Comparisin of “A Rose for Emily” and “Killings

The two stories, “Killings” by Dubus and “A Rose for Emily” by Faulkner have many resemblances. Both begin with their central characters a little unwise or a little psychological problems. They aren't bad people to start with but turn to cold blooded killers by the end of the story from their acts of love. These are the reasons I think these two stories are a lot in comparison. These people committed these hideous crimes over the act of love, and got away with it. Emily loved her man so much and probably feared him leaving. She killed him and had him there with her forever. Matt killed that man for the love of his dead son.

The French journalist Octive Mirabaeu once said, "Murder is born of love, and loves attains he greatest intensity in murder." This quote echoed through the literary writings of William Faulkner's "A Rose for Emily" and Andre Dubus's "Killings". Faulkner crafted a story around Emily Grierson, a genteel woman in the southern United States during an era when everyone was scrutinized, forced to uphold a social code, and maintain a moral order. Emily, ruled by a dominating father who sent away any would-be suitors, is left to find a mate at an age that her societies' standards considers to be non-traditional. At the age of thirty Emily's internal drive to be a wife overpowers he pride when she meets Homer Baron, a less than ideal Yankee construction worker. After much intervention her love affair takes a tragic turn in the most intense attempt to repair her self-esteem and image.

Matt Fowler, the protagonist in Andre Dubus's "Killings", reasons that the justice system is not working in the manner it should and ensures the Richard Strout's punishment for killing Fowler's son, Frank, ...