What is the effect of the shift into the present tense in paragraph 36 in "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge?"

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

The shift to the present tense in the penultimate paragraph gives a sense of immediacy to Peyton Farquar's experience. But it's not the immediacy of reality; instead, it's the immediacy of a dream. Farquar imagines himself standing at the gate of his own home; all is as he left it,...

Unlock
This Answer Now

Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this answer and thousands more. Enjoy eNotes ad-free and cancel anytime.

Start your 48-Hour Free Trial

The shift to the present tense in the penultimate paragraph gives a sense of immediacy to Peyton Farquar's experience. But it's not the immediacy of reality; instead, it's the immediacy of a dream. Farquar imagines himself standing at the gate of his own home; all is as he left it, bright and beautiful in the morning sunshine. To top it all off, he's tickled pink to see his lovely wife descending the steps of the veranda to greet him.

But just before they embrace, Farquar feels a sudden blow to the back of the head. Reality has impinged upon his dream; far from being at home with his wife, he's experiencing his last few moments on earth before dangling lifelessly beneath the timbers of the Owl Creek Bridge. There was always something decidedly unreal about his predicament, and this was reflected in the use of the past tense; it was as if none of this were really happening to him. But the dream, with Farquar's beautiful Southern mansion and equally beautiful wife, was so much more real to him and could only be rendered effectively in the present tense.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Author Ambrose Bierce uses several narrative shifts to convey the various emotional states that his protagonist, Peyton Farquar, undergoes in "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge." He begins in a straight forward third-person narration in Part I, and continues this form in Part II; however, there are some revelations about what Farquar is actually thinking in the second section. In Part III, Bierce shifts to what can best be described as a modified first-person narrative, in which part of the story is told from an omniscient narrator, and part comes from Farquar himself. The final shift in the last two paragraphs, back to a third-person narrative, is meant to serve two purposes. First, in the next-to-last paragraph, it is meant to confuse the reader, much in the same way that Farquar is disoriented from his experience. Secondly, it shows that Farquar's life has ended--he is dead and can no longer describe the action from a first-person perspective.

In the previous paragraph I addressed your question as one that questioned the various narrative shifts (from third-person to first-person and back again), rather than as the tenses used (from past to present tense). Now, about the tenses, Bierce apparently wanted the next to last paragraph to show that Farquar is still alive, but barely--the things he describes are his final, fleeting thoughts during his last second(s) of life, between the time he falls between the railroad planks until his neck snaps or he suffocates. The final paragraph reverts back to past tense, for he is now dead.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team