A Farewell to Arms
discussion
Hemingway's sentences: what makes them so good?
In a world of almost daily technological advances that make yesterday's methods seem hopelessly inadequate, Hemingway's brilliance shines by showing that simple words meticulously placed in simple sentences can still tell a story with indelible passion.
"War is not won by victory." or
"She had wonderfully beautiful hair and I would lie sometimes and watch her twisting it up in the light that came in the open door and it shone even in the night as water shines sometimes just before it is really daylight."
They are so beautifully descriptive.
Although I am not a big fan of Hemingway, I agree that the sparsity of his prose lends an emotional weight to his work. I believe his use of language forces the reader to read between the lines more than a more flowery style. It is difficult to say so much in so few words.
I read THE SUN ALSO RISES.the story was'nt very nice but I loved the book because of the way it is written. I could imagine myself living the story. :)
I'm not a terribly big fan of Hemingway overall, but I absolutely loved Farewell to Arms - it's a great novel.But back to the question - repetition and reformulation are much more evident in speech than the kind of elegant variation that you often get in writing and, I understand, got a lot of in the writing that I guess Hemingway would have grown up with. You only have to think of refrains like 'the wine dark sea' in Homer to remind you that a lot of literary stories were meant to be told not read.
I think that might explain some of the energy in Hemingway's prose despite the fact that, as you say, there are lots of times when his sentences aren't short.
I think repetition of nouns has a way of condensing or stretching the sense of time in narrative - so that a dense repetition of the same noun or nouns has an effect of concentrating and clarifying attention on the action.
Well, just a thought.
Great point, Nik. I think there's a lot to what you're saying. I know Hemingway was a big fan of the Odyssey as well.
Simplicity at its best. But, my favorite will always be 'The Sun Also Rises."
His were sparse and almost telegraphic. The best prose is economical.
Peter wrote: "His were sparse and almost telegraphic. The best prose is economical."I could't agree more ... I personally so much prefer Carver, Camus, Chekov, Hemingway, etc. to writers like Rushdie, Amis etc.
Once I rented a surfboard at a hotel on Ohahu. It was my first time on a board and on the third try I caught a piece of a dying wave and it lifted the board and took me to the beach. That's how it feels when the words are are coming fast and smooth, like being lifted and carried by some unseen force and on arrival knowing that there will always be more waves and that I couldn't stop them if I tried. And that's how it feels sometimes when I read Hemingway. Sometimes it just flows and I don't care where he's taking me because the trip feels so good. It isn't always that way, but when it is I want to stay in that zone as long as I can. AFTA has many places like this.
Hemingway is a fucking genius! It’s like he is drilling the image into your head. And the use of simple language allows you to fill in the details with your own imagination; making the story that much richer. It’s a respect for his audience. He knows we don’t have to be spoon fed. The repetition merely intensifies what he is saying (like a hypnotist’s mantra, “You are growing very, very sleepy now.”), pulling you deeper in to the story. Allowing you to get lost in his spell.
The ability to construct a sparse sentence that frequently arrives at its meaning in the final word.
The sentences are short, contain certain universal meaning that affects the emotional field of a reader.
Although Ernest Hemingway's early short stories are more florid, his style became almost journalistic, with writing that draws you into the current of the story before you realize it. He was the master of understatement; hyperbole was not Hem. His best prose is light and airy, almost dreamlike. Hemingway's unique and powerful influence on how we write was significant enough to be honored by a Nobel Prize in literature. How did it happen? What is the formula?When we're reading Hemingway or any writer, we're lost in that sacred trinity of reader, writer and words, unconscious of the contrail of evolution behind what's on the page. Hemingway was a welcome break from the excesses of Dickens and Henry James. What made the doctor's boy from Oak Park seek escape from the florid norm of the Twenties and write in such a radically nimble style?
He had a poor relationship with his mother, who dressed him as a girl until he was about to start school. Perhaps he rebelled against anything reminding him of her. A quote from For Whom The Bell Tolls sheds light on his maternal conflict:
"And is thy father still active in the Republic?" Pilar asked.
"No. He is dead."
"Can one ask how he died?"
"He shot himself."
'To avoid being tortured?' the woman asked.
"Yes,' Robert Jordan said. "To avoid being tortured."
As a cub reporter Hemingway was trained to be brief and pithy in his prose and stick to a grade school vocabulary. Perhaps his vocabulary was limited; he hadn't gone to college. As an overseas correspondent, he would have had to compile news stories from wire service cables and submit them the same way, under pressure of deadline. Cablegrams were priced by word count. Wordiness was penalized.
His first novel, The Sun Also Rises, was written while Hemingway was a foreign correspondent in Paris. On an average workday he'd be shifting between writing fiction and cable-speak. It's natural that the habitual discipline of reportage would creep into his creative writing. Indeed, some of the dialogue of Brett Ashley and Bill Scott in The Sun Also Rises is expressed in incomplete sentences, as in a telegram. It works for these characters because they've been drinking heavily, but it jolted me enough to notice and wonder about it.
Hemingway also read a lot of hard-boiled crime novels. That last line in The Sun Also Rises, "Isn't it pretty to think so," sounds like something from Dashiell Hammett.
Was it journalism, other writers, crime novels or parental rebellion that influenced his writing? It's a mixture, but for a deeper understanding of literary minimalism can be found in film and theater.
The "real" story is taking place in the mind of the reader or audience. Words on the page are prompts, like props in a film or stage production. The mind takes in what it needs and filters the rest. When too much is coming at the senses, overload occurs and the mind excludes some of what is being presented. The personality of the observer is in play, whether the author or actor or director likes it or not.
This "theater concept" occurred to me after reflecting on why the 1939 black and white version of Of Mice and Men remains superior to the '82 and '92 color versions. In the realm of storytelling, color can be superfluous and actually interfere with the flow of the story.
Stage directors know and depend on the fact that audiences only need a suggestion of reality in their sets, just enough to make sense of what is happening. This de-emphasis on setting enables an audience to concentrate on what is being said and done, where lives the core of leaning.
Such is the case with Hemingway. On the page every word competes with every other word for reader comprehension. The more words and the more complicated they are, the harder the reader must work at comprehension. If the author is wordy and over-precise in rendering a scene the all-important meaning can be lost.
Hemingway called it the Iceberg Principle (which is analogous to Carl Jung's Collective Unconscious.) It could also be called the Theater Principle. Theater-goers don't expect or need much in the way of props or sets--just enough to create the illusion of a setting to support the meat of the performance, the action and dialogue. An elaborate theater set can be a distraction, as can ornamental similes and metaphors in literature.
In a famous quote, Ezra Pound impressed upon Hemingway that precision in word selection was paramount--“Fundamental accuracy of statement is the ONE sole morality of writing.” In Hemingway's search for just the right words he discovered that extraneous words could be dropped and increase clarity. So he left them out and the through-line delivery of meaning to the reader was more direct.
Before Hemingway met Pound in Paris in the Twenties, Sherwood Anderson was in his professional life. As a cub reporter Hemingway was drawn to Anderson's use of "everyday language." He met Anderson and received advice and encouragement from the older established writer.
Sparseness can sometimes come at a cost, though. In The Sun Also Rises and other stories, I sometimes couldn't tell who was speaking. "Hills Like White Elephants" is an extreme example. Half the time I couldn't tell who was talking and it forced me to strain and backtrack, interrupting the story flow. It's curious that is "Hills..." so frequently anthologized; it's not that representative of his work. Perhaps it was an experiment to see how much of the iceberg he could submerge and still have a story. It came out in '27, after The Sun Also Rises was doing tremendously well and Hem could have gotten away with anything.
Still, whether on stage or page, the principle of economy applies. Only put in just enough, and the reader supplies what she needs, allowing more attention to dialog and action. The art is in knowing where to draw the line.
"For sale, baby shoes, never worn."Enough said.
Joe wrote: ""For sale, baby shoes, never worn."Enough said."
According to Snopes, that quote's never been substantiated as coming from Hemingway, though it's popular lore among Hemingway fans and certainly true to his persona.
Monty J wrote: "What made Earnest Hemingway seek escape from the florid norm of The Twenties and write in such a radically nimble style? He had a poor relationship with his mother. Perhaps he rebelled against anyt..."Spillane's first novel period, I, the Jury, as well as the first to feature Mike Hammer, wasn't published until 1947. So it's not possible that this particular brand of hard boiled detective fiction influenced Hemingway's minimalistic style. I'd say it's probably the other way around. Wasn't Hemingway, as is the case with so many of that era' novelists, a writer of prose because he had failed in his aspirations to be a poet? I believe Sherwood Anderson had some influence on (was perhaps even a bit of a mentor to) Hemingway. That influence, journalism, the proliferation and nascent professionalism of advertising and its copywriting techniques (Anderson's vocation before fiction writing if I'm not misktaken) ... perhaps even the rise of radio as a medium and his own built-in bullshit detector contributed to Hemingway's style. I haven't read enough biographical material about Hem to know if G. Stein guided him in this direction at all.
Mark wrote: "Monty J wrote: "What made Earnest Hemingway seek escape from the florid norm of The Twenties and write in such a radically nimble style? He had a poor relationship with his mother. Perhaps he rebel..."Thanks for the info. I hadn't thought about radio. I read somewhere that crime novels influenced him. Maybe it was Dashiell Hammett.
G. Stein, Sherwood Anderson and Ezra Pound are mentioned in A Movable Feast as having read and influenced Hemingway's early writing. In the end, he criticized each of them. An odd way to show gratitude.
I've yet to see an acknowledgements page in one of his books. A dedication, but no acknowledgement.
Imthiinking wrote: "I wish I could tell. I may be the lone voice of dissent but I just don't see it, and I hated reading this book. I find his writing style monotonous."Agreed. I just don't get what was so great about his writing. granted he has some amazing lines. But did not appreciate the flow. I will give another book of his a chance. But Steinbeck is still my hero.
Any Hemmingway suggestions? I did not like Farewell to arms- such a weak story.
In his book, The Lifetime Reading Plan, Clifton Fadiman makes the point that what he sees as Hemingway's liabilities--his machismo, his reduction of female characters to one dimension, etc.--are kept in check in his short stories but given room to muck things up in his novels. Maybe you should give a collection of his short stories a try.Also, regarding being baffled about why Hemingway receives such critical accolades: I think that's a matter of considering him in historical context. He dispensed with a lot of ornamentation and frippery in his prose that some literary schools at the time thought was "writerly". We take for granted today how much Hemingway changed the way American writers write.
His terseness. Its funny though that he wrote some of the thickest novels of the period. Its just that he strove for simplicity in his sentences. Other great artists (in every medium) also use brevity as a measure of focus and concentration: Kathe Kollwitz for example; Brancusi in sculpture; or the Japanese calligraphists. The merit of his method is found also in the dialog of John O'Hara (who was said to have a superb ear for American conversation). His characters also speak in short, clipped, blurbs. We all do. People in real life just don't make speeches.
naked and stark ........beautiful
What I like best about Hemingway's writing is the way he avoids describing characters' expressions, tone of voice, reaction--he often lets the reader decide how these characters do this which ends up telling readers something about themselves in addition to reading the story in their own unique way. I admire this this skill and enjoy reading him for this reason.
don presnell wrote: "as a manic depressive bi polarwhatever they call it now i can relate
(excepting talent)his persona was larger than life
a difficult image to maintain
i find it interesting that he
as well as Hu..."
You can find them on Amazon, Don
Spontaneous,nothing to be exaggerated, being expressive without being too verbose!!
Tim wrote: "I think A Farewell to Arms is Hemingway's most poetic novel. I was especially struck by the way he used repeating nouns to create lasting images in the reader's mind. Here's a quick breakdown with ..."I also though that. “A Farewell to Arms” was relly fun to read as the writing was soo immersive.
For any other doubters who read this far, I'll put in a word of solace. I'm not so taken by his craft. I do admire the blunt and simple noun-verb-noun style that has influenced me to avoid running on an on trying to sound good rather than being good. But his style also seemes forced: the self-conscious run-on sentences glued together by a long string of ands (how do I pluralize and?); the peculiar adjectives that could be arresting but come off as affected; and, on a larger scale, the passages that go on and on reiterating the same point. Occasionally I found a killer metaphor or fresh description or shocking, semiconcealed topic (Hills Like White Elephants), but after a while burned out on him altogether. I bludgeoned myself through Farewell to Arms mostly to see where the lifeless relationships went, and they didn't..Once a writer is at least competent and interesting, it is largely a matter of who you are to whom you elevate to "great." One thing I notice in this thread is a very strong gender skew between lovers and not-lovers, particularly in the number of words spilled (myself excepted). I don't hate Hemingway, but i do find his work overly male-oriented (his version of male anyway) and overrated for being fresh at the time (I wasnt there) rather than good.
Andrew wrote: "For any other doubters who read this far, I'll put in a word of solace. I'm not so taken by his craft. I do admire the blunt and simple noun-verb-noun style that has influenced me to avoid running ..."Wow! I agree with every word you said.
There were definitely some mind blowing perfect sentences. But overall I was simply disappointed.
I agree. Hemingway has a poetic yet straight forward style. While reading the novel, I almost feel like I am in a dream visualizing each event. He uses the perfect amount of detail, not too much to bore the reader. Hemingway is straight forward and finds a flow in his writing."War is not won by victory."
Nik wrote: "I'm not a terribly big fan of Hemingway overall, but I absolutely loved Farewell to Arms - it's a great novel.But back to the question - repetition and reformulation are much more evident in spee..."
Hey the Hebrews did this technique to emphasize a point.
Alw wrote: "I agree. Hemingway has a poetic yet straight forward style. While reading the novel, I almost feel like I am in a dream visualizing each event. He uses the perfect amount of detail, not too much..."I find that Kerouac and Hemingway both used Haiku like poetic forms to make tight sentences.
Hemingway doesn't use lots of flowery words in his sentences, he gets straight to the point and makes a great story out of it
All sorts of toothsome observations and insights found reading this thread.Is there any other author who causes such divided opinions as to his technique, his content, his themes? Not only that, but people continue to question the validity of his critical reception, the correctness of his reputation, and the strength of his legacy. I can't think of any other author who is attacked and slurred this long after their demise.
Even saying one likes Hemingway, draws fire. I think what he brought to literature--the theme of men's relationships; men without women--men on their own--was very worthwhile and relevant.
But my being male, implies there could possibly be something clouding my judgment, causing a blind spot, otherwise I probably wouldn't believe any relevancy to be found in these motifs? Eh.
Remember that Dorothy Parker was one his most ardent fans. And she certainly knew something about short story technique. And me, I uh, I also like Emily Dickinson. What now?
I'm all for generalizations but they have to have a some consistency behind them...
I think it was in his book *The Movable Feast* that Hemingway frets over the opening to a story he's trying to get out, telling himself to just write one simple declarative sentence. Hemingway is about declarative sentences. But those simple declarative sentence are written in the service of experimental realism, particularly when riding on conjunctions, for which he's mocked. Now, I'll go out on the limb. I would argue that it was Twain who took the American sentence into the 20th century. And that it was Hemingway who stripped those sentences bare of curlicues written on the backs of commas and semi-colons. Hemingway bowed to the authority of the period in sentences. And that was significant.
Perhaps it was the influence of Stein and Toklas that encouraged his experimentation, the chance taking that Scott Fitzgerald rejected in favor of Max Perkins's cash advances.
Hemingway's short story, "A Clean Well lighted Place," makes a brief foray into the realm – – just evolving then – – of "stream of consciousness," as in the great "nada" soliloquy: "...but he knew it was all nada y puis nada y nada y pues nada." "A Well Lighted Place" is an avant garde story demonstrating existential agony, a fear of nothingness, in advance of Camus's depiction of life's absurdity.
The reaction against "Popa's" chauvinistic antics is well-founded, but it is more a reflection of his time and the marketplace. It is not different than the use of the N-word throughout Twain's "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn." There's no indictment in accurately portraying the ethos of an era.
Wonderful insights, Jeff. I'm glad the original post has stirred so much debate, some of it quite intelligent and worthwhile. I think one of the reasons some people, even writers, are so quick to dismiss Hemingway is that it's easy. As a man he left much to be desired, and as an artist his output was mixed. So: throw him out the window. Less you have to read, less you have to think about. Plus you get to feel superior. But you're only cheating yourself.
Hemingway was a genius, one of the if not THE greatest American writer of the 20th century. He changed the face of literature forever, and the vitality of his artistic legacy lives on for anyone who chooses to partake of it, in both short fiction and the novel.
I found your essay on Hemingway in "Storycraft." His description (anaphora) of Abruzzi, a place he's never been, is a stunning piece of craft. "I had wanted to go to Abruzzi. I had gone to no place where the roads were frozen and hard as iron..." We know he's never been there, and we know it's because of the "smoke cafes." I think Nabokov once wrote in the New Yorker that the great writer seeks the element that reveals the instant in time when the story takes place. Those two words, "smoke cafe," render the writer in a particular place and time. Do you know Hemingway's example of great observation, where he talks about the mundane stuff of fishing and points to a moment, the moment he recognizes the fight has reached the critical juncture -- because the big fish may yet power away -- as he looks along the light 50-pound line drawn so taught that a drop of water forms along its length. That's a lot to admire.
Absolutely. Much of Hemingway's genius was in his ability to describe the world in a way that was at once utterly particular and universally resonant. Much to admire, and much to emulate and study if you're a writer. Within reason, of course. But my point is that people who dismiss Hemingway because of his flaws are doing themselves a great disservice.
Jeff wrote: "Now, I'll go out on the limb. I would argue that it was Twain ..."Agreed. Hemingway himself regarded Twain as the first and foremost modern American novelist; a figure to whom all subsequent writers were bound and beholden to for their style.
My favorite part of 'Farewell to Arms' was the conversation about growing old that Henry has with the old Count over billiards. Quintessential Hemingway.
Hemmingway is like a dangerous lover and Twain an old friend.
succinct, and very similar to our own thinking process~
Monty J wrote: "Once I rented a surfboard at a hotel on Ohahu. It was my first time on a board and on the third try I caught a piece of a dying wave and it lifted the board and took me to the beach. That's how it ..."Monty J wrote: "Once I rented a surfboard at a hotel on Ohahu. It was my first time on a board and on the third try I caught a piece of a dying wave and it lifted the board and took me to the beach. That's how it ..."
Good attempt at Hemingwayesque writing Monty.
Monty J wrote: "Mark wrote: "Monty J wrote: "What made Earnest Hemingway seek escape from the florid norm of The Twenties and write in such a radically nimble style? He had a poor relationship with his mother. Per..."I recall reading that S. Anderson was a strong mentor to both Faulkner and Hemingway and both at one point severely snubbed him to the point of his abruptly breaking off the friendship. Anderson was allegedly obnoxiously egotistical in later life and both authors got tired of the man's pomposity. The difference between the two was that Faulkner later apologized, Hemingway was content to let his mentor aggrieved forever by the insult.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
What do you think?