It has been my observation, through years of avid reading, that a book or story written by one author can be very well done by itself; however, should the like author attempt to bring back characters from an old work into a new, the well-known characters of old become flat and lacking individuality. In addition, I have found that simply changing the point of view, from which a story is told, can ruin a work for an author. These aforementioned points have been great fears in my mind when it comes to my writing. The following comparison is a prime example of my personal observation on how a writer can change the quality of his/her work by poor character development and altered style of narration. .
"Spotted Horses" and "Mule in the Yard" are two short stories by William Faulkner that deal with comedic animal chases. Although both provide entertaining examples of Faulkner's work in very similar settings, on the scale of literary value, "Spotted Horses" rises above "Mule in the Yard" in depth and insight. This superiority is result of both it's narrative style and character development, which causes "Spotted Horses" to produce an overall more powerful effect than "Mule in the Yard". .
The most notable and important difference between the two stories is the contrasting narrative style. In "Spotted Horses", a narrator who observes the major events of the story but is involved in only a minor fashion tells the story in first person point of view. His narration provides the audience with a look at the town and it's inhabitants through the eyes of someone living in the county of Mississippi. This adds a realistic dimension to the image of the story. It is also through this narrative style that Faulkner weaves humor into "Spotted Horses". The narrator shows the story in a comic light simply through his words right from the introductory paragraph. .
"Yes, sir. Flem Snopes has filled that whole country full of spotted horses.
