"... a gray-clad soldier rode up to the gate and asked for a drink of water. ...
"Suppose a man--a civilian and student of hanging--should elude the picket post and perhaps get the better of the sentinel," said Farquhar, smiling, "what could he accomplish?"
The soldier reflected. "I was there a month ago," he replied. "I observed that the flood of last winter had lodged a great quantity of driftwood against the wooden pier at this end of the bridge. It is now dry and would burn like tow."
The lady had now brought the water, which the soldier drank. He thanked her ceremoniously, bowed to her husband and rode away. An hour later, after nightfall, he repassed the plantation, going northward in the direction from which he had come. He was a Federal scout." - End of Chapter 2
This passage really made me do a double take! So, Farquhar, a very ardent supporter of the confederate side, is eager to help the cause. He is, for some reason or other, unable to serve as a soldier in the confederate army and consoles himself by doing whatever he can as a civilian to help the South. When a 'confederate' soldier rides up and asks for a drink, Farquhar and his wife are only too happy to serve him. When the soldier tells Farquhar that the Owl Creek Bridge has been rebuilt, Farquhar sees an opportunity to slow the Union progress and help his beloved South. The soldier then tells Farquhar the best way to sneak up to the bridge and then leaves. But wait! After he is hidden by darkness he goes NORTH. And Bierce flat out tells us He was a Federal spy. So the spy set Farquhar up and must have had soldiers waiting to capture him. This Union spy is the reason for Farquhar getting hung in the first place. Since this little item goes on to be the plot of the entire book. I find that very interesting. What about you?
Okay this one will be shorter, (maybe). The other thing I find intriguing about this passage/story as a whole is the roles that Ambrose Bierce puts the Union and the Confederates in. He sets the Union army as "the bad guy" and has the central hero of the story a confederate loyalist. This gets even more complicated when you consider the fact that Farquhar knew the penalty for breaking the Union Edict and went any way. (Kinda seems like, at this point anyway, he values his cause more than his family. hmmm...) And the executioners are merely doing their job, excatly what they said they would do if anyone messed with the bridge. So I wonder... What was Bierce's reasons for setting the stage as he did? Was he trying to make a political point? Was he trying to help the North realize that the Southerners were people too? better people maybe? Or is there another agenda he was pushing? I am really curious about this and I would love to hear your feedback!
Hmmmm..... I'm not quite sure. Maybe Bierce was try to show that confederates were nice people.Farquhar did give the enemy a drink of water. Then the unions hung him. I think Bierce was trying to show that the confederates were agreeable in helping others and more open towards others.
ReplyDeleteDid either of you research Bierce? (Not necessary at all:)He actually fought in the Civil War for the Union but his writing seems conflicted about both sides. Good job picking up on this Hannah! And was he set up by the Scout? And what DOES he truly value? The South? His family? Or is it all about him? And bringing glory to himself? Really good thinking!
ReplyDeleteThat is very interesting, and I have wondered about that possibility too. Another little tidbit that helps complicate matters is that Farquhar didn't know that the soldier was an enemy when he gave him a drink. Furthermore, he was being hung for trying to destroy the Union's supply line (road/key river crossing etc.). And yet in all the situations presented; offering the drink, hanging the man who disobeyed your edict, and trying to escape and save your life, and shooting at a condemned escapee; I think it is very reasonable to believe that either side would have reacted the same in each situation, and very justly so. Just more info that really makes me wonder about what Bierce was trying to say.:) Thanks for the insight!
ReplyDeleteOops! this comment was addressing Misha's comment. I hadn't seen yours yet Mrs. Jones. :)
Deleteyeah makes sense.You brought up some good points! Can't wait to see what the others put.
DeleteNo, Mrs. Jones I did not research Bierce. I kind of wanted to wait and see what people told me, but I was really curious of his public views during the civil war.
ReplyDeleteI think Farquhar would have tried to destroy the bridge regardless of who told him the Union had rebuilt it, but the fact that the scout knew about his plan doomed him to capture. So I guess I don't know, is that a set up?
Hmm, I hadn't thought much about his underlying motives, (before John's post anyway), but now that I have I guess everything could boil down to his desire for glory and personal distinction. Even focusing his thoughts on his family before death, in a way, could be his own desire to die a heroic and picture perfect death. The kind of death you hear about all heroes having (with dramatic last words and the like ;).