This critical response by John Skinner explores the interpretations of Faulkner’s short story in detail while reviewing the importance of over analyzing a piece of literary work. William Faulkner published this story in the 1930s, Skinner had published his critical response in 1985. More than 40 years has passed and people are still ignoring his claim; “A Rose for Emily” should not be interpreted any further. The characters and theme of this tale have been scrutinized by many. There have been numerous interpretations for what Miss Emily stands for; Skinner gives examples of scholars including . M. Johnson “Emily represented a refusal to submit to, or even concede, the inevitability of change”. Whereas William Going pictures Emily as a rose, “the treasured memory of the confederate veterans”. The point of view according to Skinner, is of immediate relevance to the story as the chief character, the narrator tells the chronology of the story. This narrator gives approximately “round figures” for the important events of the accounts. Yet the exact chronology is of little relevance to the overall importance of the story itself. John Skinner states that Faulkner should be taken literally, appreciate his formal subtlety in his works. 
In 1894, Colonel Sartoris, the mayor, remits Miss Emily’s taxes. For about six or seven years, while in her forties, she gives china-painting lessons to the young girls of the town. Then for many years she is seen only at her window. Townspeople watch her black servant Tobe going in and out on errands. A new generation comes to power; they insist that Miss Emily pay taxes on her property. When she fails to respond, a deputation calls on her, but she insists that she owes no taxes, as Colonel Sartoris will tell them (he has been dead ten years).