Hemingway's Ability
Would Nabokov consider Hemingway to be a "master" author/writer?
Why or why not?
Regardless of Nabokov,
do you consider Hemingway to be a "master" author/writer?
Why or why not?
posted by D. Robin @ 8/29/2008
4 comments
4 Comments:
After re-reading Hemingway’s “Soldier’s Home” and Nabakov’s “Good Readers and Good Writers,” I have found that these two authors have extremely different writing styles. While at first I thought that Nabakov would dismiss Hemingway as a poor writer, I later realized that Hemingway’s story actually fit into Nabakov’s description of good writing. However, in order to effectively answer the question (whether or not Nabakov would consider Hemingway to be a “master” author), it is necessary to first analyze the similarities and differences between Hemingway’s story and Nabakov’s description of a good story.
I will start with the differences, because they are more obvious to the readers, and because these facts are the ones that I originally noticed (causing me to originally believe that Nabakov and Hemingway would not get along well). The main differences between Hemingway’s writing style and Nabakov’s description of one are that Hemingway uses simple words and attempts to show everyday life in his story, while Nabakov seems to favor authors who employ eloquent language and fantastic lies. The fact that Hemingway attempts to simulate reality while Nabakov believes in deception in stories would lead one to believe that the differences between the two author’s writing styles is too great. However, if we look more closely into the both of the texts, we can see how Hemingway fits Nabakov’s description without directly using deceptive writing.
Even though Hemingway is trying to show his audience a realistic picture (conflicting with Nabakov’s belief that writing is all about lies), if we look closely at both texts, we can see that this realistic image is actually deceiving us in a way (thus matching Nabakov’s description). Since the story is attempting to be realistic, the audience begins to believe in it more, regardless of the small lies within the text. Due to this, I believe that instead of viewing Hemingway as an author trying to mimic reality, Nabakov would see him as an author forging a simulacrum of reality that appears to be truth, but is actually its own different world that draws an audience in through its resemblance to reality. This leads me to believe that Nabakov would view Hemingway as a “master” author (the fact that Nabakov stated “There are masterpieces of dry, limpid, organized thought…” [Nabakov 4] also helps).
My opinion on this same question (if Hemingway is a “master” author), is that Hemingway really is a “master” author (and I can explain it much faster than I can explain Nabakov’s opinion). First I must define what I believe a “master” author is; I personally believe that any author who can effectively entertain many people while creating a unique world is a “master” author. Since I am pretty sure that I am not the only person who enjoyed Hemingway’s story (though I could be wrong), he fits my first point. For the second point, I believe that Hemingway did create a unique world; it just appeared extremely similar to the world that we live in. (As a side note: I am sorry that my post is quite long… [I tend to have a side note at the end of most of my comments don’t I?])
Randolph Chua
I can honestly say that I don't believe that Nabokov would consider Hemingway (with ONE "m"!) to be what he would call a master author. Anyone who reads one of Hemingway’s stories could tell that he is a straight forward and pretty basic author throughout the majority of his stories. Due to the fact that he is so basic in his writing style compared to Nabokov who is so in depth with his use of literary devices in his stories I doubt that Nabokov would consider him a master author.
I definitely would consider Hemingway to be a master author solely based on the way he manages to tell a story. It’s not as if he is so blunt when he is writing, but he gets his point out there A LOT quicker than Nabokov manages to do (and Nabokov bothers me for this very reason!). Hemingway is what I would call a more universal author because he is more simplex in his writing, therefore making it easier for different levels to comprehend his stories.
-Brianna Blackshire
I can honestly say that I don't believe that Nabokov would consider Hemingway (with ONE "m"!) to be what he would call a master author. Anyone who reads one of Hemingway’s stories could tell that he is a straight forward and pretty basic author throughout the majority of his stories. Due to the fact that he is so basic in his writing style compared to Nabokov who is so in depth with his use of literary devices in his stories I doubt that Nabokov would consider him a master author.
I definitely would consider Hemingway to be a master author solely based on the way he manages to tell a story. It’s not as if he is so blunt when he is writing, but he gets his point out there A LOT quicker than Nabokov manages to do (and Nabokov bothers me for this very reason!). Hemingway is what I would call a more universal author because he is more simplex in his writing, therefore making it easier for different levels to comprehend his stories.
-Brianna Blackshire
After reading pieces by both Nabakov and Hemmingway, I think it's safe to say that Nabakov would consider Hemingway to be a "master" author. He would feel this way due to the fact that Hemingway incorporates, in “Soldier’s Home”, a lot of what Nabakov has spoken of in “Good Readers and Good Writers”. For example, Nabakov repeats himself over and over in order to make a point. He gets it across any way possible. Hemingway does this same thing, but the difference is the fact the Hemingway is rather blunt about it, while Nabakov is very subtle.
I consider Hemingway to be a very skilled and accomplished author, because, I feel, simply writes better. I feel this way because, I know when I was reading Nabakov’s piece, I struggled to concentrate, and not just stop reading. When I was reading Hemingway, on the other hand, I felt that it was easier to read, understand, and follow. Nabakov spoke of how you have to keep the reader’s attention the from the time they start reading, to time they finish the book, and I felt that he couldn’t accomplish this very well himself. In all honesty, I think that Hemingway fulfilled all of the requirements Nabakov wrote of, better than Nabakov did himself!
Amina Iqbal
Post a Comment
<< Home