianza, como ocurre entre Margaret Powers y Cecily Saunders, las dos figuras centrales, que se odian mutuamente pero parecen dos caras de una misma moneda: se rechazan porque en la otra se reconocen a sí mismas. Faulkner parece preguntarse —y responde con crudeza— hasta qué punto el patriarcado ha mutilado la naturaleza femenina. La respuesta, encarnada en Cecily, la prometida del soldado desfigurado, es desoladora: atrapada entre la presión familiar y las expectativas sociales, esta joven belleza estalla en una histeria causada por el peso de las apariencias. Se convierte en víctima de manipulaciones que buscan convertirla en la doncella sacrificada, un bálsamo simbólico para la herida del héroe mutilado
A través del personaje de Cecily, dotado de juventud y belleza, Faulkner reflexiona también sobre el encanto femenino y el misterio de su belleza. Explora el porqué de ese gesto íntimo en el que las mujeres se miran las uñas y las liman hasta la perfección. ¿Por qué les importa tanto tener unas uñas hermosas? Porque saben que sus manos serán observadas; porque el hombre no puede resistirse a mirar las manos de una mujer bella.
Frente a ella se alza el que es, a mi gusto, el mejor personaje de la obra: Margaret Powers, la joven viuda de guerra que conoce a Donald en el tren de regreso y, conmovida por su destino, lo acompaña a su pueblo. Margaret, cargada de una culpa íntima por la muerte de su esposo y movida por una piedad profundamente femenina, decide casarse con el soldado ciego. En ella Faulkner explora la otra cara del sacrificio femenino, casi un eco de la Tía Tula unamuniana, pero también algo más: la piedad como fundamento civilizatorio. Margaret encarna la posibilidad de un orden social distinto, menos cruel, basado en la compasión y el cuidado. Quizá por eso, sugiere Faulkner, los hombres encuentran a las mujeres indescifrables: porque mientras la lógica masculina tiende a resolver los conflictos mediante la fuerza y la imposición, esa misma que desata guerras y convierte a jóvenes en despojos, la femenina opera en un registro que desafía la simple transacción del poder.
El soldado Donald, ciego, moribundo y marcado por una cicatriz que le cruza el rostro, funciona como una alegoría potente de un Estados Unidos que perdió su inocencia infantil tras la Gran Guerra. Es el país que emerge como potencia mundial pero que, como Donald, ha dejado parte de su alma en las trincheras europeas, regresando a casa transformado, irreconocible incluso para los suyos. Faulkner, demuestra la profundidad de su mirada, semejante a Balzac, pues no se conforma con el realismo superficial; hurga en las heridas sociales con la misma precisión con que describe las cicatrices físicas.
April 15, 2026
L’esordio di Faulkner, pubblicato nel 1926. In sette parole, parla di un reduce sfigurato conteso da più donne. Livello molto alto, stile non ancora modernista. Cala solo un po’ nelle ultime pagine.
[82/100]
[82/100]
September 18, 2009
This was Faulkner's first book and all the issues that haunted his later work were already in place. The story of a group of returning WWI warriors who encounter each other on a train heading across the State's. One is horribly scarred, listless and ill. Together with a 'long, black woman', they resolve to take him back to his home in Georgia.
So a tableaux of characters is brought together to explore the emotions of loss and decline, with the notion that 'sex and death' are the front and back doors of all our existences. Images of darkness and light weave through desciptions of the landscape, the personalities of the characters, the moods that penetrate all their interactions, and the great darkness and light that prevails right acoss the South - its white and black peoples. Not sure if all the characters were completely successful - the appalling Janarious Jones being one. But everything else makes up for the absurdities of his antics.
So a tableaux of characters is brought together to explore the emotions of loss and decline, with the notion that 'sex and death' are the front and back doors of all our existences. Images of darkness and light weave through desciptions of the landscape, the personalities of the characters, the moods that penetrate all their interactions, and the great darkness and light that prevails right acoss the South - its white and black peoples. Not sure if all the characters were completely successful - the appalling Janarious Jones being one. But everything else makes up for the absurdities of his antics.
January 19, 2018
"Why, poor soldier," said his friend, tearfully, "all alone in no man's land and no matches. Ain't war hell? I ask you."
———————————
It is jealousy, I think, which makes us wish to prevent young people doing the things we had not the courage or the opportunity ourselves to accomplish once, and have not the power to do now.
———————————
"... Women Know these things. They see through us at once."
"No, I don't agree with you. If they saw through us, they would never marry us."
———————————
In war time one lives in today. Yesterday is gone and tomorrow may never come.
———————————
"Let me give you some advice," she continued sharply, "The next time you try to seduce anyone, don't do it with talk, with words. Women know more about words than men ever will. And they know how little they can ever possibly mean."
———————————
It is jealousy, I think, which makes us wish to prevent young people doing the things we had not the courage or the opportunity ourselves to accomplish once, and have not the power to do now.
———————————
"... Women Know these things. They see through us at once."
"No, I don't agree with you. If they saw through us, they would never marry us."
———————————
In war time one lives in today. Yesterday is gone and tomorrow may never come.
———————————
"Let me give you some advice," she continued sharply, "The next time you try to seduce anyone, don't do it with talk, with words. Women know more about words than men ever will. And they know how little they can ever possibly mean."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 244 reviews