Forget the legend and read the work: Teaching two stories by Ernest Hemingway

College Literature, Summer 2003 by Bauer, Margaret D

In contrast to Rogers, Roger Whitlow calls "Hills Like White Elephants" "Hemingway's most penetrating attack on man as the exploiter of woman" (1984, 95). Linda WWagner points out that in this story, "Hemingway's sympathy is clearly with the girl" (1981, 64)-and so are my students'. They recognize that the woman is much more mature than the man and that her character develops while his remains static. Therefore, we conclude-on the basis of our study of other works of literature, rather than on what is more typical of Hemingway's canon-that the woman emerges as the story's protagonist.7 We also discuss how, just as "Indian Camp" includes a sub-plot that makes a statement against subconscious white supremacy and unconscious racism in a unique way (focusing on patronizing attitudes toward Native Americans), "Hills Like White Elephants" treats uniquely the abortion issue (by leaving out the whole morality debate).

As anyone who has taught "Hills Like White Elephants" knows, the first thing the instructor must determine is whether the students recognize what the man and woman are arguing about. The key lines I point out to make certain students do not think I am reading into the story or guessing-and thus to show them that one cannot say that the couple could be arguing about anything-are the man's reference to "'an . . . operation'" though "'not really an operation at all'" and his line of reassurance, "'I'll go with you and I'll stay with you all the time. They just let the air in and then it's all perfectly natural'" (Hemingway 1927, 53).

Once the students are clear about the issue at hand, I ask them to establish the nature of the issue for each character, as well as for the author's purposes. Students are quick to recognize that the man wants his lover to get an abortion so that they can continue to travel free of responsibilities-and thus that he is not ready to settle down with a family. The woman's concerns about aborting their baby are more complicated; indeed, she is a more complicated character than the man. The author is using this point of conflict, not to make a pro-life or pro-choice statement but because, regardless of a woman's opinion of her right to choose, terminating a pregnancy can be psychologically devastating.8 The woman perceives the seriousness of the "choice" the man wishes her to make, while the man is either oblivious to its magnitude or willing to pretend it is simple for his own peace of mind.

The woman's concerns as she considers whether to do what her lover asks her are three-fold: First, she seems to be troubled by the static nature of their relationship-it is all about fun ("'look[ing] at things and try[ing] new drinks'" [Hemingway 1927, 52]) and does not seem to be moving forward toward any kind of commitment; his desire that she have an abortion suggests that he is not considering marriage to and having a family with her. If a baby on the way does not move him to propose, what will? Second, she questions her lover's certainty that if she has the abortion they would then be "'[j]ust like we were before'" (53). I wonder, can they go back to where they were before? Can we ever go back? What does this say about the two people? To such questions my students respond that he is either fooling himself or very naive, while she is much more mature and realistic.