Example Of Scholarly Footnotes

The use of scholarly footnotes creates the theme of the impossibility of knowledge by not always giving a definite answer to what or why something happens in the story. Located on most of the pages the scholarly footnotes in the story provides historical facts and additional information about the events, people or objects that are mentioned in the story. However, there are sections when the scholarly footnotes provide multiple theories or answers to a certain event or subject; thus, creating an impossibility of knowing the full knowledge behind it. For example, on Page 285 the scholarly footnotes describe the geological mound that’s located in the town and gives multiple scientific explanations what it may be is from being a meteor to an electromagnetic shift in the ground.

With multiple theories on what the mound maybe is it is impossible to know whether it was a natural creation or a manmade creation. In addition to this, the scholarly footnotes also contradict what the narrator says what happened in the story. For instance, on Page 288 the narrator claims that Zaceus Stokes personally told him that the recently deceased Mose Pickett had come out of his grave and was living again. While the scholarly footnotes state Zaceus Stokes had “No records of his recounting of the Tims Creeks tale exists, nor do witnesses confirm his ever having discussed it”. With these two contradicting statements, it is impossible to know for sure if the events in the story occurred. The use of scholarly footnotes helps create the theme of the impossibility of knowledge by providing multiple answers or theories and by contradicting the narrator on certain events. Thus, making it impossible to know what something is or what happened within the Tim’s Creek