What did Hemingway know? What didn't he?
It is always a mistake to know an author.
Death in the Afternoon (1932)
by E. Hemingway
We suggest making it as a conscious choice for mistakes being a way to learn, too.
About himself and society
"If you have a success, you have it for the wrong reasons. If you become popular it is always because of the worst aspects of your work."
As quoted in That Summer in Paris (1963) by Morley Callaghan
Nobody knows whether Hemingway would become popular if he had his career start today and even more, whether it would happen for the right reasons. Some of his views scream they come from a different epoch and get very questionable in today’s world.
- productivity or the road to burnout?
- stoicism and silence or lack of emotional intelligence?
- occasional drinking for a “lens change” or addiction based on trauma(s)?
- excitement about women as equals or seeing them as muses and caregivers only?
- cultivated strength or toxic masculinity?
These are only some of the borderline questions modern society has for Hemingway as a personality. He, of course, had no idea about how the society would change in a century while we are unable to say if he would change anything in his lifestyle or views just to match someone’s expectations.
Treated as a girl in his early childhood, Ernest-the-adult went in for bloody activities like hunting, boxing, bullfighting (here as a big fan only), and, well, wars. He was lucky to survive a number of accidents and diseases (not to avoid pain, though) but knew little to nothing about mental health and post-war changes in it (which he must have experienced first-hand). He presented himself as a self-made man (unquestionable in terms of developing as a writer) and left the significant financial support and contacts he received through his wives hidden under the water – those who knew, knew.
About writing
"It's none of their business that you have to learn how to write. Let them think you were born that way."
On the loss of a suitcase containing work from his first two years as a writer,
as quoted in With Hemingway (1984) by Arnold Samuelson
Hemingway is said to have been extremely satisfied when he realised that due to an accident, literary critics would never be able to trace his early development as a writer. It appeared to be something rather personal or probably did not represent him the way he wished. Professionally, however, Hemingway (unlike the critics) was way more interested in the result rather than process. An objective fact rather than a detailed scene. Some approaches he learnt from his first job as a young newspaper reporter, other came later, and altogether, they shaped his style around the iceberg theory[=EX1] he created.
- keep it short and clear – no regrets about saying goodbye to paragraphs
- make it as true as possible or even truer than it can really be
- stick to conventional writing rules until you master them all before introducing any personal changes
- in writing, don’t do something someone else has already done
- be ready for criticism – you’ll face it this way or another
Meanwhile, for the process of writing, Hemingway only had two things to follow:
- time discipline
- making a pause when there is an understanding of what comes next (this way, your the “well of writing” refills and you can have an active start and a productive working session)
Writing, at its best, is a lonely life.
from the Nobel Prize speech by E. Hemingway (1954)
Independent, rigid, notable, Hemingway himself was a monolith (or even an iceberg) in the 20th century literature. It doesn’t mean, though, he knew everything about it. For better or worse, he mostly stayed within the genres and style he had initially chosen, he wrote from the perspective of a white Western man (which fully justifies his experience-based approach for writing), he never wrote specifically for radio, however popular it was at the time.
Together with that, Hemingway was lucky. He did not know the struggle of waiting for translation into English or being asocial minority as a writer. With support from funds and personal contacts, he tasted fame and recognition already with his first novel (being 26 at the moment), despite a few previous rejections, and had little to complain about financially till the end of his life. Straightforward, complex, ethically difficult, his writing was popular – and still is, a century after the first success – no matter the reasons.
About war
"When you go to war as a boy you have a great illusion of immortality. Other people get killed; not you… Then when you are badly wounded the first time you lose that illusion and you know it can happen to you."
Men at War (1942) by E. Hemingway
Hemingway wrote these words at the age of 43 when witnessing already the third war in his life. The first one started when he was 15. In 1918, he, yet an 18-year-old, went to Italy as an ambulance driver to see the was with his own eyes. Then to Spain as a journalist. And to Paris as a war correspondent and a combatant for a while.
- witnessed plenty of cruel and dirty things about war
- survived multiple injuries and two deadly plane crashes
- faced chaos, betrayal, hope, love, and loss at war
- learnt to keep his mind cold when on task
- described the frontline life in a true, faithful, and touching manner that has become iconic when it comes to war literature
It was Hemingway’s conscious decision to go over the ocean and see the war. Yes, it used to be romanticised. Yes, he probably could not imagine how terrible it can be. Yes, he might want to prove something to himself or to others by getting involved in the war, or to find something special to write about. Hemingway was a great observer and sure, an outstanding writer
BUT
let’s make a little step back now. He could never know what it means to be a child at war, or a soldier in a trench, or to have your native town under fire, or to mobilise to literally defend your family. These and many other experiences with all related feelings were part of life for local soldiers and could only become a plot for Hemingway. We are by no means aiming to diminish Hemingway’s contributions to wartime and literature of the 20th century, nor are we the first to look at it from such perspective. For instance, for a modern soldier and writer from Ukraine Artur Dron', the approach has resulted in his own book about his own stories from the frontline Hemingway Knows Nothing. And while omitted on the cover, it goes from the text and is always added by the author in a commentary, “about the war in Ukraine and what it means to be a soldier here.”
Hemingway saw no good in letting the reader inside an author’s personality – and it might be absolutely reasonable from his perspective. Everybody was part of a common system, shared same or similar norms, could generally understand each other's motives with no extra effort. And as for us who now celebrate 100 hundred years from the writer’s first literary success, aren’t we entering the time when reviewing the context which the writer was part of makes more sense than omitting it for the sake of minimalism?
For more
about Ernest Hemingway: Hemingway LTD
about Artur Dron', his experiences and vision of war literature: the interview by The Ukrainians Media
The materials are a publication of Also Matters and have not been fully or partially licensed, approved, sponsored, or endorsed by any person or entity.
[=EX1] minimalist writing technique which suggests intentional omission of details and explicit explanations so that the deeper meaning of a story stays beneath the surface.