The Titanic

Hemingway is known for his Iceberg Technique in his writing. In this technique, he writes about 10% of the story and leaves the rest for the reader to interpret. The stories are complete, but many parts of the story are left unsaid. There is often not much history given, and the conclusion of the story is left up to the reader.

Initially, I was very excited to read Hemingway. He is a very well known American author, but I have very limited experience with his writing. I had been exposed to Huck Finn and Walden before, but I couldn't think of a time when I had read Hemingway. This initial excitement turned to dread, however, when I heard about the Iceberg Technique. I was not a big fan of trying to interpret what the author meant. It brought me back to high school English days. Teachers only accepted one interpretation for the literature we studied. If your interpretation deviated from the "correct" interpretation, you were wrong. Who cares if everyone has different backgrounds and experiences that may cause them to read literature differently? Clearly, the author only meant one thing when he wrote the literature. This thinking drove me nuts and led to many arguments with teachers.

Anyways, I promised myself I would at least give it an attempt. We started with Up In Michigan, and boy was I completely wrong. I did not expect what I read at all. It covered topics that I had never discussed in a academic setting. Honestly, I was completely shocked when I was done reading the story. After rereading the story, I came to appreciate the fact that details were left out. Hemingway did not need to spell everything out. Loose ends remained, and that was fine. Hemingway did not need to tell the reader how to think or how to interpret his stories; personal experiences and beliefs would handle that. Was it actually rape or not? Personally, I think it was. I drew that conclusion, however, from my belief system. Other people may see it differently, and that is completely alright. Most importantly, it got the class thinking. It was a touchy subject to discuss in class, but it was handled well.

I enjoyed the other short stories, but The Old Man and the Sea stuck out to me. The book is commonly referred to in popular culture, but I had never read it. At just over a hundred pages, it was a relatively fast and easy read. That definitely earned it some points in my book. Regardless, I found the book to be relatable, even though it was written way before my time. Some of the sections while Santiago is out on the sea got a bit repetitive, but ultimately it was a pleasure to read. Coming from a religious background, it was easy to pick out a good portion of the religious imagery. The group presentations pointed out even more than I had seen. Everybody had those "marlin" they have chased; some have been successful and some haven't. Was Santiago successful? I believe so. He may have had the fish destroyed by sharks, but I don't think that was the ultimate prize. Manolin comes back to work with him. He earns the respect of some local fishermen. He proved to himself that he could catch the fish. Through it all, however, a sad realization struck me. Santiago brought himself to the brink of death to catch this fish. His prize was destroyed by sharks. He hangs the carcass up, yet passing tourists believe it to be a shark. They are completely oblivious to everything Santiago went through. The world kept ticking as Santiago was having the battle of his life. I think about that in present day. People may be "fighting their marlin" without anybody knowing. I think this is why the book struck a chord with me.

By the end of the Hemingway section, I had changed my views on this literary technique. I was no longer "the Titanic" being destroyed by an iceberg. I didn't mind using my experiences and knowledge to tie up loose ends. Sometimes, loose ends can remain loose. I was able to interpret the stories in ways that were applicable to my life. I didn't have to fit some grading rubric to earn maximum points.