Why are the events in “A rose for Emily” not in the customary course of chronological order?

In "A Rose for Emily," the townspeople narrate the story
in the following order, beginning with her
death:

1. Miss Emily
   dies


2. The aldermen visit her about her
   taxes.


3. Miss Emily give painting
   lessons.


4. Her father
   dies.


5. Homer Baron
   disappears.


6. The aldermen apply lime around her
   house.


7. Homer Barson arrives in
   town.


8. Miss Emily asks the druggist for
   poison.


9. The townspeople discover the bridal
   sweet.

Obviously, this is not in chronological
order, because Emily is introduced as dead, and then the collective narrators flash back
to her earlier life.  However, Homer Baron's event are in a kind of chronology: he is
first introduced, then said to have disappeared, and then, at the end, we find his bones
in the bed.

If Faulkner would have put Miss Emily's events
in chronogical order, it would have culminated in her death, not his, thereby
undercutting the horrifying discovery that the townspeople make (Miss Emily lying in bed
with Homer Baron's corpse).  It should have been no mystery that Emily died, or Homer
for that matter.  It should have been no mystery that Emily poisoned Homer.  The mystery
comes when we discover her necrophelia.