Name: Ahmed Taher Hussein
ID: 23170
Section: 4
Date: 2025/5/12
Instructor: Tayma Hussein
Morals and Violence, an Inverse
Relationship
Morality is what distinguishes humans from other living beings, as animals only know
the language of force and violence, however, the further humans move away from morality, the
closer they become to the language of animals. Today we will learn about examples that told in a
dazzling literary way how people can be stripped of their morals and become like animals. “A
Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner (1930), “The Sniper” by Liam O’Flaherty (1923), and “A
Good Man is Hard to Find” by Flannery O’Connor (1953) are three stories written in
purpose that address and explain the dangers of moral decadence and how it has an inverse
relationship with violence. “A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner, is a short story where the
main character, Emily, is living lonely after the dead of her father and decide to not have any
relationship, however, she liked a man called Honer, but he did not respond to her, pushing her
into poisoning him and kill him. The other short story “The Sniper” by Liam O’Flaherty talks
about a young sniper soldier in a civil war fighting at the territory of the enemy, and he engages
to a battle with another masked sniper, and managed to kill him by smart tactic, yet that masked
sniper was discovered to be his own brother. The last short story is “A Good Man is Hard to
Find” by Flannery O’Connor talks about a family on her trip into another state in U.S, but they
decided to go off the track to visit the grandmother’s old village, but they had had an accident in
the middle of the way, and at the deeps of the forest, they interacted with a group of criminals led
by a prison breaker called “The Misfit” that ended the family's life. Each three stories approach
differently to deliver the same message, which is the idea of the inverse relationship between
morals and violence, illustrated by obsession of control and domination by William Faulkner’s
story, civil war, and moral decline by Liam O’Flaherty’s story, losing the meaning of morals by
Flannery O’Connor’s story.
William Faulkner’s story illustrates how the desire to control, dominate, and reject others
can lead to disastrous consequences if left unchecked. Emily, the main character, is beautifully
written as a representation of immorality and lack of engagement with her surroundings. After
the death of her father, who was a wealthy and prominent man, Colonel Sartoris said, “Colonel
Sartoris invented an involved tale to the effect that Miss Emily’s father had loaned money to the
town…” No one would have believed such a statement about an ordinary person; Emily’s father
is an undeniable exception. However, her father was a controlling figure, forbidding her from
speaking to him on the grounds that they were not worthy of her attention. After his death, she
denied his death and postponed his funeral for three days. This was because she was so
controlling that she became completely emotionally controlled. This led to a mental and
psychological disorder in her. This led to her complete isolation from people and her refusal to
see anyone. In addition, she loved to control and dominate others and defeat them, according to
this text: “She vanquished them, horse and foot, just as she had vanquished their fathers thirty
years before about the smell.” She refused to pay taxes to the municipality because of an old
decision exempting her from taxes by the colonel. They tried to fabricate claims of intending to
confiscate the house, but she was able to defeat them and foil their plans. The most key point in
the story is that she loved a man named Homer, but this man apparently rejected her because of
his gay tendency towards men, and this led to her anger at her rejection, causing her to poison
him and kill him. Not only that but also hiding his body for 40 years. She did not put him only
there to cover her crime, but also to keep the body and sleep with it. The reason she fell in love
with that person was her desire to change out of her isolated environment, so she chose this
person who did not reciprocate her feelings. His rejection of her feelings lit a fire in her heart,
and because of her love of control and domination, she but to keep him forever, even if he was a
dead body. Immorality led Emily not to accept the reality and just move on but instead killing
him to get what she wants. This story illustrates what immorals can lead the person to, proving
that violence becomes an available and obvious option in the absence of any morals, proving the
inverse relationship between morality and violence.
Liam O’Flaherty’s story emphasizes and proves the thesis, but from the other side, which
is how war and violence could lead to immorality. Violence is the path that will make a person
lose his morals and human values. It is the steps of the devil that blind human insight. In the
story, after the main character killed the masked sniper after a difficult confrontation with the
masked sniper, he was able to kill him. "His enemy had been hit. He was reeling over the parapet
in his death agony." After he killed him, he felt a deep sense of remorse and guilt for killing this
person, which resulted in him cursing the war and the weapon. He had no choice but to throw his
weapon on the ground, causing bullet to pass near his head, getting him back to reality, as the
text states: “His teeth chattered, he began to gibber to himself, cursing the war, cursing himself,
cursing everybody.” The reason behind that is that while he was engaging the battle with enemy,
the sense of violence was just like an anesthetic for his morals, blinding his own vision
completely. After that anesthetic effect was gone, he finally began to question his actions and the
purpose of it, resulting in a moment of vision and seeing that war is nothing murdering for a
purposeless conflict, completely unethical and immoral. But the bullet's recall returned anesthetic
to its effect, laughing at what he was doing. And, with a sudden desire, he wanted to identify the
identity of that sniper, discovering he was his brother. The idea of the story is to illustrates that
war, and violence can diffuse a person's moral sense and lead him to kill a stranger he doesn't
know. The author's photographing of the main character killing his brother delivers message that
violence will certainly lead human to commit immoral action coming from pure violence, like
killing your own brother, highlighting the inverse relationship between morality and violence.
Flannery O’Connor’s story illustrates the effect of losing the meaning of morals or being
morally lost on human’s behavior and how it will lead him to commit violence. Morals are the
barrier human beings to prevent them acting violently and give them a purpose of living among
other human beings. In the short story, the most significant event that happened in the story is the
conversation between the grandmother and the prison breaker Misfit, as it was really rich and full
of meaningful ideas. While the grandmother and the misfit were talking about Jusus Christ
whether he truly did revive the dead or not, he, according to the text, says: “I wasn’t there so I
can’t say He didn’t,” The Misfit said. “I wisht I had of been there,” he said, hitting the ground
with his fist. “It ain’t right I wasn’t there because if I had of been there I would of known. Listen
lady,” he said in a high voice, “if I had of been there I would of known and I wouldn’t be like I
am now.” Misfit wished to see the Jesus Christ reviving the dead people and make certain that he
is the truth sent to people like him, so that he will follow him and leave everything behind “Jesus
was the only One that ever raised the dead,” The Misfit continued, “and He shouldn’t have done
it. He shown everything off balance. If He did what He said, then it’s nothing for you to do but
throw away everything and follow Him, and if He didn’t, then it’s nothing for you to do but
enjoy the few minutes you got left the best way you can-by killing somebody or burning down
his house or doing some other meanness to him. No pleasure but meanness,” What the Misfit
says is simply that he is morally lost and does not know its meaning or purpose, as he is lost and
does not find anyone to guide him, not even Christ, whom Christians consider God, and as a
result of that, he concluded in his own special mindset and point of view for this life, which is if
there is no purpose in this life, then the only thing you can do is to enjoy the few years of your
life before you turn into a dead body, irrespective of all moral values . The writer here figured
The Misfit as the person who lost the meanings of life and its purpose. Without Moral, this will
certainly build a viewpoint on this life that says there is no meaning in this life except sadistic
enjoyment, killing and violence. This result proves the inverse relationship between morals and
violence.
In conclusion, all three stories show that there is an inverse relationship between violence
and morals, the less morals you have, the more violent you become, and the more violent you
are, the more morals you lose. Illustrated by Emily’s lack of morals that led her to murder in
William Faulkner’s story, moral decline for the sniper caused by his violence behavior Liam
O’Flaherty’s story and seeing violence as a way and purpose of life with the absence of morals
Flannery O’Connor’s story. All the three writers are indirectly trying to encourage society to
reject violence and for the sake of keeping the morals values and consider morality the core of
society so that violence does not spread like a disease.
References:
1. Faulkner, W. (1930, Apr). A Rose for Emily.
2. O’Flaherty, L. (1923, Jan). The Sniper.
3. O’Connor, F. (1953, Spring). A Good Man is Hard to Find.