Argument: Ernest Hemingway has a unique writing style, and if he did not properly execute them, they would not have been as successful. He gives very little characterization; he instead uses dialogue to give life and personality to his characters. Because of this the reader was able to make their own assumptions about people and major events, which allowed the story to be more relatable and for the reader to find connections to their own life. Another way he portrays his characters is through imagery. He uses a lot of pathetic fallacy to connect the environment to moods of characters and to events taking place. Evidence: "despite the thorough description of the action, the reader is left to grapple with the complex issues of suicide, contract murder, and desperation, because the emotive details are not explained in any way."(O'Donnell). "Hemingway's male characters are often convincing and full of life"(O'Donnell). "In A Farewell to Arms the rain emerges as a glaring symbol of death early on and is often repeated, even told to us by Catherine Barkley who said to Frederic Henry that she saw them together "dead in the rain."(O'Donnell). "Many of his most memorable scenes are descriptions of nature, passion, cafés, eating, drinking, fishing…"(O'Donnell). Thoughts: This article was very helpful, because it touched on many points that I am writing my paper on. It analyzed Hemingway's style, and how his unique/different way of writing worked and what the purpose was behind it. It's interesting to see how Hemingway was able to create such strong characters and emotions without being up front and obvious about them.

Argument: Bruce Reeves points out that although "To Have and Have Not" is not one of Hemingway's better-known novels, it has had an insight on issues during the time it was written, and brought with it a new form of writing. The main theme is dealing with pain and hardships, overcoming them to move on with life and existence. Hemingway portrays his own personal struggles and life experiences through his work. Often times his characters experience and go through similar things he did. Evidence: "It was considered a forerunner of the "tough guy" school of fiction, but it has come to be seen more as a unique work…"(Reeves). "To Have and Have Not is arguably his one book in which the sum of the parts does not equal the individual fragments."(Reeves). "He assumes that everyone is equally alone."(Reeves). "Harry Morgan with relentless energy from one situation to another, until he is cornered with no hope of escape."(Reeves). Thoughts: Reeves summarizes the novel and describes the characters to show the main themes and meaning of the novel. I have also found that there are many correlations between Hemingway's characters from one book to another, such as how they act and their personalities. The characters are put in difficult situations that challenge their emotional strength. They all seem to know something bad is going to happen to them in the end.

Argument: The article was proving that Farewell to Arms is a tragedy. It was not written with the same structure of a traditional tragedy, so it has been argued on weather or not it is. The critic claims that the novel is because of Catherine's death. Others say that her death was pointless and uncalled for, but the critic points out that her death was part of the tragic plot. Hemingway constructs a unique relationship between Catherine and Frederic so you have sympathy toward them so he can create a tragic emotion in the end. Evidence: "Hemingway has fashioned a new form of tragedy in which the hero acts not mistakenly but supremely well, and suffers a doom which is not directly caused by his actions at all. The belief that life is a tragedy, lip itself, has become the backbone for a new literary structure." (Merrill). "…in A Farewell to Arms, as in any tragic work, we are made to feel that the hero's doom is inevitable. If the reader doubts that Hemingway has achieved this sense of tragic inevitability, let him consider whether the book could have ended with the lovers' escape to Switzerland rather than Catherine's death." (Merrill). Thoughts: Hemingway created a different style that no one had ever tried before making it open for argument. Merrill provides the reader with a detailed background and analysis of A Farewell to Arms, which supports and proves his claim to be right. He gives insight into who Hemingway was, and why he wrote the novel in a nontraditional manner. By proving his understanding of the novel I was able to see connections to what he was saying and what happened in the story. I think that because his analysis was so in depth it was hard to find a way to disagree.