There are, it seems, two kinds of Faulknerians. Or there used to be. Although not contending critical camps per se, these two approaches to the long career of this modernist from the American south nevertheless partake of very different ways of considering the canonical writer. In the process, they seek to maintain Faulkner’s continuing relevance in ways that say much about his contribution to a uniquely American and regional modernism as well as a body of work marked, particularly in his later novels, by post-Second World War—if not also postmodern—practices and concerns.

Document Type

Book Review

Publication Date


Publisher Statement

Copyright © The Johns Hopkins University Press. This article first appeared in Modernism/modernity 16:4 (2009), 803-808.

Please note that downloads of the article are for private/personal use only.