An Author's Audience Manipulation

The short story by Ambrose Bierce, An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge, tells a tragic tale that twists our conception of truth through the narrator’s manipulation of our misguided trust.  Ab initio, an omniscient narrator explains Peyton Farquhar’s perception of being lynched execution-style off of a railroad bridge during the civil war era.  The first chapter of the short story builds the suspense leading up to the actual execution.  The first chapter eases the audience into trusting the narrator through his discreet but profound details.  For example, the narrator describes the condemned man’s recognition of the slow flow of the stream beneath the bridge.  By the conclusion of the first chapter the narrator has gained our trust by mentioning small details that implicate simple yet vivid truths.

In the second chapter the narrator provides background knowledge of the external forces that placed Peyton Farquhar in his dreadful position but requires us to make intuitive assumptions about his history.  When Peyton encounters a federal scout we discover that the “Yanks” are repairing the railroads and intend to hang anyone who disturbs the railroad grounds.  The narrator directly states Peyton’s southern opinions which strongly implies the explanation for Peyton’s condemnation.  Here the narrator extends his manipulative powers by reiterating his extraordinary knowledge of Peyton’s situation but requiring us to make assumption about what actually occurred; i.e. the narrator does not directly tell us how or why Peyton is executed.  By requiring the audience to make a simple and superficial abstract connection the author sets the table for his ultimate manipulation.

In the third and final chapter the narrator finally describes what the audience has been waiting for throughout the entire story, the execution.  The description of the execution focuses primarily on Peyton’s thoughts and perception, and not, however, on actual occurrences.  The narrator subtly slips into Peyton’s thoughts and out of reality.  The narrator uses his ability to enter Peyton’s thoughts to deceive the audience and convince them that Peyton survives his execution even though he does not.  Because the narrator describes the execution through the thoughts of Peyton Farquhar the author deceives the audience.  The narrator manipulates the audience by making the story seem so superficial and laid out.  The audience is unable to detect falsity when the execution strictly presents Peyton’s thoughts because the narrator manipulated our thoughts into believing in the superficiality of the story.  Our trust was misguided in that we trusted the narrator’s dedication to a superficial story.