Timothy Findley’s Short Story Stones

In Timothy Findley’s short story “Stones”, the author illustrates a deserter’s self-destruction through post-war trauma, which slowly transforms itself into a complete loss of sanity caused by the persecutions of his community. Through contrast in symbolism and narrative point of view, Findley emphasizes on the deteriorated mental state of a loving dad, David, who, through a self-fulfilling prophesy, has become hated by those who surround him.

First of all, as the title of the story points out, stones play a major role in the story. In fact, stones may be interpreted in many different ways and carry different symbolisms. Initially, stones were responsible at war for jamming the tanks’ tracks on the beach of Dieppe, which caused the antagonist of the story to desert combat. “Seeing the evident massacre of the first troop […] ― my father froze in his place and could not move” (210). Stones, from this point of view, are considered to be responsible for the turning point of the patriarch’s loyalty. A loyalty towards his companion but also towards his country. Also, a brick with the word murderer written in chalk on it was thrown through the window of the family’s florist shop after the return of David from war, which symbolizes the general hatred of the community towards him. The stone, in this situation, comes directly in contrast with the flowers because it demolishes the beautiful and fragile image of the flower. This makes sense if we attribute the image of the flower with the pre-war identity of the father. In other words, carrying and loving are characteristics that can be associated with the pre-war patriarch’s identity. Such attributes can also be associated with the virtuous aspect of flowers when they are given to others. Additionally, the word stone itself carries a connotation of hardness and weight which can be seen in this act of oppression by the members of the community. The father is being labeled as a deserter by society after having turning his back to his duty at Dieppe causing the death of many soldiers that were under his commands. “There was not a mark on his body, but―far inside―he had been destroyed” (200). The desertion itself is already hardly bearable but with the popular hatred shown toward deserters, it only amplifies the sentiment of guilt, which makes the deserter’s social status unbearable.

 Secondly, the story is based on the point of view of the father’s youngest child, Ben, possibly the only loving relative left to the father after his return. This narrative point of view contrasts society’s negative vision of David as a deserter with Ben’s image of his father. Being already damaged by his service at war, Ben’s father has become rude and violent with his family. Indeed, through a self-fulfilling prophesy, Ben’s father has become the coward society continually labeled him of. Although, Ben continues to love his father even though he has not always been the best father to him.  However, this unconditional love of a son for his father can be discredited due the son’s young age. Indeed, his young age does not provide Ben a full understanding of his father’s reputation and what it involves. “Children don’t understand such things. Fathers cannot be cowards” (210). Ben’s unconditional love towards his father is therefore revealed to be partly associated with ignorance. Children need to love and therefore will continue to love no matter what. “I would have loved a stone. If only he had known” (211). In other words, Ben still values his father in an affectionate way even though society expresses its contempt toward him. The deterioration of David’s mental health not only describe but is also being amplified by contrasting his son’s innocent point of view with society’s abhorrence. David’s mental lethargy is not only described through his behaviour but also throughout Ben’s interpretation of his father’s actions. In brief, Ben’s narrative point of view magnifies his father’s loss of mentality by being contrasted with society’s stigma towards his father.