Hemingway and Gender Conflict, Essay Example

Hemingway’s short stories “Cat in the Rain”, “Hills like White Elephants”, and “End of Something” all contain elements of gender conflict, in which the relationship between man and woman constitute the fundamental tension of the narrative. Concomitantly, it is nevertheless difficult to ascertain Hemingway’s acute views on gender conflict, insofar as his writing style is characterized by a so-called “iceberg theory” of writing, in which omissions to the story are crucial to the explication of the narrative itself. It is precisely such omissions, however, that indicate the nature of gender conflict in these texts: relationships between men and women are often complicated by an omission in the communicative process, as what is left unsaid is very often the source of tension. Thus, some presupposed gender roles assigned to man or woman, for example, particular gender roles of the time period of the composition of the stories (the 1920s) are not the source of this tension. In this regard, Hemingway’s style, particularly in these three texts, can be said to faithfully describe some of the fundamental difficulties in the gender relationship: gender in Hemingway functions as a source of conflict produced by that which is omitted in the relationship. This omission may take various forms: the omission of love or the avoidance of a discussion of a profoundly personal problem. The following essay shall use these three short stories to explore gender conflict in Hemingway’s writing, particularly in terms of his iceberg theory of composition, such that what is left unsaid becomes the fundamental element of gender relationships.

Hemingway’s views on gender and the relationship between man and woman are notorious themes of controversy in the secondary literature. As Eby notes, there is a tendency for readings of Hemingway to function “by stressing his ‘hypermasculinity.’” (5) In other words, this hypermasculinity suggests that Hemingway always takes a masculine point of view in his analysis of gender conflict: it is invariably the woman who is the source of tension. This, however, would seem to be an unfair reading, insofar as one considers the underlying complexity of the relationships that Hemingway seeks to portray. In a story such as “End of Something”, the relationship between the man and the woman cannot be said to side with the man, but rather it is his very indecisiveness and ambiguity that determines the nature of their shared tension. For example, the character Marjorie asks her companion, “What’s the matter, Nick?” (“End of Something”, 80), while Nick’s response, “I don’t know” (“End of Something”, 80) is obviously thoroughly ambiguous. If Hemingway were, in fact, a “hypermasculine” writer, one would assume that the character of the man would be the one who is decisive in his actions and his character. Rather, it is the man who cannot answer the direct question of the woman, unable to articulate his own mindset properly. In this regard, Hemingway’s iceberg theory can be considered relevant, as the reader is withheld the reason for Nick’s concern. Further on in the story, Marjorie presses Nick, “What’s really the matter?” (“End of Something”, 81), to which Nick responds after some hesitation “it isn’t fun any more.” (“End of Something”, 81) The male character in Hemingway’s text thus carries the role of the indecisive character, one that can only a muster a response based on “fun”, instead of a more serious reason. Whereas Hemingway’s iceberg theory could be employed to suggest that there is a more fundamental logic to Nick’s behaviour, there is nevertheless a gender conflict present in the story that follows from Nick’s own omission of the problem in the relationship. This may be considered as a typical male character trait, insofar as Nick is unable to articulate his feelings about the relationship; yet at the same time, his somewhat impotent and unserious answer shows that he himself remains in a certain lost and indecisive state. This omission in the communicative process indicates that there is a failure by the man to be decisive and articulate the problems within the relationship, thus leading to an issue of gender conflict.

Such conflict is also apparent in the dialogue between man and woman in the story “Hills like White Elephants.” According to Hemingway’s iceberg theory, the main reason for the dispute seems to be the man urging the female character Jig to have an abortion. The precise nature of the omission here is not crucial: rather, it can be said that there is a certain communicative disconnect between the two characters that repeats itself in Hemingway’s utilization of the iceberg theory of composition. The gender roles here are essentially constituted by the gap in their relationship, as opposed to any specific sexual roles that either character plays. As Pamela Smiley wrties, “Hills Like White Elephants” forces the reader “to recognize both the circular noncommunication of strong gender-linked language differences.” (288) Accordingly, it is noncommunication – that is, an omission – between individuals that creates the respective gender roles, as opposed to the gender roles necessarily leading to noncommunication. For example, the male character says to the female character Jig, “that’s the only thing that bothers us. It’s the only thing that’s made us unhappy” (“Hills like White Elephants”, 212) in reference to the pregnancy. Thus, noncommunication or gender conflict does not follow from male and female sexuality, but rather from a point in the relationship in which something – an omission in the relationship, that of the potential of having a child – creates the problematic. Once again, the woman is decisively strong in the story – its concluding lines are uttered by Jig: “I feel fine,” she said. “There’s nothing wrong with me. I feel fine.” (“Hills like White Elephants”, 214) Whereas this line could be interpreted as the female character hiding her true feelings, this would do a disservice to the strength of the character portrayed throughout the story. That Hemingway concludes the story with her resilient lines supports this interpretation. Accordingly, gender conflict is not created by some pre-assigned roles of decisiveness or strength to either man or woman, but rather arises from an omission within the context of a particular relationship, a break in communication that occurs.

The story “Cat in the Rain” also repeats this motif of conflict between a male and female couple. In this case, there is an absence of love detected by the female character that drives their tension. The story, based around two Americans at a hotel, revolves around a dispute between the man and the woman. The woman notices a cat trapped in the rain and is determined to retrieve it. Here the symbolism is clear for the rest of the story, as the female character is mirrored in the trapped cat. Yet it is the woman who is to rescue the cat, with an inexorable determination: “I’m going down and get that kitty,” the American wife said. “I’ll do it,” her husband offered from the bed. “No I’ll get it. The poor kitty out trying to keep dry under a table.” (“Cat in the Rain”, 129) It is the woman character that is once again decisive, embarking on rescuing the cat herself without assistance from a man. Hence, the tension in the story is not between pre-assigned gender roles, but rather arises because of an omission of something within the relationship that thus creates the gender conflict tension. Once again, Hemingway’s iceberg theory omits the clear reasons for dispute, yet this omission is consistent with the omission within the relationship – the omission of love – that engenders conflict.

Accordingly, Hemingway’s work in these stories can be understood as a portrayal of gender conflict that does not rest on any preconceived or presupposed notions of some ideological, historical or social construction of the roles of a man or a woman. Rather, this conflict results from an absence within the relationship itself that leads to tension. That in a story such as “End of Something” it is the man who feels this absence, or “Cat in the Rain”, a woman, demonstrates that this communicative breakdown is what is crucial for Hemingway in his stories, as opposed to a “hypermasculinity.” Moreover, Hemingway’s iceberg theory of composition, which thrives on omissions from the narrative storyline, compliments the omission that creates the very conflict that grounds each of these narratives.

Works Cited

Eby, Carl P. Hemingway’s Fetishism: Psychoanalysis and the Mirror of Manhood. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1999.

Hemingway, Ernest. “Cat in the Rain.” The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway. New York: Scribner, 1987. pp. 129-131.

Hemingway, Ernest. “End of Something.” The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway. New York: Scribner, 1987. pp. 79-82.

Hemingway, Ernest. “Hills like White Elephants.” The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway. New York: Scribner, 1987. pp. 211-214.

Smiley, Pamela. “Gender-Linked Miscommunication in “Hills like White Elephants.” New Critical Approaches to the Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway. Ed.

Jackson J. Benson. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998. pp. 288-299.