mono
05-16-2005, 02:26 PM
In another thread, I mentioned reading this short novel, The Old Man and the Sea, by Ernest Hemingway in a very brief time. In a few words, I found this story absolutely amazing, and I wondered of others' thoughts.
The main character, in a way, feels so comforted by his life at sea, despite his unlucky eighty-four days of catching no fish, yet so rejected by life at land by his peers, not including the young boy who follows and fishes with him, periodically.
The marlin, I believe, somehow attributed to Santiago, the main character, with striking similarities: they both traveled the sea (or la mer) alone, both searching for means of survival, and both carrying themselves with much pride, the large fish, obviously, through a less verbal manner. True, Santiago did express his excitement in his reward for boasting his catch (during his "lucky" eight-fifth day) to his fellow fishermen, and contemplated of how much he could sell the meat resources, but, I believe, he more prized his dignity in treasuring his life at sea, and finally succeeding the big catch he had anticipated for months.
For those who have never read the novel, but intend to, I recommend not to continue reading this message.
For those who have, we know the result: after Santiago's big fight, miles from his home in Havana, he ties the marlin to the side of his second-rate boat (reflecting his poverty) with utmost pride. During his long journey back home, he uses all of his defending weapons on sharks attacking the large, dead fish, who, in turn, consume all of it, excepting the tail, the head, and the cartilage skeleton. The old man, then, returns to his abode, sadly, exhausted, and wounded, retaining only his dignity with no proof.
Hemingway speaks loud, I think, in communicating the great difference between rewards, dividing human dignity from the very common need to prove one's accomplishment to others. The old man certainly could have used the money, in selling the marlin's resources, but he returns from sea with less than he left, having wasted every item on his boat when fighting with the hungry sharks.
With this moral, digging deeper into human instinct, Hemingway, similar to William Golding in Lord of the Flies, emphasizes the instinctive greed involved in all human endeavors. The parents of the young boy forbade him to spend time with Santiago, considering him bad luck for his eighty-four day streak of catching no fish, despite his diligence; while fighting with the marlin for days, the old man prayed to succeed, so as to sell and consume the fish, essential for survival; also during his struggle, a small bird perched on the boat, in the middle of the sea, and Santiago could but pity the bird for his escape from other larger, hunting birds on his return to land; lastly, the fight to the death of the sharks attacking the marlin, also for need of survival.
Hemingway, a devoted hunter and fisherman, would recognize this greed-driven struggle, necessary for life, if anyone knew, I think.
. . .
Well, I just realized how much I have typed. I apologize. :p
Does anyone else have any thoughts on this wonderful piece of art?
The main character, in a way, feels so comforted by his life at sea, despite his unlucky eighty-four days of catching no fish, yet so rejected by life at land by his peers, not including the young boy who follows and fishes with him, periodically.
The marlin, I believe, somehow attributed to Santiago, the main character, with striking similarities: they both traveled the sea (or la mer) alone, both searching for means of survival, and both carrying themselves with much pride, the large fish, obviously, through a less verbal manner. True, Santiago did express his excitement in his reward for boasting his catch (during his "lucky" eight-fifth day) to his fellow fishermen, and contemplated of how much he could sell the meat resources, but, I believe, he more prized his dignity in treasuring his life at sea, and finally succeeding the big catch he had anticipated for months.
For those who have never read the novel, but intend to, I recommend not to continue reading this message.
For those who have, we know the result: after Santiago's big fight, miles from his home in Havana, he ties the marlin to the side of his second-rate boat (reflecting his poverty) with utmost pride. During his long journey back home, he uses all of his defending weapons on sharks attacking the large, dead fish, who, in turn, consume all of it, excepting the tail, the head, and the cartilage skeleton. The old man, then, returns to his abode, sadly, exhausted, and wounded, retaining only his dignity with no proof.
Hemingway speaks loud, I think, in communicating the great difference between rewards, dividing human dignity from the very common need to prove one's accomplishment to others. The old man certainly could have used the money, in selling the marlin's resources, but he returns from sea with less than he left, having wasted every item on his boat when fighting with the hungry sharks.
With this moral, digging deeper into human instinct, Hemingway, similar to William Golding in Lord of the Flies, emphasizes the instinctive greed involved in all human endeavors. The parents of the young boy forbade him to spend time with Santiago, considering him bad luck for his eighty-four day streak of catching no fish, despite his diligence; while fighting with the marlin for days, the old man prayed to succeed, so as to sell and consume the fish, essential for survival; also during his struggle, a small bird perched on the boat, in the middle of the sea, and Santiago could but pity the bird for his escape from other larger, hunting birds on his return to land; lastly, the fight to the death of the sharks attacking the marlin, also for need of survival.
Hemingway, a devoted hunter and fisherman, would recognize this greed-driven struggle, necessary for life, if anyone knew, I think.
. . .
Well, I just realized how much I have typed. I apologize. :p
Does anyone else have any thoughts on this wonderful piece of art?