The Sun Also Rises: Does it have a point?

[ktm5124]

I just finished Ernest Hemingway's novel A Sun Also Rises, and while I moderately enjoyed it, I fail to see a point. I do not expect every novel to have a point, message, moral, etc., but I am curious whether other people see a point to the novel.

By the end of the book, Lady Brett Ashley has left Pedro Romero and is planning to return to Mike. In effect she is returning to square one; over the course of the whole novel she is planning to marry Mike, and by the end of it she is back in the same predicament -- planning to marry Mike, but not taking any steps toward making it happen.

Brett hasn't seemed to make much progress; she is tarrying with affairs. And as for Jacob? He is in love with Brett, and he is not really trying to find anyone else. One may recall that he had a brief night out with a pretty girl named Edna, whom he ended up leaving behind at a party in order to have some wine with Brett.

Not only are Brett and Jacob stagnant in their love lives; really just about every character in the novel makes no progress in his or her love life. Love just doesn't happen in this novel - it only dissipates.

So what does it mean when at the end of the novel Brett and Jacob are alone together in a taxi? What barrier is preventing them from getting married? (Is it Jacob's lack of a penis?) What do we learn about life from this novel? The characters are frivolous with their time, money, and relationships, and they just drift on at the end in unknown paths.

[LitNetIsGreat]

The characters are frivolous with their time, money, and relationships, and they just drift on at the end in unknown paths.

Well maybe that's the point?

For me this is one of Hemingway's best novels along with A Moveable Feast.

[ktm5124]

If the point of the novel is to depict a generation of expatriates as drifters without a purpose in life... well, that isn't much of a point, and it isn't much to learn from.

Thanks for your two-line response. I found it invaluable...

[LitNetIsGreat]

OK, no problem...

[ktr]

Thanks for your two-line response. I found it invaluable...

nobody owes you a damn thing, bro. i certainly didn't cough up 200,000 dollars to an ivy league school to sit here regurgitating info to a dude that can't comprehend Hemingway.

[WuWei]

Besides the fact that no, not every novel needs to have one clearly recognizable point, I'm afraid the deal with The Sun Also Rises is pretty much that; the strikingly effective narrative of the "Lost Generation", a pre-existentialist tale (if you want to get philosophical with that) of non-directional, morally and spiritually void lives after the horrors of the war, in which geography itself is pretty much devoid of any sentimental content.

Btw, there's few things I hate more than reducing a great book to a simple cliff-notish "point".

[dfloyd]

of the twentieth century, which is demonstrated very well from the quote from Ecclesiastes, I would suggest you stick to novels such as those in the Harry Potter series which have a more readily observable plot and characterization.

Most general readers of the Hemingway novel misunderstand the work as romanticizing on disilluisionment or 'lostness'. Hemingway said, "The point of the book to me is that the earth abideth forever .... I didn't mean for the book to be a hollow or bitter satire but a damn tragedy with the earth abiding for ever as a hero."

There is irony between the quotation from Gertrude Stein and the Ecclisiastes pronouncement. Hemingway thought most readers would see this and realize "the lost generation" phrase was a false expression of the novel's value system. But readers in 1926 didn't see it and, obviously, presnt day readers don't either.

[ktm5124]

nobody owes you a damn thing, bro. i certainly didn't cough up 200,000 dollars to an ivy league school to sit here regurgitating info to a dude that can't comprehend Hemingway.

Very mature. I hope you're still in college because you have a lot left to learn...


Besides the fact that no, not every novel needs to have one clearly recognizable point, I'm afraid the deal with The Sun Also Rises is pretty much that; the strikingly effective narrative of the "Lost Generation", a pre-existentialist tale (if you want to get philosophical with that) of non-directional, morally and spiritually void lives after the horrors of the war, in which geography itself is pretty much devoid of any sentimental content.

Btw, there's few things I hate more than reducing a great book to a simple cliff-notish "point".

Well geography is certainly not devoid of sentimental content. Spain is a very "violent" country -- not only is this violence depicted in the bullfighting, but also in the tensions between characters that reach a boiling point in Spain. France is much more peaceful, and it is not until the novel heads out to Spain that we get the fighting, the breakups, etc.

The novel does depict characters with morally and spiritually void lives, but to leave it at that does not satisfy me as a reader. I started this thread because, at the end of the novel, I felt unsatisfied as a reader; I feel I did not learn anything, was not struck by an aesthetic...

I am not trying to reduce the novel to a "cliff-notish point". I am merely trying to find satisfaction as a reader.

[ktm5124]

of the twentieth century, which is demonstrated very well from the quote from Ecclesiastes, I would suggest you stick to novels such as those in the Harry Potter series which have a more readily observable plot and characterization.

Most general readers of the Hemingway novel misunderstand the work as romanticizing on disilluisionment or 'lostness'. Hemingway said, "The point of the book to me is that the earth abideth forever .... I didn't mean for the book to be a hollow or bitter satire but a damn tragedy with the earth abiding for ever as a hero."

There is irony between the quotation from Gertrude Stein and the Ecclisiastes pronouncement. Hemingway thought most readers would see this and realize "the lost generation" phrase was a false expression of the novel's value system. But readers in 1926 didn't see it and, obviously, presnt day readers don't either.

Well I am torn between the helpfulness of your post and the insult I have to suffer. Pointing to the Ecclesiastes quote was helpful, and so was offering the Hemingway quote.

However, the insult was immature, and I have plenty of indications in my life that I am a competent college reader. In the future, please offer your good advice and withhold the immature comments.

[deep blue day]

TSAR interests me because it realistically depicts the consequences of leading a life devoid of values and trascendental purpose. Being also artistically groundbreaking, I see a lot to like in this novel. The mentioned theme pervades much of Hemingway's work -- men and women seeking meaning in the thrills provided by an adventuresome and self-destructive lifestyle, failing more often than not. Much like the author himself.

[ktm5124]

TSAR interests me because it realistically depicts the consequences of leading a life devoid of values and trascendental purpose. Being also artistically groundbreaking, I see a lot to like in this novel. The mentioned theme pervades much of Hemingway's work -- men and women seeking meaning in the thrills provided by an adventuresome and self-destructive lifestyle, failing more often than not. Much like the author himself.

This is very interesting. And you can draw parallels in how the characters lead their lives and how the Spanish take thrill in the fighting of the bulls -- destructive, devoid of purpose, leading to the loss of human life. Being an aficionado himself, Hemingway's own value system is at stake. You suggest this yourself.

I see this is your first post. I hope you continue posting on these forums.

[ktr]

Very mature. I hope you're still in college because you have a lot left to learn...

I believe your comment to be rather hypocritical and indicative of a victimized "why me?" personality. The impression you made with your sarcastic little quip was rather poor, taken in conjunction with your less than thoughtful original post you might have expected a negative reaction.

[deep blue day]

This is very interesting. And you can draw parallels in how the characters lead their lives and how the Spanish take thrill in the fighting of the bulls -- destructive, devoid of purpose, leading to the loss of human life. Being an aficionado himself, Hemingway's own value system is at stake. You suggest this yourself.

I see this is your first post. I hope you continue posting on these forums.

Although not an aficionado myself, I don't see bullfighting as 'destructive, devoid of purpose'. Bullfighters risk their integrity in the ring for a higher purpose: the exaltation of courage and aesthetic beauty.

[ktm5124]

I believe your comment to be rather hypocritical and indicative of a victimized "why me?" personality. The impression you made with your sarcastic little quip was rather poor, taken in conjunction with your less than thoughtful original post you might have expected a negative reaction.

You once again attack me... can you stop it, please?

The reason I made that sarcastic response is because I do not appreciate the ten-word insubstantial reply. I find it bordering on disrespectful. My initial post was not less-than-thoughtful, and I expect a thoughtful post to be answered by a thoughtful reply.

[dfloyd]

I certainly didn't mean to insult you but to point out that if you don't understand a novel, ask questions without criticizing a novel most have found to be of superior artistic merit. Hemingway's writing is simplistic, but his thoughts behind his work are not. Lady Brett tells Jake at novels end, "We could have had such a damned good time together." And Jake replies, "Isn't it pretty to think so." In this brief exchange, Hemingway is telling us that regardless of circumstances, Jake's losing his 'Cojones', Lady Brett woould have turned out the same. This book, which at first seems simplistic, is, in fact, one of the most complex novels to appear after WWI.

It is not a novel about a 'lost generation'. Hemingway didn't consider himself a part of a 'lost generation'. He knew Stein's phrase came from her criticism of her auto mechanic.

[ktm5124]

Although not an aficionado myself, I don't see bullfighting as 'destructive, devoid of purpose'. Bullfighters risk their integrity in the ring for a higher purpose: the exaltation of courage and aesthetic beauty.

There is definitely an open dialogue in the novel regarding the value of bullfighting. On one hand Hemingway makes sure to include the civilian who is gorged through the chest in running ahead of the bulls. In deciding to give the victim a wife and a children, one could say that Hemingway is admitting to the senseless death of civilians that accompanies San Fermin. At the same time, he does exalt the sport to an art, so one can only say that Hemingway approaches the question with an open mind.

I think there is also a way to read the novel in which Jacob is trying to retrieve his lost masculinity in the spectacle of the bulls... Perhaps now that the war is over, it is only through bullfighting, and similar dangerous manly activities, that men can prove themselves men. In this way the holiday of San Fermin can be seen as a ritual recreation of the war -- a medium for a man to express himself that was lost when the war ended.

[deep blue day]

There is definitely an open dialogue in the novel regarding the value of bullfighting. On one hand Hemingway makes sure to include the civilian who is gorged through the chest in running ahead of the bulls. In deciding to give the victim a wife and a children, one could say that Hemingway is admitting to the senseless death of civilians that accompanies San Fermin. At the same time, he does exalt the sport to an art, so one can only say that Hemingway approaches the question with an open mind.

I think there is also a way to read the novel in which Jacob is trying to retrieve his lost masculinity in the spectacle of the bulls... Perhaps now that the war is over, it is only through bullfighting, and similar dangerous manly activities, that men can prove themselves men. In this way the holiday of San Fermin can be seen as a ritual recreation of the war -- a medium for a man to express himself that was lost when the war ended.

Going by Fitzgerald's famous quote, Hemingway's generation was "a new generation grown up to find all Gods dead, all wars fought, all faiths in man shaken." Trascendence is easily found in war: sacrificing oneself for the higher good (that of the nation, and indirectly for your family and loved ones). In the post-war period warriors had to search for meaning elsewhere.

[Brad Coelho]

KTM,
There’s nothing wrong w/ asking such a fundamental question about any book, classic or not. If it didn't strike you w/ profundity, well then that hardly makes you less of a literary scholar ;) I think Hemingway's prose was a necessary paradigm shift, but I tend to find it limiting from an aesthetic standpoint. Discipline is important, yet too much handcuffing to any creative process can render your work suffocated.

The excesses of the expats in TSAR were in stark contrast to Hemingway's prose, and this template paved the way for Farewell to Arms (as did his less than 3 dimensional portrayals of women- from Brit to Catherine Barkley). The hyperbolic inebriation does render you w/ an almost parallel numbness as a reader...but Jake's literal impotence, paralleled w/ the metaphorical impotence of other characters, tended to shape the conceit from my point of view. In spite of each man's intentions on conjuring a meaningful relationship w/ Brit, who was coveted by all, their efforts were likely to yield similar 'isn't it nice to think so' conclusions. Superficial desires for a superficial symbol, leaving you dry-mouthed, hungover & wandering the country for relief of headache.

[Virgil]

At the heart of the novel is Romero's character and Jake's Roman Catholicism. If you understand how that contrasts with the frivilousness of the lost generation, then you will understand the novel.

[LitNetIsGreat]

The reason I made that sarcastic response is because I do not appreciate the ten-word insubstantial reply. I find it bordering on disrespectful. My initial post was not less-than-thoughtful, and I expect a thoughtful post to be answered by a thoughtful reply.

I am sorry you considered my reply “insubstantial” – I thought it was a most wise response from a less than wise sounding title and surmising. I do not want to get petty, for I am well above all of that nonsense, but your searching for a point seemed to go against your understanding that a novel doesn’t need one in the first place?!? So why ask the question?

I also don’t understand your disappointment regarding the development (or lack of) of the relationships within the novel. Are you trying to argue that a lack of linear development in this area makes the novel inadequate in some way? That you were disappointed that they all didn’t live happily ever after or that they didn’t end their respective love interests in a tragic suicide pack? Again, that line of reasoning left me a little bemused...

What’s the point of the novel?

You could respond with - what’s the point in any art? What’s the point in this painting or that sculpture? For me one of the points is what we feel when we interact with art - the aesthetic experience it gives us for that moment or forever.

This novel left me in a most wonderful mood of colour. It gave to a feeling of energy, excitement, beauty, friendship – it gave to me an atmosphere of warmth which still warms me today. On another note I found the prose style all but perfectly suited to the attitude of the novel itself, I felt it to be in perfect accord with the flow and feeling of the novel.

Apparently it didn’t do this for you in any way. So what? That is not how literature works. Why should people have to go around defending their own personal experiences anyway?

So when you said this:


The characters are frivolous with their time, money, and relationships, and they just drift on at the end in unknown paths.

And I said this:


Well maybe that's the point?

I think that a most wise reply to a statement that seems to suggest that there is anything at all wrong in being frivolous with time, money or relationships at all. It sounds a bloody good idea to me!

[ktm5124]

I like to either "learn something" from a novel, or be put into an "aesthetic bliss". On finishing TSAR I felt like I had achieved neither, and so I created this thread to see if I could benefit from discussion.

And I have benefited. It was not enough for me to see a depiction of empty people -- people who are morally, spiritually, romantically and/or monetarily bankrupt. I wanted explanations why, and to see if any characters went against the grain. In thinking over the novel and discussing it I found some explanations. And now I feel like I have gained a lot from TSAR.

[Rores28]

nobody owes you a damn thing, bro. i certainly didn't cough up 200,000 dollars to an ivy league school to sit here regurgitating info to a dude that can't comprehend Hemingway.

Was this post a joke?

[ktr]

Was this post a joke?

I don't owe you an explanation.


(see what i did there?)

[keilj]

I like to either "learn something" from a novel, or be put into an "aesthetic bliss". On finishing TSAR I felt like I had achieved neither, and so I created this thread to see if I could benefit from discussion.

And I have benefited. It was not enough for me to see a depiction of empty people -- people who are morally, spiritually, romantically and/or monetarily bankrupt. I wanted explanations why, and to see if any characters went against the grain. In thinking over the novel and discussing it I found some explanations. And now I feel like I have gained a lot from TSAR.

If I like the author's style, or prose, then I can read a book by them even if the book does not have some big point to it. For example, some might argue that Steinbeck's Sweet Thursday was a book about nothing, but I enjoyed it because I like Steinbeck's writing and I like most of the things he has written, even when they are not slam-dunk great and do not have mass appeal. On the other hand, if I am not crazy about the writer's style or tone, I can get annoyed at a book that seems to ramble or have no point.


Also, many great books (and great art) contain in them gems of truth. So even if the story does not draw to some climactic point, you can get a lot out of it in its depiction of the realities of human feelings and conditions. One example is the HBO show Deadwood, which many hated becasue it was profane and it may not have had a big, central point. But for those looking, it had moment after moment of truths about the human condition, human nature, how we treat one another. For me, if a writer can depict those things skillfully and truthfully, that is the most enjoyable art

I haven't read Sun Also Rises lately, but in some of Hemingway's other works, such as Winner Take Nothing and Islands in the Stream - it is his grasp of these small but important truths that I love about those books

[ktm5124]

If I like the author's style, or prose, then I can read a book by them even if the book does not have some big point to it. For example, some might argue that Steinbeck's Sweet Thursday was a book about nothing, but I enjoyed it because I like Steinbeck's writing and I like most of the things he has written, even when they are not slam-dunk great and do not have mass appeal. On the other hand, if I am not crazy about the writer's style or tone, I can get annoyed at a book that seems to ramble or have no point.


Also, many great books (and great art) contain in them gems of truth. So even if the story does not draw to some climactic point, you can get a lot out of it in its depiction of the realities of human feelings and conditions. One example is the HBO show Deadwood, which many hated becasue it was profane and it may not have had a big, central point. But for those looking, it had moment after moment of truths about the human condition, human nature, how we treat one another. For me, if a writer can depict those things skillfully and truthfully, that is the most enjoyable art

I haven't read Sun Also Rises lately, but in some of Hemingway's other works, such as Winner Take Nothing and Islands in the Stream - it is his grasp of these small but important truths that I love about those books

I never claimed that a novel should have a point to it. Read my posts carefully.

My friend actually recommended the show Deadwood to me recently. The way you describe it makes me really want to watch it :)

[Brad Coelho]

If I like the author's style, or prose, then I can read a book by them even if the book does not have some big point to it. For example, some might argue that Steinbeck's Sweet Thursday was a book about nothing, but I enjoyed it because I like Steinbeck's writing and I like most of the things he has written, even when they are not slam-dunk great and do not have mass appeal. On the other hand, if I am not crazy about the writer's style or tone, I can get annoyed at a book that seems to ramble or have no point.


Also, many great books (and great art) contain in them gems of truth. So even if the story does not draw to some climactic point, you can get a lot out of it in its depiction of the realities of human feelings and conditions. One example is the HBO show Deadwood, which many hated becasue it was profane and it may not have had a big, central point. But for those looking, it had moment after moment of truths about the human condition, human nature, how we treat one another. For me, if a writer can depict those things skillfully and truthfully, that is the most enjoyable art

I haven't read Sun Also Rises lately, but in some of Hemingway's other works, such as Winner Take Nothing and Islands in the Stream - it is his grasp of these small but important truths that I love about those books

I never thought I'd read through works that not only lack a compelling plot but also any sense of lucidity or organization...then I met the words of Henry Miller & William Burrough's Naked Lunch. Granted I don't attack them the way I would a linear, substance aggregating work (I tend to nibble, read them backwards, then forwards...then scan the middle); but my appreciation of their deconstructed literature was only attained through the initial appeal I found in their prose. Then the hook, line & you know what followed.

[keilj]

My friend actually recommended the show Deadwood to me recently. The way you describe it makes me really want to watch it :)


cool - here is a small nibble:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2Q7YRDL90E

[Babak Movahed]

Alright first off dude don't mind that ktr guy, he's a dick and an *******.

and regarding The Sun Also Rises, even if you didn't recognize a point to the novel, you can at least admire Hemingway's unique style. He has a distinct way of presenting one with so much scattered ideas and explication in the beginning of a novel then as the novel progresses he funnels all that down to what he wants you to see, with his use of dialogue and narration. You shouldn't read this novel with the intention of finding a meaning but rather it should be read for its form and style. The better one understands form and style of a book the easier it becomes to understand the content.

You're entitled to your opinion but I think you should try to approach literature with a broader sensibility. (No offense)

[dfloyd]

In 1958, while serving with the USAF in Japan, I was introduced to Hemingway trhrough the movie of The Sun Also Rises. I saw it in a Japanese theater with Japanese subtititles. At that time the Japanese loved American movies so the theatre was crowded with Japanese who cheered on the bulls at Pamplona. The movie is flawed - most movies are - but as I later found out, it follows the book quite closely. The actors never went to Pamplona. The bull fight scenes were shot in Mexico against a much darker skinned people with black hair than the blonde natives of Pamplona. Also, the actors were much older than the crew in Hemingway's book would have been.

The movie stars Tyrone Power as Jack Barnes, Mel Ferrer as Robert Cohn, Eddie Albert as Jake's fishing buddy, Erroll Flynn as Mike Campbell, and the beauteous Ava Gardner as Lady Brett Ashley. Now when I read the novel - I've read it at least seven times - I can still picture all these dead actors as they speak to me through the book. The last to go was Mell Ferrer who was over eighty when he passed away. He is remembered primarily as Audrey Hepburn's first husband.

After seeing the movie, I found the book at the base library, reading it for the first time. I have read the remainder of Hemingway's books once, but I've read The Sun Also Rises many times. I have the collected works of Hemingway in 19 or so volumes, and I was offered recently $400 plus for them. I offered to reduce the price if I could kep one volume, that of The Sun Also Rises.The buyer wouldn't agree to that, so I still have the nineteen volumes.

This work of fiction is not entirely a work of fiction. In 1925, Hemingway and his wife Hadley went to Pamplona. They joined a group of expatriates which included Hemingway's friend Harold Loeb, who was a Jew and the model for Robert Cohn. An English lady named Twysdale, or something similar, was paid a lot of attention by Loeb. Hemingway also became enraptured with the lady who had left her husband. Then Hemingway found out that Loeb had slept with Twysdale in Paris, and this led to a near fight between Hemingway and Loeb.

Realizing that this was the stuff that novels are made of, Hemingway returned to Paris and wrote his book. It always amuses me how critics and professors point out all the symbolism of this novel. Hemingway was just telling a story, an interesting story he had lived through. I suppose that critics and professors have to invent symbolism to justify their existence. I've always loved the book, and most, if not all of the symbolism, is not true. It is just a good tale about some English and American expatriates living in Paris. It doesn't have to have a point. The story is good enough to stand on its own merit.

[ktm5124]

Realizing that this was the stuff that novels are made of, Hemingway returned to Paris and wrote his book. It always amuses me how critics and professors point out all the symbolism of this novel. Hemingway was just telling a story, an interesting story he had lived through. I suppose that critics and professors have to invent symbolism to justify their existence. I've always loved the book, and most, if not all of the symbolism, is not true. It is just a good tale about some English and American expatriates living in Paris. It doesn't have to have a point. The story is good enough to stand on its own merit.

This is a rather ridiculous statement that reflects poorly on yourself. To categorically insult literary critics in such a manner - "critics and professors have to invent symbolism to justify their existence" - is an absurd black-and-white blanket statement. The plot of a novel is a valuable asset, but a story tells more than just its plot. A novel can be read for just its plot, but I think the reader is provided a richer experience when taking all the features of a novel, both textual and subtextual, into consideration.

To repeat myself for the one hundred and first time -- I do not claim that a novel should have a point. But if this novel did have a point, I wanted to know what you guys thought it was. Please, people, utilize your powers of scrutiny and read my posts carefully. Stop it with the heroic "a novel need not have a point" mantra!

Allow me to quote my original post:

I do not expect every novel to have a point, message, moral, etc., but I am curious whether other people see a point to the novel.

An example of a novel that I do not think has a point, and is one of my favorite novels ever, is Lolita.

[dfloyd]

I wasn't responding to your post, but telling my own story about my afilliation with the Hemingway novel. Frankly, I had forgoten about your comments. You'll see that I didn't refer to any of your previous posts, and I wont.

[keilj]

To repeat myself for the one hundred and first time -- I do not claim that a novel should have a point.

To be fair, the title of your thread is "xxx, does it have a point" :cheers2:

[ktr]

An example of a novel that I do not think has a point, and is one of my favorite novels ever, is Lolita.

lol.........................

[kelby_lake]

Pale Fire doesn't and it was great :D

[kelby_lake]

I really liked The Sun Also Rises and whilst it may not have symbolism in the way that The Great Gatsby has symbolism, there seems to be significance in the parts from real life Hemingway chose- otherwise, why would he bother? There isn't that much of a story; it's more about how the characters interact with each other and the places they visit.

[damondarkwalker]

If you get your unit blown off in a war, you won't get the girl.
:crazy:

[Brad Coelho]

If you get your unit blown off in a war, you won't get the girl.
:crazy:
And a sharp point it is :cool: