January/Hemingway Book: 'A Farewell to Arms'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papayahed

The riding crop did seem oddly out of place when it was first mentioned.

I was wondering about the priest myself, was he an actual person or was he made up to be the "opposite". It doesn't seem to me that the priest and Rinaldi are opposites, just Different priorities....maybe.

---

The riding crop as a symbol seems heavy handed. What is she doing carrying it around? She doesn't have a horse. It does seem odd too; not one of the finer points of the novel.

I think they are a kind of opposites:

Rinaldi: experienced; surgeon, dealing with grim biological matters; from the city, I believe; visits prostitutes; thinks of women for biological needs, to put it in a nice way; atheist.

Priest: innocence; deals with metaphysical things; from the country; celibate; thinks the best of people; obviously not an atheist.

So that brings us to Frederic Henry and his relationship with Catherine. At first he's no different than Rinaldi and could be seen as following in his footsteps. Here's a quick scene from the end of chapter 5:

...Rinaldi was lying on his bed. He looked at me.
"So you make progress with Miss Barkley?"
"We are friends."
"You have that pleasant air of a dog in heat."
I did not understand the word.
"Of a what?"
He explained.
"You," I said "have that pleasant air of a dog who--"
"Stop it," he said. "In a little while we would say insulting things." He laughed.
"Good-night," I said.
"Good-night, little puppy."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Rinaldi: experienced; surgeon, dealing with grim biological matters; from the city, I believe; visits prostitutes; thinks of women for biological needs, to put it in a nice way; atheist.

Priest: innocence; deals with metaphysical things; from the country; celibate; thinks the best of people; obviously not an atheist.

---

Last night I was thinking that these 2 were perhaps examples of the different parts of Henry. He did claim to be an athiest yet took the St. Anthony medal.

Or maybe, how Henry was vs. how he will be, this is the one where his injuries left him "altered" correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papayahed

Last night I was thinking that these 2 were perhaps examples of the different parts of Henry. He did claim to be an athiest yet took the St. Anthony medal.

Or maybe, how Henry was vs. how he will be, this is the one where his injuries left him "altered" correct?

---

I'm not sure of the answer. Perhaps you're right. Is Henry more like Rinaldi at the beginning? Probably closer to Rinaldi than the priest. I don't think Rinaldi is capable of love. Typically when an author does presents two characters like this he's presenting alternative paths for the central character. But what happens is he chooses neither. His relationship becomes more than hormonal. He falls in love with her. Some key sections:

The end of chapter 7:
"I went to the door and suddenly I felt lonely and empty. I had treated seeing Catherine very lightly, I had gotten somewhat drunk and had nearly forgotten to come but when I could not see her there I was feeling lonely and hollow."

And then toward the end of chapter 11, the priest says:
"Yes," he[the priest] said. You do. What you tell me about in the nights. That is not love. That is only passion and lust. When you love you wish to do things for. You wish to sacrifice for. You wish to serve."

And then at the end (why are all his key moments at the end of chapters?) of chapter 14:
"She went out. God knows I had not wanted to fall in love with her. I had not wanted to fall in love with any one. But God knows I had and I lay on the bed in the room of the hospital in Milan and all sorts of things went through my head but I felt wonderful..."

Has he been pursuaded by the priest? It seems to me he didn't have much of a choice. Love overtook him rather than choosing.

I found the riding crop absurd in that scene and somewhat in the book; especially because it was sent to Catherine by her dead fiance's family... It is not something you would like to have of your dead ex, is it? And it is surely not something you would like to carry with you during the war when you are a nurse working in a hospital. I am not sure that it symbolizes chivalry but I thought it might be suggestive about Catherine nature maybe but I don't think I have read enough to make any comments on that yet (Chapter 12).

I think the Priest and Rinaldi are reflecting different sides of Henry. It doesn't seem like he becomes more like the Priest later on to me. From the very beginning, he seems to be the only one who is 'in touch' with the priest and this is emphasised over and over again during the idle banters in the mess. He communicates with him in a way others do/cannot. And he is also able to talk and share things with Rinaldi too who seems to be interested in... lighter things in life.

I think by offering these two different characters as Henry's friends, Hemingway is trying to show what he is capable of; that there is more to him than mere womanising.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

I'm not sure of the answer. Perhaps you're right.

---

+

that's why math is sooo much better. :nod:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papayahed

+

that's why math is sooo much better. :nod:

---

Only if it doesn't include differential equations! Calculus and below was good. Beyond calc, I lost it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

I think by offering these two different characters as Henry's friends, Hemingway is trying to show what he is capable of; that there is more to him than mere womanising.

---

Let's not read too much into this (as I'm sure Hemingway would advise.) It's likely Hemingway was merely describing different real people he knew during the war in Italy. In military life the troops tend to practice one-upmanship and belittle each other for becoming too serious with one woman.

Just got the book youve certinaly charged ahead wiuth this one I guess that means I'd better get cracking if I want to keep up

:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starrwriter

Let's not read too much into this (as I'm sure Hemingway would advise.) It's likely Hemingway was merely describing different real people he knew during the war in Italy. In military life the troops tend to practice one-upmanship and belittle each other for becoming too serious with one woman.

---

Star - The characters are very carefully selected and drawn out in a particular way. There are themes Hem is after. These are not just randomly selected characters. Hem would not have built the reputation as a great writer if he didn't. If it seems realistic, that's a credit to Hemmingway's writing. Although their are elements of autobiagraphy here, it is not an autobiagraphy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starrwriter

Let's not read too much into this (as I'm sure Hemingway would advise.) It's likely Hemingway was merely describing different real people he knew during the war in Italy. In military life the troops tend to practice one-upmanship and belittle each other for becoming too serious with one woman.

---

I don't think trying to understand the main character in a novel is 'reading too much into' things. Like Virgil pointed out, there is a reason why Henry is presented in a certain way and the people around him help establish certain things about him and/or the background to the story.

I mean if we had suggested that the sole reason Hemingway wrote this book was that his heart was broken by an English nurse and that he killed the female lead in the book because of he could not handle this rejection, then maybe we would be reading too much into things! ;) :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

I mean if we had suggested that the sole reason Hemingway wrote this book was that his heart was broken by an English nurse and that he killed the female lead in the book because of he could not handle this rejection, then maybe we would be reading too much into things!

---

Although it wasn't his sole reason, he was heart-broken and he didn't handle the rejection well at all. (He thought he kept seeing the nurse in crowds for years afterward.)

Killing off an old girlfriend in fiction can be quite therapeutic. I've done it more than once myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starrwriter

Killing off an old girlfriend in fiction can be quite therapeutic. I've done it more than once myself.

---

I am sure... In fiction, in real life... We all know the line gets blurred at times, Starr...

:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

I am sure... In fiction, in real life... We all know the line gets blurred at times, Starr...

---

What have you heard?

I admit nothing. I deny everything.

At this point, I'd like to ask what the women especially on forum reading the novel think of Catherine. Feminist have criticized Hemingway for his portrayal of her. They find her submissive and simple. I tend to agree. As to submissive, well, that's Hemingway's perogative as the author, but I do think she's got no depth to her charcater. She strikes me as two dimensional, a stock figure. And for a major character to be so two dimensional I think it takes away from the novel. What do others think?

I agree with you, Virgil. Not that I'm too crazy about Rinaldi (those "baby's" are wearing on my nerves!), but Catherine has been driving me up a wall. I find her to be a chattery airhead with nothing to say. Not just that, though. She doesn't seem like the sort of person who's seen war. She's like an airy little debutante, instead of an experienced war nurse (V.A.D., more accurately). She deals with the victims of WWI artillery—notoriously gruesome injuries,—and it hasn't sobered her or made her think more deeply. Perhaps, in an era where everyone was sobered by war, that would have seemed attractive; innocence and vitality despite the horrors of war. But, really, come on now...

Quote:

---

"How many have you—how do you say it?—stayed with?"
"None."
"You're lying to me."
"Yes."
"It's all right. Keep right on lying to me. That's what I want you to do. Were they pretty?"
"I never stayed with anyone."
"That's right. Were they very attractive?"
"I don't know anything about it."

...

"I'll say just what you wish and I'll do what you wish and then you will never want any other girls, will you?" She looked at me very happily. "I'll do what you want and say what you want and then I'll be a great success, won't I?"
"Yes."
"What would you like me to do now that you're all ready?"
"Come to the bed again."
"All right. I'll come."

---

What the **** kind of twisted nonsense is that? I can see someone wanting to spend the night with that, but who could fall in love with it? Hemingway's ideal woman is a life-size Chatty Cathy doll. A Chatty-Cathy blow-up doll. I wonder if this is where they got the name for the doll? :p

Miss Gage seems slightly more sane. I wish we'd gotten to know her better. I like Miss Gage and I like the priest. They seem quiet and level-headed.