This story was originally told from a third person perspective. In this journal I will be discussing how the story would be told differently from four different perspectives from the original.
             If this story was to be told by Abner Snopes, he would be the protagonist of the story. In his version of the story he would antagonize the landowners. As described in the original story, they were not well off. In fact, they were a struggling farmer family that only had worn out clothes to wear. Abner would tell the story as if it were him and his family versus everyone else: The Justice, Mr. Harris, Mr. and Mrs. De Spain, and the community that they lived in, because to him the only thing that mattered was family. He was always trying to smack some sense into his son, Sartoris, because he was always trying to be righteous even if that meant going against his own family. According to Abner, what Sartoris should do is "learn to stick to [his] own blood or [he] ain't going to have blood to stick to [him]." What Abner meant by saying that is that his son should support him regardless of what is right or wrong just because he is the father. He would also justify why he burnt the two barns and show that burning them down was a way for him to express his frustrations against the post-civil war community that he was staying in. After burning down the first barn, they approached the next barn where he had made arrangements to stay. In the original story, the author points out how this barn was grand compared to the twelve they had stayed at before, but Abner wouldn't mention that in his version because to him it is just another barn. Later he would also mention his disappointment in his son Sartoris for running away and not sticking to his own blood, his own family, like he was supposed to. In the end he would have a tragic heroic death, in his perspective, where he got shot down by one of the multiple antagonists, Mr...