A Farewell To Arms 1971

 This has nothing to do with the Double Barrel Ranch, but it's my blog. (Not following the rules again.) 

 When I was 17 years old, I had to write a critique of "The Style" of a book we had read for 12th grade English class. Even at this age, my iconoclastic tendencies were apparent as I'm sure that 99% of my fellow students were writing approvingly of the famous novel's presentation. I begged to differ:

2 December 1971 "The Style"

"The characters in A Farewell To Arms by Ernest Hemingway are not very active. There are many pages devoted to how Frederic Henry did nothing. How he spent his time in the hospital, how he did nothing in Montreux, how he did nothing while waiting for Catherine to have the baby, etc. There was a lack of action in the book. And there doesn't seem to be much of a reason behind the book, other than to tell a nice (or not so nice) story. There should have been more life to the the novel. Less conversation and more description would also help. Hemingway's style seems to be to let the reader guess who is talking and what the listeners think of the speaker's words. Very seldom did he use the words "Catherine asked" or other identifying and descriptive phrases. Also I searched and searched and I was unable to discover the fate of Barto, one of the guys with the ambulances. He just disappeared from the pages without a word. This is kind of ridiculous. If his style includes such mistakes then he should never have been published. Not once does the book mention anyone's age. His style does not take into account any facts. What year is it? Your guess is as good as mine. 

When writing is vague and uncertain and the story line is weak (the weak love affair), it is boring. If it didn't have a war going on with a threat of danger, the novel just wouldn't hold water. 

A lot of symbolism will escape most people so it is better to be straightforward and be sure the reader understands. That, I believe, is the main object of a novel - to get something across. And if it is vague, shrouded in symbolism, full of guesswork, contains mistakes, and is spotty in action - then it needs a lot of work. I haven't the faintest idea why the book sold."

The teacher's notes on my critique are interesting. She asked why it was important to know people's ages? Why was the year important? People disappear from our life and we never know what happened to them happens in real life. She said maybe I couldn't grasp the story line? And perhaps I didn't know why the book sold because I just didn't appreciate it? Umm, yes?

I guess today, 53 years later, and having never read another work by Ernest Hemingway...I will have to say that the style of including character ages, year, stories with things resolved are all important to me. Is it a teenager or a 40 year old? Is it WW1 or WW2? And to have a meaningful conclusion to a story, etc. are all important to me. The assignment was to critique the style not to highly praise the best selling author like a million others have done. There was no grade indicated on the paper. Today I would have explained that appreciation of "style" is subjective. Maybe I should have left out the last sentence saying I couldn't understand why the book was ever sold? Yes, that was maybe a bit over the top. But give me a break, I was 17...and a budding iconoclast!