What does Faulkner convey about the rich-poor divide in "Barn Burning"?

Quick answer:

In this story, Faulkner uses the relationship between Abner Snopes, a poor sharecropper, and Major de Spain, a wealthy landowner to show the distinction between the haves and have-nots. Abner is a representative of the have-nots. He resents Major de Spain for his wealth and power. He considers himself "a creature without a country," and he believes he is being unfairly treated by society because of it. In fact, Abner believes that all labor is unjustly rewarded—unjustly, because no matter how hard an individual works for their master, they will still not be given the valuable things in life such as land or money.

Expert Answers

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

Faulkner's "Barn Burning" is set in the late 19th century when sharecropping was widely used in rural agricultural areas. Sharecropping was a system in which a wealthy landowner would allow poor families to live on and farm their land and keep a share of the crops. Faulkner wrote this story during the 1930s when the Great Depression was in full swing and tenant farmers created unions to secure protective rights.

Abner Snopes is one sharecropper who resents the wealthy landowners he works for. In the opening scene, Abner is in court accused of burning Mr. Harris's barn—which he did out of spite. When the family arrives at the new landowner's home, the home of Major de Spain, Abner once again spites the wealthy by deliberately treading manure onto the expensive rug. When asked to clean it, Abner makes it worse. Mr. de Spain wants Abner to pay him with twenty bushels of corn for the damage to the rug. Instead, Abner sues him and the judge reduces it to ten bushels. However, Abner is still angry and plans to burn Mr. de Spain's barn.

The power-play between the rich and poor in Faulkner's story makes it the most interesting. The wealthy landowners have a lot of power to wield. Because they own the land, they can turn out the sharecroppers whenever they please. They can set a quota for crops that the sharecroppers have to meet or face punishment if they don't. The relationship is unbalanced as wealthy take and the poor give. Twenty bushels of corn is a high price to pay—one that likely would have come out of the Snopes family's share. This form of punishment would have punished the whole family, not just Abner.

Abner knows that the wealthy have the upper-hand. In fact, he equates the job with slavery. He refers to Mr. de Spain as the man who will begin "owning me body and soul for the next eight months." He also remarks to Sarty after treading on the clean rug that the house was built on the sweat of black Americans, but now they want the sweat of white Americans. Abner's proclivity for burning barns and ruining rugs is his way of using power over the wealthy. The poor don't have houses full of expensive possessions nor do they have barns full of grain, seed, animals, and harvest. Sharecroppers don't even own the houses they live in. But Abner knows the importance of material possessions to the rich. He burns barns in an act of defiance because he knows the importance of barns in an agrarian society.

Abner's behavior is also drastically out of line with social norms. The wealthy and privileged are revered by society, and the poor were prejudiced. Twice in the story, Abner finds himself in court, and both times, he receives unjust punishments. Though he is not found guilty of burning Mr. Harris's barn, the judge orders him to leave town anyway, which is no small feat for a poor farmer with a family. We do know that he is guilty, but the judge does not, which is why a guilty verdict was not delivered. The second time, he is found guilty, and though the judge reduces his payment, the punishment is still disproportionate to the crime.

See eNotes Ad-Free

Start your 48-hour free trial to get access to more than 30,000 additional guides and more than 350,000 Homework Help questions answered by our experts.

Get 48 Hours Free Access
Approved by eNotes Editorial