Each of the outcomes presents its own challenges, but the third was arguably the most complex in its requirements. This is understandable given that the outcome centers around the concept of a multi-faceted claim. Said complex argument must develop throughout the course of the writing and thus conclude with a different stance than that with which it began, in addition to doing so in a way that clearly articulates analytical sub-claims and counterclaims and convinces the reader of its significance. This is a hefty set of expectations to fulfill, but the density and intricacy of the major paper’s subject matter more than adequately enables it to rise to all of these expectations. Although this assignment was the most difficult for me, I am very proud of its final result and believe it fully exemplifies all of the qualities outlined in outcome three.

The “line of inquiry” (Outcome 3) I followed while developing this paper emerged well before I actually began to write it. This is perhaps predictable given his primary role within As I Lay Dying, but Darl quickly became my favorite, if at times extremely problematic, character to analyze. My first reading response for the novel attempted to answer the question of why “…Cora [is] so certain that Darl is such a loving, sweet person” (Reading Response 14 Jan). Then, a reading response turned in on the 20^th of January returned to Darl again, this time in an endeavor to decipher Darl’s mystifying passage about the nature of sleep and existence. This became the topic of my second short assignment, in which I performed a close reading of this same passage. At the end of my analysis, I was happily surprised to find that I had constructed a logical way of understanding Darl’s confusing words. In his final comment on my short assignment two Navid appeared to agree, writing, “You take one of the novel’s most infamously ambiguous passages and perform a reasonable, persuasive, methodical interpretation that manages to illuminate both its form and content…” After providing evidence that pointed to a relatively rational Darl Bundren, it was rather shocking to read his gibbering, nigh unintelligible last chapter. Although it was clear that Darl was not sane when the reader last saw him, I was not fully convinced of his madness throughout the entire novel, which led me to develop this line of inquiry even further.

My library session brainstorming activity was the first writing in a long line of texts specifically looking at the question of Darl’s sanity. I quickly jotted down evidence on either side, with notes such as “inane jabbering,” “is anything objective,” and “reasons for laughing.” Some of the ideas formed here made it into my paper while others were eventually abandoned, which begins to show the extent to which my ideas progressed over the course of the last assignments. In short assignment three, I analyzed a scholarly article that itself analyzed the syntactical changes associated with Darl’s insanity, and in short assignment four I wrote my abstract with the intent to “break down the subject of Darl’s purported insanity.” Finally, my line of inquiry reached my major paper, at which point it did not just suddenly stop. Rather, it continued to be molded and developed through my various sub-claims, concessions, and qualifications.

The question of Darl’s sanity initially appears straightforward: is he insane? Yes or no? However, a nuanced examination of both primary and secondary evidence was needed, which produced a complex answer. Both of my scholarly secondary sources argued that Darl was unequivocally insane, in opposition to most of the claims in my final conclusion. This therefore created a very diverse array of views presented within the paper and an obvious necessity for “taking into consideration counterclaims” (Outcome 3). The apparent contradiction did not undermine my position, however, but instead enabled me to develop my own clear stance in contrast to their absolute arguments as such: “While Mathews suggests literary explanations for why Darl should be mad, neither she nor Wiley entertain the notion that Darl could, in fact, be sane” (MP Revised 3). Yet though my perspective differed from theirs, I was still able to utilize aspects of their methodology and even make similar claims in some situations. For example, I employed Wiley’s analysis of Darl’s personal pronoun use to make the case that Darl was indeed mad in his last chapter and expanded upon Mathews’s concept of Darl’s function as the primary narrator within As I Lay Dying.

As I further developed my argument, I evaluated the question of Darl’s sanity with a careful consideration for the evidence provided in the text through different perspectives in order to formulate multiple sub-claims that supported my overarching stance. Some of these sub-claims included an inspection of potential familial motives for getting rid of Darl, a comparison of other characters’ peculiarities to Darl’s own, and an analysis of the socially constructed aspects of madness and sanity. The former then fed into my most developed sub claim: whether or not Darl would be found legally insane. To take a definitive position on this, it was absolutely crucial that I fully scrutinized all pieces of evidence, given the fact that such a lens of analysis was not undertaken in As I Lay Dying or any literary criticism I could find.  I used the legal definition of insanity as described by Cornell law and showed that Darl would not be considered mentally incompetent, knew what he was doing, and understood the negative consequences thereof. Each of these points required extensive textual scrutiny. For example, I provided quotes from the novel in which Darl clearly stated that he thought Addie wanted to be hidden “away from the sight of man” (Faulkner 215) and explored potential reasons for why he believed so, including: "Just as Anse supposedly felt it was his duty to Addie to bury her in Jackson, it is clear Darl felt it was his duty to end the family’s shambling effort to do so and finally put Addie to rest... Darl was thus motivated by this same, logical response to a conspicuously rotting corpse and made an informed, aware decision to burn down the barn (MP Revised 6)."

So as to complete the many requirements of the major paper, I made a variety of arguments which had the potential to be overwhelming if it were not for my “clear organizational strategy” as mandated by outcome four. Within my paper, I initially presented a brief background of Darl Bundren’s significance in As I Lay Dying and then delved into Wiley’s linguistic approach to Darl’s insanity, followed by Mathews’s two part analysis of his role as a narrator and his focus on the past and future. Once my secondary sources’ positions were described, I challenged some of their claims and introduced my own analysis. To this end, I discussed the socially constructed nature of insanity in As I Lay Dying, as well as probable outside motivation for committing Darl to an institution. I then began my investigation of the legal definition of insanity as outlined above, and eventually reached my final, fully developed conclusion that Darl was not insane throughout the entire text, but that the extraordinary stresses of the past few days and his family’s complete betrayal caused him to “temporarily crack” (MP Revised 7). At this point, I was able to articulate the stakes one could take from this paper given the qualifying conclusion. This argument goes against the vast majority of scholarly work on the subject, and thus opens the door for entirely new interpretations of As I Lay Dying. The Bundren family was never portrayed in a good light, but if it is assumed that they forced Darl into a mental institution entirely for their own gain, then they have reached yet another level of moral depravity. On the other hand, the complexity of Darl’s character and his contributions to the novel are easily swept away once the conclusion has been reached that he is insane. By allowing him the possibility of sanity, Darl is afforded “many possible futures other than the picture given of him foaming at the mouth, wasting away behind bars” (MP Revised 7).