It's the Hemingway or the Highway

          If I had to describe Hemingway’s style in one word, I would have to characterize it as “inconsistent”. He goes from using long sentences to short ones, literal language to figurative. Another inconsistency is his treatment of time in A Moveable Feast. I think that it is because of these stylistic irregularities that we read Hemingway in the first place. His unique style is what makes him such a renowned author, it obviously wasn’t the “oh so intriguing” plot my friends. Throughout the novel, Hemingway brings the reader through parts of his life with important people and places that impacted his career as a journalist and eventually an author. Often times, Hemingway wouldn’t even put these events and introductions to new people in order, simply because that is not the point he is trying to make. This tactic might seem nutty, but come on; it’s Hemingway for Pete’s sake. Because Hemingway goes about it in this way, form absolutely does not follow content. If it did, content would play an important role in how Hemingway’s form is expressed. Hemingway doesn’t want the readers to be using the content to explain the form; rather he wants us to use the form to create our own content. Hemingway’s tone of uncertainty encourages the reader to paint their own personal pictures in their heads. For example, Hemingway will leave parts of the plot for the reader’s interpretation, “It was only Zelda’s secret that she shared with me, as a hawk might share something with a man. But hawks do not share.” The reader is left unsure of the secret and is responsible for interpreting what Hemingway meant by the hawk comparison. Hemingway may seem like just a crazy guy, but that alone couldn’t have gotten him the success that he achieved. A Moveable Feast is considered a memoir but I think that it is more of a journal type genre; it was almost as if Hemingway took snippets of his life (very detail-oriented ones at that) and compiled them into one big story telling session.