Kevin's Watch

Yeah, THAT talent-less jerk

That is what I use to think, anyway. I had read some Hemingway in high school. We read The Old Man and the Sea and a short story that I do not remember but always refered to as "A Farewell to Arms Lite". In either case, compared to my obsession at the time, Stephen Crane, and to me new author Stephen R Donaldson I was not impressed. I had decided that Hemingway was a lazy writer that appealed to easily impressed readers with his "oh, the Old Man represents Jesus!" garbage. It did not help matters that I was raised in a family of Hemingway haters.

Later, in college, I would run across one of his short stories again. This time, about a couple on a train talking around the subject of abortion. Whatevs, Steinbeck was better.

Finally, after immersing myself in modernists writings, I decided to read The Sun Always Rises... and I was thoroughly impressed. My world shattered, I started to wonder if maybe... just maybe I was unfair to ol' Ernesto.

So this month, I'll be reading the other two 'great' works of his, A Farewell to Arms and For Whom the Bell Tolls. Who knows? I might even give The Old Man and the Sea another try. It has been about eleven years and I am wiser about my readings. It will be interesting to see if my opinion has changed.

Anyone is allowed to join in, make suggestions on short stories, attitude, comment on my analysis, etc. You don't have to stick with what I am currently reading either, since true classics rarely depend on plot spoilers.

So, bring your hatred or praise as you sip some absenthe, it's time to discuss Ernest Hemingway.

Well, you know the story of his "six word story," right?

--A

Avatar wrote:Well, you know the story of his "six word story," right?

--A

Was his the baby shoes one?

I think I recall hearing it was actually not written by him, but was
written in something about his life.

[I just looked, apparently it isn't known for sure but the story of the story first appeared in "Papa."]

That was the one.

To be honest, I've never been a huge fan. But then didn't really ever devote much time to him, so willing to be corrected.

--A

Hi Orlion,

I keep gravitating to this thread every time I look in on the Watch, so decided to pop into the library to see what they had.

(Didn't want to read the old man or for whom, saw the movies and know how they end.)
I've took out To Have And Have Not. So if it's all the same with you I can let you know how I found it. Which shouldn't take too long as it's under 200 pages, just what I wanted.

By all means! It'd be good to have an idea of how some of his other novels turn out.

Well, I'm through Part I and Part II of A Farewell To Arms, so I figured I would give my thoughts here. I'll give some general thoughts, and then some thoughts on the individual "books", as he calls them. If you want to avoid 'spoilers'... well, I do not know what to tell you... I'm kinda in the Murrin school of thought that a good book can not be spoiled, but plot discussion will be mostly limited to when I talk about specific parts. Also, I'll make several references to The Sun Also Rises.

So A Farewell To Arms shares a bit of thematic matter with The Sun Also Rises. Our narrator is an expatriate American whose identity and prestige is tied up in the foreign countries he associates with. Alcohol is also a very important part of life and the story is kinda framed as a travel log. Instead of France and Spain, though, we have travel through Italy. This leads me to believe that part of what made Hemingway a popular writer was not so much his technique or plot, but because it was a means for people to "visit" these foreign countries they would never be able to see in real life. World War I figures strongly in both novels, but A Farewell to Arms starts right before the US got involved (so about 1916).

Book I

Here, we are introduced to our narrator, an American serving as an ambulance driver in the Italian army. We do not know much about him, just that he happened to be in Italy when they started fighting the Austrians and he decided, "why not?" and joined the Italian army. Italy and Austria are struggling for a range of mountains, but with winter come on, fighting becomes impossible and our narrator (whose real name is not given until later) is given leave to go wherever in Italy for a couple months. He essentially goes to towns suggested by military officials, sticking his dick in whatever girl will allow it and does not go to the priest's father's house, where he could have hunted. I'm sure there's something there, but I need to collect my thoughts first. Anyway, he also meets Catherine Barkley, a British nurse/blonde bombshell who has just lost her fiancee to the Front... making her available as a sexual conquest. Our narrator is called to the front, where we find the disorganization of the army. A trench mortar goes of in his dugout, blasting his kneecap 'off' and he is carried off to an 'American' hospital in Milan (since they just joined up).

Book II

Here we find that Catherine has followed Fred Henry (gasp! That's his name!) and they start to have an affair. We start seeing that Henry is losing his identity as an Italian as he finds that he actually loves Catherine... and as Catherine would also draw him away from his former culture of Italian friends. We find out that Catherine becomes pregnant, despite her taking herbs to try and prevent it (maybe even abort it). Whatevs, Henry says, and they make plans to frolick together during his three week leave after he has healed up before he goes back to the Front. A case of jaundice prevents that, and his leave is canceled and he has to return to the front post haste.

I've been having difficulties getting into second gear with Hemingway's - To Have and Have Not. I still can't finish the first chapter. Tried reading in bed...fell asleep...tried reading in a waiting room...appointment began...tried reading in cafe...couldn't drink two cups.

Anyway, from what I've read so far, I like this book and also dislike it.
The first alarm bell was the copious use of the word 'nigger' - maybe six times on one of the pages. I felt uncomfortable with this, and took an instant dislike to most of the characters. But then I saw that right from the first paragraph the location of the story rules. From the bright sunny morning to the rising heat of the afternoon Hemingway fills the pages with the natural things of his inviroment.

As the chartered fishing boat leaves Havana and draws close to the stream, nearly purple with regular whirpools, we see birds feeding on little tuna, faded yellow gulfweed, flying fish as big as 2lbs...and I'd like to find out what Hemingway meant by saying the fish looked like the picture of Lindenburgh crossing the Atlantic.

One other thing, a little silly perhaps, but as soon as the characters started talking I could hear in the background the crackle and pop of a black and white soundtrack.

I love Hemingway...especially the short stories. My favorite novel is the first...The Sun Also Rises, unless Old Man and the Sea counts, 'cause I think it is incredible.

Finally managed to pick up again, To Have and Have Not. I loved reading chapter 1. The marlin fishing was great. How naive I was to think the story would continue as it began. I really tried to like the central character but the brutal cold blooded murder he commits left me feeling sick to my stomach.
It was almost as if Hemingway was inviting the reader to participate in the experience of killing without emotion. There was just no rhyme or reason for it that I could deduce.

I know the story takes place in the depression era and he had a wife and two kids to feed and he needed his boat to do this. But the scene left me cold.

I also know it's only fiction and yet after reading a brief summary of Hemingway's life and times and had some idea of who the man was, it caused me to view this story in a very differant light.

So maybe part I is only the fiction in action. To set the scene for the killing of his alcholic shipmate. Maybe part I is needed so as to help the reader understand why there should be no remorse or pity for a poor unlucky 'rummy'.

Maybe part II will explain his reasons more clearly but I'm not going to read on. I need some time to let this one sink in.

Krazy Kat wrote:It was almost as if Hemingway was inviting the reader to participate in the experience of killing without emotion.

Y'know, that made me think of a quote that I would have sworn was by Hemingway.

But it turns out it wasn't. It was Robert Ruark.

I'll include it here for interests sake...it's one I always loved, and I've wrongly attributed it for years:

"I lurched up and looked at Mbogo, and Mbogo looked at me. He was 50 to 60 yards off, his head low, his eyes staring right down my soul. He looked at me as if he hated my guts. He looked as if I had despoiled his fiancé, murdered his mother and burned down his house. He looked at me as if I owed him money. I never saw such malevolence in the eyes of any animal or human being before or since. So I shot him."

(Mbogo was a Cape Buffalo btw.)

--A

Hemingway must have saw a lot bad stuff in his life. War in Europe.
His writing reflects this. He's a hard man, and so are his characters.
He nails words to the page.
Fishing and fiction, are a perfect example of how Hemingway sets the style.

I guess it's just the phase I'm going through at this time. Maybe a couple of years ago I would have drank up this book with satisfaction. I'm not too sure why this story was so unsettling for me.


3rd Chronicles Spoiler

Spoiler

What puzzles me is why I was unphazed with the horrific death of Liand?

Hemingway is more real. There is no element of fantasy to separate you, however slightly, from his characters.

Maybe.

--A

Avatar wrote:Hemingway is more real. There is no element of fantasy to separate you, however slightly, from his characters.

Maybe.

--A

In part, yes. When you place your story in the real world, it is much easier to relate to the plot and characters. This means you are more likely to become more affected by events that happen in the story.

Also, Hemingway has this aura about him... people have this idea that he actually experienced most if not all the stories he wrote. As a result, the reader might get it into his head that what he is reading is a sort of 'true account where names are changed to protect the innocent.' This aspect of Hemingway is overblown, in my opinion. Sure, he drew inspiration from what happened to him, but he was also a reporter. He would have heard and written several accounts by different people about different events. With this wealth of information from various points of views, he was able to write more convincing pieces. Kinda like how Stephan Crane was able to write accurately about the feelings of a soldier during battle even though he never fought in one.

Here's an interesting bit about Hemingway as remembered by Orson Welles: www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEknTQkV-Zk

I agree with that, although he certainly had a busy and "exciting" life from which he could draw much first hand experience as well. (Hell, IIRC, he survived 2 plane crashes. )

--A

Avatar wrote:I agree with that, although he certainly had a busy and "exciting" life from which he could draw much first hand experience as well. (Hell, IIRC, he survived 2 plane crashes. )

--A

If I recall, it was 2 consecutive, not even weeks apart, plane crashes. So he defied quite a bit of statistics... hell, you could probably use that as an argument that God exists and is a Hemingway fan

I loved Hemingway when younger, and have read most of his novels and short stories. His style however ultimately strikes me as affected in a way that is distracting. It's like he's saying that 'I am a man of integrity and courage, which makes my writing laconic and fatalistic.' I can't quite accept it at face value.

Don Exnihilote wrote:I loved Hemingway when younger, and have read most of his novels and short stories. His style however ultimately strikes me as affected in a way that is distracting. It's like he's saying that 'I am a man of integrity and courage, which makes my writing laconic and fatalistic.' I can't quite accept it at face value.

I seem to be going the exact opposite. Younger, I hated Hemingway. We read a couple of short stories (like, realllly short stories), The Old Man and the Sea, and what I am starting to suspect were the worst parts of A Farewell to Arms presented as a short story in high school.

Now, I'm older... I've read many a modernistic work, plenty of Steinbeck and McCarthy... and now it seems like Hemingway did know what he was doing. Last year, I read The Sun Also Rises and found that I enjoyed it immensely. Then you had A Farewell to Arms which, taken as a whole and not focusing on the 'romantic' relationship like idiot commentators do, it was fantastic and easily one of the best war novels I read. Until I read For Whom the Bell Tolls, which is even better despite Hemingway trying to give the reader a feel for the Spanish language in English.... and which actually has some good examples of heroism and courage.

As far as it being laconic and fatalistic, I think (particularly with A Farewell to Arms) that's a result of him being a member of that 'modernist' movement. The technique he choose to mostly experiment with was to be minimalist and the modernist view (particularly when it came to the Great War) seems to be a sort of fatalistic one. Later writers would be able to take the techniques of modernism without having to continually serve the themes of estrangement, loss, and cataclysmic change, but as a movement it had to start somewhere.