Ernest Hemingway: A Farewell To Arms

[Fieldy]

I've just finished a Farewell to Arms. I was interested on other people's opinion on the book.

For me, Hemingway's prose is sometimes instantly catching and some of the descriptions are beautiful yet simplistic when he doesnt go on too long. But at others time, he just explains everything and for me gets in the way of scenes.

I noticed how Hemingway links everything together very well with either subtle hints or a passive voice that comes true in the end.

I thought the action was very well done such especially at the start and in the middle to end.

Some of the characters were excellent such as the priest, Rinaldi and Ms. Walker
as such as there bonding, mocking and general hate with each other that had sly actions.

Although I absolutely detested Catherine Barkley she got on my nerves real bad! So simplistic and she kept repeating the same words throughout which did not create an emotional bond as the same technique did with of mice and men between lennie and george.

At the end I was not really upset but felt more sorrow for Federico because all his actions in a sense were to see her and help her. Such as the blistered hands. Although in a sense his actions were for self - survival.

I can see Hemingway was a misogist (sp??) but if the women were like that in his day, so would I be

note: I tried not to give any of the plot away or essential details, thus my analyse of it may seem a bit thin.

I know it may seem easy but can someone please tell me how to do spoilers.

 

[ValkyrieRaven88]

Eek! I was totally disgusted with this book--people who know and love me refuse to let me get started on it. The characters were flat, unbelievable, and changed their minds at the drop of a hat, and sometimes where we couldn't see a hat drop.
Fred: I don't love Catherine. I have no intention of loving her. What's that? She's here. Oh, well, okay, then I guess I love her.
Then there's the DIALOGUE. Oh, my GOD, the dialogue was awful. There was actually a scene were Catherine said she wished she had STDs! Then there's another scene when they're talking about the Swiss navy and Catherine starts talking about having a huge breakfast even though they might be killed or something.
And there was that chapter on horse racing that had nothing to do with the rest of the story...what was the point of that?
And at the end of the story, Fred doesn't care much about his child.
Hemingway was trying to reminisce about his romance as a teen in a completely wrong way. He goes on and on about things we can't even care about because he doesn't know the first thing about characterization.

 

[aniela]

hi,
i am quite an admirer of hemingway's style, even though i needed some time to get the point of it.
what i like in his writing is that he is getting away from the classical style of writing a novel: a coherent plot, with no gaps, everything being bound together in an easy understandable way from the time and logic perspective.
i like hemingway because he tries to capture moments of reality as we ourselves perceive them. i mean do we have dialogues in everyday life that are very rigorously built when it comes to logical structue? aren't we jumping from one subject to another? do we all concentrate on a single theme? i think we are continously distracted by external events that have no connection with our main stream of thoughts. we can be preoccupied with an issue but still enjoy graffitis on the walls when we go home by bus.
so, the main reasons i like hemingway's style are:
-his lack of concern to make things in his novel "lool real" in the sense that he is trying to construct a novel where the unity of time and action is carefully respected; "reality" is not at all coherent, it has a lot of gaps in it, a lot of things are implied, and it is made up from disparate elements
-his dialogues are not like theatrical dialogues, where the characters have to unveil themselves, their psychology, their past; how many times does this happen in our life?
why isn't the simplicity of life boring or repulsive in our everyday existence and it is in a novel? why should a novel give us the impression of a reality that is actually an artificial one? do we really need to keep the illusion that life is meaningful, coherent, without dead moments?

 

[Justin91]

Aniela – You have summarized perfectly the reason I also appreciate Hemingway’s work. Even though some of his work can be hard to read, a reader needs to acclimate to his prose. What attribute does it take to truly enjoy Hemingway’s work? Some may call it patience, others maturity; but I believe you have hit the nail on the head: the reader must step out of the usual paperback paced plot and enjoy it for what it is…perfect sentences within perfect paragraphs waiting to be read and then reflected upon later.

 

[Doug Johnson]

Although I absolutely detested Catherine Barkley. So simplistic and she kept repeating the same words throughout

I read it a long time ago, but that's what I remember too. I thought she was very weak and unrealistic. Romance isn't really Hemingway's forte. I've read some of his Spanish Civil War short stories. They were excellent.

 

[ValkyrieRaven88]

Kind of weird, because I hate Hemingway for all the reasons aniela seems to hate him. Oh, well; it's a matter of preference of style. I of course will respect your opinion, while fervently swearing this was my least favorite book of all time.