Rating: 
Summary: Developing Faulkner
Review: Apparently, "Flags in the Dust" is the original text of the novel published in a cut form as "Sartoris". Having read "Flags in the Dust", I could see why it was cut - as the blurb on the cover said, it's frequently "over-written". Here's just one example:"...yet more ladies were sibilantly crescendic with an occasional soberly clad male on the outer fringe of their colorful chattering like rocks dumbly imponderable about the cauldron where seethed an hysterical tideflux." And there's more where that came from. By the way, Faulkner seemed addicted to the use of the word sibilant in all its forms in this novel. I got the impression that this was a young author trying too hard to impress. The finer parts of the novel are where Faulkner describes his characters in a more economical style. Despite the stylistic faults, there's much of interest in "Flags in the Dust". Just after World War One, young Bayard Sartoris (a fighter pilot) returns to his family home in the South. His twin brother (also a pilot) was killed in the War. The South he returns to is in part an Antebellum relic (slavery exists in all but name), but also it's changing due to the influence of the War and industrial progress - some blacks are questioning why they are denied civil rights when they fought in the War. Faulkner describes the "old white" (and indeed "old black") attitudes, and yet portrays the poverty suffered by many blacks with great sympathy. Perhaps the dialogue will grate a bit to the modern reader - racialist words are used with great frequency - but perhaps it is impossible to depict the mores of the time in any other way. "Flags in the Dust" is not a great novel, nor even a really good one, but it's a must for anyone who is interested in Faulkner's development as a writer. G Rodgers
Rating:
Summary: Developing Faulkner
Review: Apparently, "Flags in the Dust" is the original text of the novel published in a cut form as "Sartoris". Having read "Flags in the Dust", I could see why it was cut - as the blurb on the cover said, it's frequently "over-written". Here's just one example: "...yet more ladies were sibilantly crescendic with an occasional soberly clad male on the outer fringe of their colorful chattering like rocks dumbly imponderable about the cauldron where seethed an hysterical tideflux." And there's more where that came from. By the way, Faulkner seemed addicted to the use of the word sibilant in all its forms in this novel. I got the impression that this was a young author trying too hard to impress. The finer parts of the novel are where Faulkner describes his characters in a more economical style. Despite the stylistic faults, there's much of interest in "Flags in the Dust". Just after World War One, young Bayard Sartoris (a fighter pilot) returns to his family home in the South. His twin brother (also a pilot) was killed in the War. The South he returns to is in part an Antebellum relic (slavery exists in all but name), but also it's changing due to the influence of the War and industrial progress - some blacks are questioning why they are denied civil rights when they fought in the War. Faulkner describes the "old white" (and indeed "old black") attitudes, and yet portrays the poverty suffered by many blacks with great sympathy. Perhaps the dialogue will grate a bit to the modern reader - racialist words are used with great frequency - but perhaps it is impossible to depict the mores of the time in any other way. "Flags in the Dust" is not a great novel, nor even a really good one, but it's a must for anyone who is interested in Faulkner's development as a writer. G Rodgers
Rating: 
Summary: Faulkner's "Flags" Tastes Better Than It Looks
Review: Before I read this book, I kept hearing what a horrible novel it was. However, it isn't horrible; it's just not nearly as fantastic as some of his other works. It's still definitely worth the read, though. If you can make it through sentences that seem to never end and some repitition, you will find a great story of love, guilt, and Southern life. This book opens with the Sartoris family, and several young men (Bayard Sartoris and others) returning home from World War I, and the impressions war left upon them. Thrown in with a little bit of incest, love notes, and a daredevil, this book provides a good combination of mushiness (sp?), humor, and sorrow. However, while some have said not to read this book as your first Faulkner, I disagree. And here's why: reading this book after you have read some of his other works really makes you look at this book in a more negative way, since his other works have been so great. Just remember, if this is your first Faulkner read, many of his other works are MUCH BETTER, so if you read this first and don't like it, there are MUCH BETTER ones out there. As far as reading goes, it's a pretty easy read (although you might have to keep track of all the Johns and Bayards), at least in comparison to some of his other books. Also, if you plan on reading other Faulkner books, this one is a MUST, since it introduces you to the Benbrows, Snopes, and the Sartorises-all characters that are found in some of his other novels.
Rating:
Summary: Faulkner's "Flags" Tastes Better Than It Looks
Review: Before I read this book, I kept hearing what a horrible novel it was. However, it isn't horrible; it's just not nearly as fantastic as some of his other works. It's still definitely worth the read, though. If you can make it through sentences that seem to never end and some repitition, you will find a great story of love, guilt, and Southern life. This book opens with the Sartoris family, and several young men (Bayard Sartoris and others) returning home from World War I, and the impressions war left upon them. Thrown in with a little bit of incest, love notes, and a daredevil, this book provides a good combination of mushiness (sp?), humor, and sorrow. However, while some have said not to read this book as your first Faulkner, I disagree. And here's why: reading this book after you have read some of his other works really makes you look at this book in a more negative way, since his other works have been so great. Just remember, if this is your first Faulkner read, many of his other works are MUCH BETTER, so if you read this first and don't like it, there are MUCH BETTER ones out there. As far as reading goes, it's a pretty easy read (although you might have to keep track of all the Johns and Bayards), at least in comparison to some of his other books. Also, if you plan on reading other Faulkner books, this one is a MUST, since it introduces you to the Benbrows, Snopes, and the Sartorises-all characters that are found in some of his other novels.
Rating:
Summary: A thrilling ride
Review: I read this book in three sittings. The novel thrills as well as exasperates, especially as it starts to wind down at the end. Plot threads are not all neatly tied up at the end and the repetition of several character names -- Bayard in particular -- delineating three generations of male descendants with the same first name can be confusing and obscure, but the central story of Young Bayard Sartoris, recklessly pursuing the fulfillment of a death wish out of guilt for the death of his brother in World War One, is undeniably powerful. The plot concerning Narcissa's mysterious anonymous love letters is also intriguing particularly in light of the fact that Faulkner picks up this plot thread in a short story called "There was a Queen". Horace Benbow and his relationship with Belle, a married and "fallen" woman, also makes for delicious, though highly literal, reading. I was reminded in some respects of Dickens. This book, the first of Faulkner's series of novels set in the fictional county of Yoknawpatawa Mississippi, is a terrific stepping stone from which to plunge into his later works. It isn't perfect, but -- like Young Bayard's crazy, suicidal jaunts in his "modern" automobile --it is a terrific and thrilling ride.
Rating:
Summary: A thrilling ride
Review: I read this book in three sittings. The novel thrills as well as exasperates, especially as it starts to wind down at the end. Plot threads are not all neatly tied up at the end and the repetition of several character names -- Bayard in particular -- delineating three generations of male descendants with the same first name can be confusing and obscure, but the central story of Young Bayard Sartoris, recklessly pursuing the fulfillment of a death wish out of guilt for the death of his brother in World War One, is undeniably powerful. The plot concerning Narcissa's mysterious anonymous love letters is also intriguing particularly in light of the fact that Faulkner picks up this plot thread in a short story called "There was a Queen". Horace Benbow and his relationship with Belle, a married and "fallen" woman, also makes for delicious, though highly literal, reading. I was reminded in some respects of Dickens. This book, the first of Faulkner's series of novels set in the fictional county of Yoknawpatawa Mississippi, is a terrific stepping stone from which to plunge into his later works. It isn't perfect, but -- like Young Bayard's crazy, suicidal jaunts in his "modern" automobile --it is a terrific and thrilling ride.
Rating: 
Summary: The only Faulkner I truly enjoyed
Review: I'm going to go out on a limb here, and express my feelings about Flags in the Dust using simple English. I took a course on Faulkner, and this was the novel I absolutely loved reading. I was frustratingly mystified by Sound and the Fury(particularly by all the accolades it has received), disgusted and disturbed by The Light in August, and had at least some admiration for Absalom, Absalom. Several reviewers describe this as "young" Faulkner or "developing" Faulkner - well, for me, this is Faulkner before the copious self-conscious devices - and seems far more genuine than his other novels. There it is - now I can only await the flood of "non-helpful" votes. It was worth it though.
Rating:
Summary: The only Faulkner I truly enjoyed
Review: I'm going to go out on a limb here, and express my feelings about Flags in the Dust using simple English. I took a course on Faulkner, and this was the novel I absolutely loved reading. I was frustratingly mystified by Sound and the Fury(particularly by all the accolades it has received), disgusted and disturbed by The Light in August, and had at least some admiration for Absalom, Absalom. Several reviewers describe this as "young" Faulkner or "developing" Faulkner - well, for me, this is Faulkner before the copious self-conscious devices - and seems far more genuine than his other novels. There it is - now I can only await the flood of "non-helpful" votes. It was worth it though.
Rating:
Summary: Aim for this Flag - Then graduate to The Sound and the Fury
Review: If you want to start reading Faulkner, begin with this book. This is his first compelling novel, and, while not a masterpiece like The Sound and The Fury or Absalom, Absalom, it is more accessible and beautifully renders the aristocratic glamour and reckless violence of the Sartoris men. Equally arresting is the characterization of Horace Benbow.
Rating:
Summary: Aim for this Flag - Then graduate to The Sound and the Fury
Review: If you want to start reading Faulkner, begin with this book. This is his first compelling novel, and, while not a masterpiece like The Sound and The Fury or Absalom, Absalom, it is more accessible and beautifully renders the aristocratic glamour and reckless violence of the Sartoris men. Equally arresting is the characterization of Horace Benbow.
| 
