The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber, by Ernest Hemingway (1936)1. Review the opening scene. What is the effect of the story's beginning with this scene, and then presenting a chronologically earlier scene later? What would be gained, and what would be lost, if the shooting of the lion were presented first?KirstenThis opening scene creates a sense of wonder as to why the group is, "pretending that nothing had happened" (p. 29). Because Wilson says to Macomber: "'You've got your lion...and a damned fine one too'" (p. 30), it is initially believed that Macomber had, "been carried to his tent from the edge of camp" (p. 29), because of something heroic he had done. The description of Macomber's physical appearance: "very tall, very well built if you did not mind that length of bone, dark, his hair cropped like an oarsman, rather thin-lipped, and was considered handsome" (p. 30), also leads to the guess that he had done something noble, as his looks match those of a stereotypical hero. But with the revelation that he, "had just shown himself, very publicly, to be a coward" (p. 30), this entire false perception of Macomber crumbles. If the shooting of the lion had been presented first, the anticipation of learning what Macomber did that was so cowardly would have been lost. Also, if the story had been presented chronologically, I do not believe that I would have thought that his running away from the lion is such a weak thing to do, but because it is mentioned so uncomfortably and so frequently before that scene is revealed, it makes what he did seem much worse. KelseyBy opening the story out of chronological order, Hemingway is able to show the reaction of the characters to the shooting before it actually happens. This gives the reader a better idea of each character's response to the lion shooting; this information helps the reader to understand the initial responses of the character. The characters' feelings are shown, and then the author describes how they came to feel them. It allows the reader to feel as if he knows more than he would if it were merely in chronological order. This provides a background on Macomber before the shooting happens which is essential for the development of his character. The order allows the reader to tolerate the relationship between Mr. and Mrs. Macomber, which could have become unbearably annoying if the story were presented in sequential order. KatieBy opening the story with the celebration after Macomber has shot the lion, the reader has a sense of mystery and uncertainty. There is an odd strife between Macomber and his wife that is not explained until later in the story, therefore urging the audience to read on. If the author had presented the story chronologically, the reader would have an acquired disdain for Wilson and the wife that is lacking in the beginning of the story. The reader would also understand why Wilson claims Macomber is a "bloody coward." I think the story would not be as profound if the shooting of the lion were presented first. The reader has more insight into Macomber's life by reading about the lunch party and his high-class social standing that readers would have missed if they had first read about the hunting expedition. If the reader were thrown into the scene of the lion's shooting there would be no connection or background information about Macomber. This connection oddly enough is apparent in the scene after Macomber shoots the lion instead of before. BaileyJamieBy starting the story with this scene, the reader is offered a vague feeling of discontentment between the characters that has occurred from an unknown event. The ambiguity of the situation is intriguing and almost makes Macomber sound like he accomplished something great. But following this scene with a prior happening helps to clarify the situation and give meaning behind the conflict. Had the story started with the killing of the lion, the clarity of the situation would be more obvious but the emotional conflicts of the characters would be known, and hence less compelling. KathrynBy presenting the shooting of the lion out of chronological order, Hemingway allows the reader to view the incident while keeping in mind each character's reaction. The characters' reactions say as much about who they are as their immediate responses during the incident, so it helps the reader evaluate the lion-shooting when he already understands the characters on some level. If the shooting of the lion were presented first, the characters would be unknown during the most important part of the story. During the opening scene, Macomber's social status and his relationship with his wife are explored. Hints about his new clothes and his "personal boy" indicate that Macomber is extremely rich, while comments about his wife's "predatory" nature suggest the power struggle between them. This knowledge about Macomber's personal life gives the incident more meaning because the reader is able to extrapolate how it could affect the rest of his life. Margot's dismissive attitude in the opening scene makes it clear that she might leave her husband, while Macomber's willingness to own up to his cowardice reveals courage in itself. The reader can then draw parallels between Macomber and his prey, based on his competitive relationship with Margot. Reading about the shooting, the reader can perceive Macomber's similarity to the lion, and anticipate to some degree that he will try to redeem himself with a final surge. Because the shooting of the lion is the deciding incident in Francis Macomber's fate, it is useful to know something about him when witnessing it. If the shooting of the lion were presented first, the reader would have an opportunity judge the characters before their identities were explored. Pre-conceived judgments on the part of the reader would have ruined the effectiveness of the story, because the reader would not be able to objectively evaluate events. 2. Did your responses to the three main characters change as you read the story? Which is the more sympathetic male figure, Robert Wilson or Francis Macomber?KirstenI initially thought of Macomber as someone who is weak, and I felt embarrassed that he couldn't manage his fear, yet continued to discuss and apologize for running away. But when his wife cheats on him with Robert Wilson, I began to think of him more like a young boy who does not know how to act like an adult man and is afraid; I felt pity for him. Once he kills the buffalo, however, my entire perception of him changes: no longer does he seem weak or child-like, but with this moment he becomes someone to be respected. With Margaret, I felt bad for her because her husband was a coward. Any sympathy I felt for her, though, was lost when she purposely hurt Macomber by cheating on him with Wilson. When Macomber kills the buffalo and Margaret realizes that she is no longer in the position of authority over him, and that he now has the ability to leave her, I felt pity for her like I felt for Macomber. I think that Francis Macomber is the more sympathetic male character. Although Robert Wilson exists outside of the backwards American dynamics and is a strong character, Macomber has to deal with more than Wilson in the sense of needing to defend his ability to be a strong, adult man. KelseyIn the beginning I pitied Margot Macomber because she seemed uncomfortable and out of her element. I continued to pity her because she needs wealth to feel safe in the world. She is so wrapped in the need for monetary security that she stays married to a man whom she does not love.mWhen she cheats on Macomber I lost all sympathetic feelings toward her. The more sympathetic figure is Francis Macomber because he is put into a pressured situation to kill a majestic beast; however he is not a natural killer, and thus buckles under the pressure. On top of all of this his wife cheats on him with their guide Robert Wilson and later ends up killing Macomber. Macomber is constantly put in uncomfortable, uncontrollable situations that require the reader to show sympathetic feelings toward him. KatieI responded negatively to both characters in the beginning because of their stereotypical wealthy man's persona. They seemed carefree and introspective as they sat and sipped gimlets in the tent. However, I was more sympathetic towards Macomber as the story progressed. Macomber was hesitant about killing the lion and was not a natural-born killer like Wilson, but had more of a conscious or regret about killing. The reader is also more sympathetic towards Macomber due to his unbearable wife. She is arrogant and repulsive as she blatantly cheats on Macomber with his hunting partner Wilson. She crawls into bed and calls Macomber "a coward," and then doesn't want to talk about her adultery: "Please, darling, let's not talk about it. I'm so very sleepy." Due to the actions and personality of Macomber's wife the reader feels more sympathetic towards Macomber. The reader also sees Macomber's transformation as he becomes more courageous and daring after he kills the lion. Therefore, the audience feels more condolence when he dies because he has overcome his fear and developed as a character. BaileyJamieAs I read the story, my reception of Robert Wilson and Mrs. Macomber worsened, as they seemed to be licentious. Despite having such a characteristic though, Robert Wilson was the more sympathetic of the males; he seemed to have some care for Macomber's sad situation and wanted to see him succeed (even though Wilson still flirted/got with Macomber's wife). KathrynAt the beginning of the story, I sympathized with Margot's disappointment in her husband. I respected her scorn and agreed with her evaluation that Macomber was cowardly and inadequate, because I initially viewed Macomber through the lenses of her and Wilson's disdain. Macomber's admissions to cowardice hinted that perhaps he did have the courage to try to reclaim his dignity, however, and I ceased to sympathize with Margot when she stooped so low as to punish Macomber by sleeping with Robert Wilson. Before the buffalo hunting expedition, Margot and Macomber were both juvenile and immature in their power-struggle, while Robert Wilson assumed the position of expert, and almost father-figure. When Macomber realized his courage while hunting buffalo, however, he shed his immaturity and became Robert Wilson's equal, leaving Margot behind in the metaphorical childhood that they had occupied together. Macomber is ultimately the more sympathetic figure because he demands the reader's admiration when he leaves immaturity behind to conquer possibly the first real challenge of his wealthy, coddled life. 3. How do the physical descriptions of the characters help us to understand them? For example, what is the significance of Robert Wilson's "red face"? How does Margot Macomber's appearance change as the story progresses?KirstenRobert Wilson's appearance is a symbol ascertaining his manliness. Unlike Macomber, Wilson is not handsome in a pretty, conventional sense. His attraction stems from how his appearance reflects his "manly" pursuits: his red face is a result from hunting in the sun, while his tattered clothes reveal that he has been at it a long time. His intense "machine-gunner's eyes" (p. 33), also add to his persona of strength and manliness. Margaret is first described as, "an extremely handsome and well-kept woman of the beauty and social position" (p. 30). Later, she becomes, "pretty rather than beautiful" (p. 35), until she is only described as, "a great beauty in Africa, but she was not a great enough beauty any more at home to be able to leave [Macomber] and better herself and she knew it and he knew it. She had missed the chance to leave him and he knew it. If he had been better with women she would have probably have started to worry about him getting another new, beautiful wife" (p. 45). While Margaret may be beautiful in Africa, in American society she is no longer the beauty she once was, which makes her vulnerable once Macomber realizes his authority in the relationship. KelseyRobert Wilson's "red face" is important because I believe it represents his short temper towards Americans. Mrs. Macomber notices it more so than her husband because he has such a little tolerance towards women in general. Margot Macomber's appearance changes from being a bystander, to a loving wife, to an almost intolerable woman. Robert Wilson is the picture of a true man. His face is red from the many hours he has spent tracking and killing animals in the intense sun. This physical description automatically establishes his superiority over the other characters while on this safari, he is in his element in this country and his face represents this idea. Margot Macomber's appearance changes from being beautiful to just "pretty" because of her uncouth actions. As she becomes less respectable in Francis Macomber's eyes she loses her beauty as well.While in America Francis was able to ignore her bad actions, here Margot is less able to cover up her hurtful actions and thus she looses a lot of her respectability and becomes yet another unsatisfied American. KatieIn the beginning of the story Margot is described as a "...well-kept woman of the beauty and social position which, had, five years before, commanded five thousand dollars as the price for endorsing..." The reader has a vision of Margot as a high-status wife who married for money instead of love. This theory remains true throughout the story but Margot is described in a less venerable way in the end of the account. Then she is described as "...looking pretty rather than beautiful" and "...not a great enough beauty any more." Wilson's red face signifies his thirst for blood and killing. He is a professional hunter and does not have much sympathy for animals and killing. His eyes are "extremely cold blue," which indicates his cruel characteristics as a hunter. BaileyJamieMr. Wilson's "red face" helps to characterize Wilson as a manly figure. He almost has a warrior-type face that is burning with desire and passion (that captures the ruggedness and rawness of a "true man"), an allure that Mrs. Macomber cannot deny. His "blue, machine-guner's eyes," further this description by connoting his fierceness and shrewdness. Margot Macomber is presented in the beginning of the story as a very beautiful, socially-eminent figure. As the story progresses she seems to gain an aura of "freshness" that is a little more carefree and less professional than her former self. KathrynWilson's red face indicates his familiarity with the outdoors, and his expertise at safaris. This establishes him as the leader of the expedition; it is somewhat of a badge of his leadership. Margot Macomber's appearance early in the story is severe, stern, and beautiful but relatively old. This gives the impression of someone striving to maintain control when age and the elements defy her efforts. Her stern beauty that is used as a weapon against her husband changes however, when she begins to look "pretty rather than beautiful". This indicates that she is stuck in childhood, or perhaps even evolving backwards while Macomber comes to realize his courage and to grow up. 4. What are Wilson's opinions about American men and women? Why are these important? How is Wilson's own nationality significant?KirstenWilson believes that American men are "boy-men" in the sense that they remain childlike and weak, while their wives, "govern [their husbands]...and to govern one has to be cruel sometimes." This system is backwards to Wilson, since in Africa these roles are reversed as the husband is expected to be the head of the relationship, not to act and be treated like a child by his wife. Wilson's opinions are important because they objectively identify the problems or abnormalities in the American social dynamic. KelseyWilson's own nationality allows him to judge the American people without being hypocritical. Likewise Wilson looks down on Mr. Macomber, because Francis Macomber wants the pride of killing sought-after animals without having to work for it. Wilson views American men as weak and incapable of typical actions which were once necessary for survival, such as killing a beast for meat. Instead Margot is the one who controls the relationship while Wilson tries to ignore her hurtful actions. He views American women as headstrong and unwilling to accept their place in society as 2nd to the man like it is in Africa. Wilson views American men and women in a negative way, thinking them to be annoying and indolent. KatieWilson feels some disgust towards American men and women. Although he slept with Macomber's wife he mocks her after she kills her husband. This signifies Wilson's dislike of her and he doesn't truly believe the killing was an accident. Macomber feels like American men are hard to tell apart and vary in their characteristics: "You most certainly could not tell a damned thing about an American." Because America is the melting-pot of all cultures they are not easy to define or categorize. However, Wilson does exude a negative opinion about Americans because of what he observes in Macomber and his wife. Macomber is a coward and his wife is an obnoxious woman cheating on her husband. BaileyJamieWilson seems to think that Americans are confusing people; he becomes upset with the lack of knowledge Macomber seems to have and the general conceited attitude of Macomber, but is impressed with his tenacious attitude towards hunting, and the respect he shows Wilson as a hunter. Yet in general, he regards American men as being soft and non-competent and the women as being very fine, attractive, cruel, more powerful, and more hardened than the men. Being of the English Nationality proves significant for Wilson, because he can view the two objectively or can more easily see their flaws. KathrynWilson seems to feel that American men and women are unpredictable and unreliable, but that they have the potential for greatness. Wilson is presumably British, which could contribute to his feelings that Americans are naive and inexperienced, but that they generally have courage that he hopes will be exposed. Britain's literal claim as America's fatherland represents the overall impression that Wilson is older and more evolved than Francis and Margot. This is important to the story in that its theme revolves around Francis' loss of innocence and boyhood. 5. The story intertwines two narrative strands, the story of the hunting expedition and the story of the Macombers' marriage. How are these related to each other?KirstenBoth narratives intertwine to relate to who stands in the position of authority. In the hunting expedition, Macomber faces the lion but is weak and cannot overcome it. Wilson, however, can and kills it instead. Macomber is in a low position while Wilson and his wife are superior and have an affair together. When Macomber acts bravely against the buffalo, however, he is raised to a level equal of Wilson, and since his fear and childlike insecurity is gone, he has authority over his wife. His wife, in turn, shoots him when she realizes how vulnerable she now is in the relationship. KelseyThe marriage and hunting expedition are out of Macomber's control. He has no say in what happens with his marriage to Margot, she cheats on him, and he cannot control the animals' reaction when he is hunting them. Both seem to be failures and Macomber appears to be dissatisfied with them. He likes the idealized idea of each: of having a faithful wife, and of having a head of an animal he killed mounted on his wall. However, as he is on the path to obtaining this dream something unexpectedly happens and it becomes different from what he originally had planned and wanted. KatieHis marriage correlates the hunting expeditions because it is a constant battle and fight. Just like the animals Macomber is trying to kill, his wife resists and defies him on a daily basis. She is uncontrollable just like the animals, and eventually is the one that kills Macomber although he initially feared the animals because they could kill him. There is a sense that Macomber fears his wife because she might leave him and humiliate him, and Macomber also fears the animals and their capricious actions. BaileyJamieThe story of Macomber's hunting begins with a struggle; it is a failed attempt to kill a lion. In the aftermath of the event he is regarded as a coward, but he promises himself to try again with buffalo. His marriage parallels the situation, as it is a struggle; his wife cheats on him. While he does not do anything about it immediately (which can be seen as cowardice) he does seem angry and wants to make a difference. Macomber is similar to the lion. Macomber is wounded by his wife's actions but sulks away as the lion does. In the ensuing buffalo hunt, Macomber takes on persona of great confidence and pride, just like the lion who feels a surge of power before his death. Macomber is overcome by such personal strength, that he begins to take control of his relationship. Before anything further can be done though, he ends up being killed. KathrynMacomber's marriage is a continual power struggle, and the hunting trip marks the culmination of this battle. Margot and Francis remain married because it provides security, and because each believes the other unable to do better. Macomber wants to prove his manliness to Margot, and initially fails miserably with the lion. Margot punishes him for his cowardice by sleeping with Wilson, as a petty form of displaying her own dominance. The lion's death, however, gives a clue to Macomber's mindset. The lion is wounded by Macomber, just as Macomber is repeatedly wounded by his wife, but gathers every ounce of energy to produce a final surge of revenge. When Macomber kills the buffalo, Margot understands that he has realized his potential for courage, and that she will no longer be able to dominate him. The hunting trip demonstrates Margot and Macomber's competitive relationship, and provides the setting for their final struggle for control. 6. At various points, Margot, Francis, and Wilson all consider Francis Macomber a coward, and the narrator seems to agree with that judgement. Do you share this judgement of his character? Why or why not? What definitions of bravery and cowardice does the story apply to Macomber?KirstenI don't necessarily classify Macomber as a coward; I associate cowardliness with selfishness, and I don't believe that Macomber is selfish. Rather, I think of him like a man who is still like a scared child -- exactly the way Wilson describes most American men. The story, however, relates this trait of being afraid to being a coward, while bravery is the ability to not show fear in the face of death. KelseyI do not agree with the judgment bestowed upon Francis Macomber's character. The story seems to show his cowardice as a desire to stick to his beliefs; however I disagree with this idea and believe it is a display of bravery. Francis is merely going against the ideas that are normally accepted in society and emphasizing what he believes in. He seems to always give things which he originally showed a form of cowardice towards a second try -- he typically redeems himself. KatieYes I agree that Macomber is a coward in some moments throughout the story. He is effectively controlled by his wife Margot and does not stand up to her even when she is having a blatant affair. Macomber also seems insecure about his own abilities as a hunter even though he is set up with a professional guide and given proper weapons. The label "coward" could easily be applied to Macomber especially during the beginning of the story. He allows Margot to hold her power over him while she manipulates him, and he therefore does not take initiative in his own life. However, after valiantly shooting the buffalo, Macomber gains more confidence and ultimate bravery before he is killed. BaileyJamieFrancis is marked by cowardice throughout the story. Not so much in his fear of the lion, but in his inability to take charge in his marriage. He is upset with the way in which his wife is acting, but takes no action to stop it or prevent it. He cannot stand up for what he feels is unjust. He does show an act of physical and mental bravery at the end, when the buffalo is charging him. He stands there with unwavering confidence which is only cut short by his untimely death at the hands of his wife. KathrynI do not agree that Francis Macomber is a coward, because while he may have run in the face of danger he does not hesitate to admit his own cowardice and take steps to redeem himself. Had he denied that he was a coward or tried to cast himself in a better light, Macomber would have been cowardly, but his willingness to accept responsibility for his actions make up for his cowardice during the lion hunt. The story applies black-and-white stereotypical definitions of cowardice to Macomber: i.e.-- running in the face of physical danger. This is not a fair assessment of his character, however, because he demonstrates bravery on many different levels. When Macomber faces the buffalo he demonstrates remarkable physical courage, as well as the courage to overcome humiliation. Macomber's final act demonstrates his ability to overcome obstacles, and establishes that he has finally shed his immaturity and has grown into a man. 7. Locate specific places in the story where each of the three main characters seems to exert power over the others in a shifting pattern of predominance. How do these shifts in the balance of power affect your expectations about the story and its outcome?KirstenAfter Macomber proves himself to be a coward, his wife begins to act bitterly towards him, while openly flirting with Wilson. After the failed lion hunt, for example, while they sat in the car, "his wife had reached forward and put her hand on Wilson's shoulder. He turned and she had leaned forward over the low seat and kissed him on the mouth" (p.44). Wilson also respects Macomber less, but he hides his disapproval of Macomber's weakness instead thinking things like, "Now what in hell were you going to do about a man who talked like that" (p. 33), or, "How should a woman act when she discovers her husband is a bloody coward?" (p. 35). His wife's total lack of respect for him climaxes when she sleeps with Wilson. When Macomber says that she promised to be faithful during the trip, she replies: "'Yes, darling. That's the way I meant it to be. But the trip was spoiled yesterday. We don't have to talk about it, do we?'" (p. 46). This structure of power shifts when Macomber shows bravery when hunting the buffalo. He loses his fear and thus gains authority in the situation: he is now an equal to Wilson, as they are both "true" men, while Margaret is no longer dominant over Macomber. She states: "'You've gotten awfully brave, awfully suddenly,' his wife said contemptuously, but her contempt was not secure. She was very afraid of something'" (p. 54). Margaret fears that since she is no longer in control, that Macomber now has the ability to leave her; she responds to this by killing him before he can ever exert this authority over her. KelseyWilson displays this power throughout the story -- he is in his element on the African Safari and thus always seems to be a level above the other characters. When he sleeps with Margot he just reinforces this exertion of power. Francis Macomber becomes a dominant character when he finally tells Margot how he feels about her and Wilson, and how frustrated he is with each. Margot becomes dominate when she shoots Macomber -- whether it was purposeful or an accident. KatieOn page 32, Wilson exudes power over Macomber because of his superior hunting skills. Macomber is nervous that Wilson will tell everyone about the lion, giving Wilson power over Macomber and control over his social status. Macomber weakly says to Wilson: "I'm awfully sorry about that lion business. It doesn't have to go any further, does it? I mean no one will hear about it, will they?" Margot holds power over her husband for the majority of the story with her digging remarks like: "You're not afraid, are you?" She also has total control of the situation when she cheats on Macomber with Wilson: "Well, you're a coward...let's not talk. I'm so very sleepy," Margot replies as she climbs into bed. Macomber finally has his chance to show dominance over the other two when he realizes his potential bravery and loses his doubts and hesitations. "You've gotten awfully brave, awfully suddenly," says Macomber's wife. She is now insecure about his new-found confidence and she worries he will not be as easily manipulated. Throughout the story it seems like Wilson and Margot are in power more than Macomber. It is not until the final moments of his life that Macomber has a revelation and becomes more powerful. He is ultimately killed by his wife who has shown dominance throughout the story and whether by accident or not she kills her husband. BaileyJamieMr. Wilson seems to have dominance in the beginning of the story, when Macomber is embarrassed over his recent mishap with the lion. Mr. Wilson knows it is shameful for Macomber and makes Macomber look insufficient in the eyes of his wife. As a result, Wilson uses the lion story to demean Macomber and gain presence and attraction in Margot's mind Margot has dominance the night she returns from her infidelities. Macomber is mad at her but he can do nothing, as she simply tells him she doesn't want to talk about it (which Macomber immediately succumbs to because he is insecure with himself and admires the manliness of Wilson). Macomber has his share of superiority and rule after his buffalo hunt. He is so self-absorbed and confident, that he becomes the leader and tells the others what to do. In the first two instances, I thought the wife and Mr. Wilson were going to merely waltz all over Macomber and have it their way. When Macomber seemed to become the dominant one, I thought he would exact revenge by killing Mr. Wilson or would have a successful end to his story. KathrynEarly in the story, Margot and Wilson both dominate Macomber in the light of his failure with the lion. Margot's condescending remarks reveal that she controls Macomber, as does her sleeping with Wilson. Margot is extremely condescending toward Macomber, with sarcastic remarks about his cowardice and through flaunting her infidelity. Throughout the story, Macomber and Margot both seem to seek Wilson's approval, because he is dominant as the leader of the safari and the most experienced hunter. When Macomber shoots the buffalo, however, Wilson begins to regard Macomber as an equal, and Margot sees in him a newfound courage that places him outside of her control. These shifts in power cause the reader to anticipate that the actions of the characters will be geared toward gaining predominance over the others. For instance, Macomber's loathing of being dominated by his wife and Wilson prompt him to demonstrate his courage during the buffalo hunt. 8. The title "The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber" has several possible meanings. Initially, how did you interpret the title? How did your interpretation change after a second reading?KirstenBefore reading the story, I interpreted the title to mean that the entire, short span of Francis Macomber's life was happy. On my second reading, I understood the title in the sense that only a short piece of his life was happy -- that the time right before he died when he had lost his fear for death was the only time he experienced true happiness. KelseyAfter reading the story and then the title again I believe it is a depiction of how Macomber does not feel happiness for long periods of time. He married his wife, and then things went downhill from there. Similarly, the idea of hunting made him feel happy; however he became uncomfortable when it came down to shooting an animal. KatieAt first when I picked up the packet I thought that the title was an oxymoron because the story seemed lengthy. As I read the story the first time I thought the title was still a contradiction to Macomber's life which seemed miserable. However, I think the title fits Macomber's life more closely than I first interpreted. Moments before he is killed, Macomber feels an inward sensation of contentment and glee. He feels more powerful and courageous than ever before. Also, his life seems to end extremely abruptly, and although the reader does not know the age of Macomber, he does not seem old enough to have lived a long life. Therefore, the title is more appropriate than I first assumed and is not a complete contradiction. BaileyJamieI interpreted the title, after having finished the story, as being descriptive of the end of the story. In the last few pages when Macomber truly feels confident in himself, truly feels alive, he is overcome by a sense of joy. This feeling is only momentary, as he is quickly killed by his wife. His life had not been particularly fulfilling until that point, at which it turned happy. So The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber was the happy life he lived at the end. KathrynInitially, I interpreted the title to reflect Macomber's life of decadence, wealth, and ease. After the second reading, however, I came to feel that the title referred primarily to the final moments of Macomber's life, when he realized his own courage and left boyhood behind in favor of manliness and bravery. Only at the conclusion of the story, when he overcame possibly the first major obstacle in his life, was Macomber truly happy. This indicates the satisfaction of achieving a goal, and the happiness to be gained from realizing one's potential. A Clean Well-Lighted Place, by Ernest Hemingway (1933)Look up "nihilism" and "existentialism" and write their definitions here:Nihilism is the belief that there is no universal truth and that existence is ultimately meaningless; rejection of all religious and moral principles; rejecting established laws, an extreme form of skepticism and the belief of nothingness or nonexistence. 1) total rejection of social mores: the general rejection of established social conventions and beliefs, especially of morality and religion
An extreme form of skepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth. Nothingness or nonexistence Existentialism is the philosophy that individuals must be the ones to create meaning and essence in their lives -- not deities or other authorities. There is no "higher force" in the universe, which means that there is no purpose at the core of existence. Instead, people themselves are responsible for embracing existence and finding meaning in their lives. A philosophical movement begun in the 19th century that is centered on individual existence and denies that the universe has any intrinsic meaning or purpose. It requires people to take responsibility for their own actions and to shape their own destinies. A philosophical theory emphasizing the existence of the individual as a free and self-determining agent; a philosophical attitude expressing the idea that every person has his own unique control over his life and situation. It is a belief strong in self-determination and freedom of choice for every individual. A philosophical attitude that stresses the individual's unique position as a self-determining agent responsible for the authenticity of his or her choices. 1. The young waiter has "confidence" whereas the old waiter does not. What does "confidence" mean in the context of the story?KirstenThe young waiter has confidence in the sense that he believes his life has some significance or value. Unlike the old server or the deaf man, the young waiter has a sense of purpose because he is young and has a wife. The old waiter and the deaf man lack this confidence in their existence, and are happier enjoying their existence in the comfort of the cafe'. KelseyThey young waiter displays a confidence that begins to borderline on arrogance when he becomes disrespectful towards older generations. He has this "confidence" because he does not take the time to think about life -- the young waiter runs around with a fake feeling of self-assurance. Confidence in this story means a false sense of security in the world; the young waiter who displays this trait seems to feel as if his life has meaning. However, the more experienced older generation is better informed and believes in more of a nihilistic view, hence they like a clean well-lighted place to sit and think. KatieThe young waiter has confidence in the sense that he is self-absorbed and cares only about his own life. He doesn't worry himself about the old man but is completely introspective and oozes self-confidence. When a character only worries about himself he can be confident because his not weighed down by the sorrows or misfortunes of others. The young waiter also feels like his life has some meaning because he has a wife. He also has his youth still which gives him hope for opportunity, whereas he feels the old men are past their prime and useless. BaileyThe confidence in one's own life: the old waiter lacks a place, a home and a feeling of belonging -- the bar seems to be his refuge, whereas the young waiter has a wife, and a job. The young waiter has had less time to mature and know about life and therefore believes that these tokens of confidence are what life is all about, yet the old man rebukes this thought by saying that at one point the old man had had a wife. JamieIn the context of the story, confidence means that the person has something to live for. The older waiter feels he has nothing to look forward to and is sure about nothing, and therefore is lacking confidence. The younger waiter is sure of certain things and has aims in his life (like returning home to see his wife). As a result, he is seen as having confidence. KathrynThe young waiter has confidence that his life has purpose; that he has a future to live and work for. Whereas the young waiter has a wife and a family and ambition, the old waiter lacks these things and therefore lacks confidence in the importance of his life. The young waiter is self-assured because he has not reached the point in his life that he asks questions, but seeks refuge in bars and with others, instead of in quiet cafes where he can think and reflect on truth. 2. Note the places where the word "nothing" is used. What does "nothing" mean to the old waiter? How is the young waiter's statement that the old man has "nothing" to fear because he has money ironic from the old waiter's point of view?KirstenTo the old waiter, the word "nothing" relates to his existence: there is no God, no higher purpose to his life, and he must settle for small comforts, like the cafe', to offset this truth. For the old waiter, a clean, well-lighted cafe' serves as an escape from the darkness of reality: that life is filled with nothing meaningful. The young waiter's statement is ironic because the deaf man does, in fact, have "nothing", or "nothingness," to fear -- his money is also essentially worthless except in the sense that it allows him to indulge in some of the few escapes from this reality. KelseyThe old man uses the word "nothing" to describe the fact that he has not accomplished anything worthwhile. He has no family, no support, and is very similar to the deaf man. The young waiter's statement that the old man has "nothing" to fear because he has money is ironic because the old man uses the word nothing to describe things which cannot be bought with money. The difference between the old man and the old waiter, and the young waiter is that the former are okay with a nihilistic existence while the latter is not. The young waiter adds a sense of urgency and represents the idea that younger generations must always be busy and rarely take the time to think, hence, he likes a bar atmosphere, while the older waiter and old man are aware of their surroundings and like a clean well-lighted place to think. Hemingway describes the cafe' as "empty except where the old man sat in the shadow of the leaves of the tree that moved slightly in the wind." (p. 267). Since shadow symbolizes the representation of the soul, and trees connote life, this description focuses on the idea that the old man, who prefers to think instead of always being occupied, is more connected to himself. Katie"It was a nothing that he knew too well. It was a nothing and a man was nothing too," thinks the old waiter. The old man refers to everything as "nothing." Essentially everything is nothing: God, money, and life all have no great meaning. The young waiter is naive, and holds the idea that money makes happiness: thus he believes one has "nothing" to lose when one has wealth. BaileyFor the old waiter, nothing means life. The old waiter feels that nothing is life, so when the young waiter says that the old man has "nothing" to fear, then he is saying the old has life to fear. The only thing to fear is nothing itself. Jamie"Nothing" means everything to the old waiter. For all of his questions, his beliefs, his inquiries, the answer is nothing. It is the essence of his existence. The statement that young waiter makes about the old man having "nothing" to fear because he has money is ironic because the old waiter believes in nothing. The statement correlates to the older waiter's beliefs because the old man has despair over nothing, which is sensible when there is "nothing", especially to despair. Kathryn"Nothing" reflects the waiter's view that nothingness is the essence of his life. He feels that he has nothing toward which to work because nothing exists outside the current form of existence, so he must try to take solace in the small comforts of the everyday. It is ironic that the young waiter remarks that the old man has ""nothing" to fear because he has money, because the old waiter embraces "nothing". The statement "nothing to fear" obtains ambiguity in this context, because it casts the meaning of "nothing" into doubt. The waiter probably intends to remark that the old man should have no fear, but in a more literal sense, the philosophy that nothing else exists indicates an actual fear "nothing" in itself. 3. What is the old waiter's concept of dignity? Hos does it relate to his concept of nothingness?KirstenThe old waiter understands dignity to be the ability of finding ways to cope with life's darkness with grace. Although the deaf man is drunk, he is also polite to the waiters and keeps to himself, merely appreciating the pleasant cafe'. Despite hardships he has experienced, like his attempted suicide, he remains in control of himself though he understands the pointlessness of his life. KelseyThe old waiter views dignity as being connected to the soul and accepting nihilistic ideals. When the younger waiter fills the old man's glass and he asks for a little more, "the waiter poured on into the glass so that the brandy slopped over and ran down the stem into the top saucer of the pile." (p. 267). The glass is a representation of the old man's life, and the brandy represents everything he has down -- as he has gotten older the glass has been unable to hold all of his accomplishments and so the less-important ones slop over the edges. The old man has dignity because he is not obsessed with his accomplishments; he has a few he cherishes, however, he is willing to forget the rest. Whereas the young man feels as if he must prove himself to the world. KatieThe old waiter's concept of dignity is being selfless and altruistic towards others. He detests the young waiter's uncompassionate attitude about the old man who just needs a place to drink and relax. The old waiter also feels this sense of nothingness and wants to provide a place for others to come and reflect: "Each night I am reluctant to close up because there may be someone who needs the cafe'." The old waiter is not self-centered like the young waiter and his view of dignity is being helpful to others who are in the same state of unhappiness. Although the old waiter feels a state of nothingness: "I have never had confidence and I am not young," he has more self-worth than the young waiter because he is not selfish. The old waiter also appears somewhat content in his state of emptiness because he finds comfort in a clean, well-lighted cafe': he can sit and reflect or drink like the old man. BaileyThough the old man is drunk he still manages to act normal and polite to the bartender and waiters. The old waiter feels that even though life might be rough "or nothing," one must still have dignity. Both the old man and the old waiter have lived a full life and in the end one begins to reflect on what was truly important. The old man, though drunk, still has respect for himself and has dignity and respects others. JamieThe waiter's concept of dignity is that of the old man, who is walking down the street after he has clearly become drunk. This relates to his concept of nothingness, as the old man is a sad sight who seemingly has nothing to live for; he has nothing which the waiter regards as having dignity. KathrynThe old waiter's concept of dignity is elegantly accepting one's situation. Instead of grasping at diversions or ideals, dignity is demonstrated when people accept truth and cope with its implications gracefully. This relates to his concept of nothingness in that the old waiter has discarded naivety and hope in favor of understanding that there is nothing for which to live except the everyday. 4. What is the significance of the young waiter's act of pouring brandy until it sloshes over the side of the old man's cup?KirstenI believe that the significance of this act is that while some, like the deaf man, attempt to peacefully take pleasure in activities like enjoying brandy in a quiet cafe', there will those, like the young waiter, who still believe that their life is infused with a sense of purpose and that their time, therefore, is more valuable. The young waiter does not respect the deaf man's motivations to sit alone and drink in the cafe', and thus is sloppy in helping him find comfort. KelseyThe brandy overflowing from the glass not only represents the old man's life, and how he chooses to cherish only a select few memories, it also shows the disrespect that is given to people with different ambitions and beliefs, and the differences that occur due to misunderstanding between generations. The younger waiter is unsure of how to "deal" with a man who prefers a clean well-lighted place to think, rather than a place like a bar to party. The younger waiter prefers the latter because he is not forced to confront life and his beliefs. KatieThe brandy signifies the old man's state of nothingness which is currently brewing inside him and is "pouring" over. The old man reached this tipping point when he tried to commit suicide and was too over-whelmed with his numb existence. His inside state of depression is reflected in the pouring of the brandy which is too great for the cup and eventually sloshes out the sides. This act also symbolizes the young waiter's disrespect of the old man and how, in general, youth greatly disrespect their elders. BaileyAt first the waiter fills it to the top, but then the old man asks for more, at which point it overflows. This could signify the old man's life and how it has been full, but there came a point where it just overflowed. The contents that emptied from the cup represent the things in life that no longer seem important, whereas the brandy still retained in the glass represent the parts of his life that gave him meaning. JamieDoing so, the waiter shows how he is careless in life and does not take the time to think as the elderly man does. KathrynThe old man's request for enough brandy to fill his cup reflects his desire for fulfillment in life, through introspection and quiet meditation. The young waiter's act of filling the cup until it overflows demonstrates his impatience with contemplations of this sort, when he personally favors external stimulation. The old man has reached a place in his life that he wishes to feel satisfied with having reached a deep understanding of things, while the young waiter is impatient and wrapped up in shallow promises of purpose. The cafes preferred by the old man and the old waiter are clean and well-lighted, reflecting their search for illumination and truth and their eventual acceptance of nothingness, while the young waiter prefers noisy bars where he can find superficial purpose that is really distraction in disguise. |
BACK TO Thacher English II page | The North Fork School Home Page |
top of this page
Click on bar below to email Marie
Copyright March 30, 2008 Marie M. Furnary All rights reserved.