Question 1
“In the late summer of that year we lived in a house in a village that looked across the river and the plain to the mountains. In the bed of the river there were pebbles and boulders, dry and white in the sun, and the water was clear and swiftly moving and blue in the channels. Troops went by the house and down the road and the dust they raised powdered the leaves of the trees. The trunks of the trees too were dusty and the leaves fell early that year and we saw the troops marching along the road and the dust rising and leaves, stirred by the breeze, falling and the soldiers marching and afterward the road bare and white except for the leaves.” – A Farewell to Arms pg. 3
This beautifully written first paragraph uses the word “the” 24 times. Hemingway’s language, although simple, has a way of conveying information with distinct visual impressions. Please examine the paragraph and list the things Hemingway has imparted to the reader in this vivid classic opening. What is your impression of Hemingway’s unique straightforward writing style?
Question 2
Hemingway uses the natural occurrence of rain as symbolic. Examine his use of rain in book one of the text. What does it stand for? Can you identify any other references to nature that also might contain a deeper meaning? What is your interpretation?
Question 3
How does Hemingway convey his personal views of this war in Book one? Please share some textual examples (with page numbers) to “back-up” your answers.
Bonus questions:
A-Hemingway waits until chapters six and seven to reveal Lieutenant Frederic Henry’s full name. What does this tell us about how Hemingway views our protagonist?
B-Hemingway likes his dichotomies. Have you found any in book one of A Farewell to Arms? What is he trying to convey?
C-Frederic and Catherine declare their love for each other then abruptly acknowledge it is just a game. (26-27) What is Hemingway saying about the nature of wartime romances?
Bonus Question
A: It was an interesting choice to not reveal Henry’s name right away. This is indicative of his own thoughts on his protagonist and his detatchment from Henry. Hemingway establishes his message is not specifically about Henry, but rather that Henry’s struggles could be happening to any soldier because these traumatic experiences were so common. However, I could also see it is a comment on how these men were viewed by the military and their countries. An individual man’s name would not have mattered to the politicians sending him into war.
Bonus Question
A: I liked this question a lot because I noticed this as well and I feel like this answer could be thought about in many different ways. I agree with Riley^^ how this could be a form of detachment from Henry because who knows what could happen to Henry (as our past books have shown a theme of death). I also feel like Hemingway does this to show how every soldier in this war is seen as a soldier that is not always identified with their name, but identified as being just a soldier. I do like how Hemingway does reveal Henry’s full name because it does then give the reader less of that detachment and now we feel somewhat closer to Henry now knowing his full name. I also think Hemingway views our protagonist as a very carefully crafted main character that for some reason seems more in-depth as a character compared to Paul for example.
1. Although his writing might be considered “straight-forward,” I found it interesting that the way he describes events are kind of glassed over. For example, “The major asked me to have a drink with him and two other officers. We drank rum and it was very friendly…I went back to the drivers” (41). This quote is an example of Hemingway’s plot descriptions. He doesn’t go into detail, and as a result I found it really vague at times. What do you all think about the way he writes? Would you agree that he jumps from one thing to another?
Bonus Question C: I really enjoyed the honesty in Catherine and Frederic’s relationship. It was the most realistic account of a ‘wartime romance’ I’ve read. They know they don’t actually love each other, but both need the other for companionship.
Response to: “What do you think about the way he writes”?
I feel like Hemingway works hard to write in a way that gives his readers really descriptive passages without distracting them with fancy words and long sentences. I think this “vagueness” is intentional and it is part of his genius.
Even though the language is often very straightforward and simple, the effect is quite complex. In the first paragraph Hemingway gives us vivid description of the setting in A Farewell to Arms, but he also makes the reader aware of the passing of time and the fact that a war is in progress.
The summer turns into fall as the soldiers march forward and this constant stream of troops and the dust they raise on the road is the indication that a war is underway and the road “bare and white” could be a metaphor for the fact that many will not return to walk this path again.
I do agree that he jumps from one thing to another. But here’s the thing, I feel like Hemingway is really good at capturing the details of everyday living and in life we often jump from doing one thing to another without much fanfare. Just like Lt. Henry’s drink with the other officers. Hemingway probably felt it was not important enough to go into detail.
Hemingway is defiantly the most difficult writer I’ve ever had to read. To me, what sets him apart from other authors is how he described the environment in his novels. Just like in the first chapter of Farwell to Arms, it’s a whole chapter of just describing the land that Nick is in. Also, as we said in class, Hemingway’s vocabulary is very simple. He has a habit of repeating the same words over and over again. Making it very difficult to continue reading. While I appreciate the use of more simple words (so I don’t have to go and look up the meaning of a word while reading) the way Hemingway uses simple words just makes the story seem more dull.
Pingback: Tristan Barber’s Reading Questions for February 22nd: A Farewell to Arms – Book Three (Pages 160-233) | Literature of the Great War