The purpose of this study was to critically evaluate the aesthetic decisions and theoretical complexity of three of Ernest Hemingway’s most experimental texts: IN OUR TIME, TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT, and THE GARDEN OF EDEN, and to show that the usually maligned Hemingway was an author invested in the avant-garde and in analyzing and dissecting rigid societal rules, not championing them.
Through critical analysis this study examined how Hemingway makes specific aesthetic decisions in order to more clearly examine the disparity between whites and both women and racial minorities in America. The problems that Hemingway makes clear through his art are meant to have a profound effect upon the reader and encourage re-evaluation of societal rules, their purpose, and their fairness to those who are not white, male, and typically in a position of power. The findings demonstrate that Hemingway’s entire oeuvre is open to re-interpretation on the basis of a progressive view of the author.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fiu.edu/oai:digitalcommons.fiu.edu:etd-1874 |
| Date | 01 January 2012 |
| Creators | Riobueno, Michael |
| Publisher | FIU Digital Commons |
| Source Sets | Florida International University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations |
Page generated in 0.0023 seconds