Talk:Ernest Hemingway

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Ernest Hemingway is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 23, 2010.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Arts and Entertainment (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Core  This article is listed on the project's core biographies page.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject United States / Idaho (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Idaho (marked as Low-importance).
 
Note icon
This article has been selected for use on the United States portal.
WikiProject Chicago (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Illinois (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Cuba (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cuba, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cuba related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Journalism (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Version 0.5      (Rated FA-Class)
Peer review This Arts article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale.
Wikipedia CD Selection
WikiProject icon Ernest Hemingway is included in the Wikipedia CD Selection, see Ernest Hemingway at Schools Wikipedia. Please maintain high quality standards; if you are an established editor your last version in the article history may be used so please don't leave the article with unresolved issues, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the DVDs.
 

Silver Medal of Military Valor[edit]

Material, attributed to Lynn (1987), "a claim disputed by Kenneth Lynn who notes that Hemingway received the Italian Silver Medal of Bravery with only a vague citation, not the gold medal that such a feat would have merited" was recently inserted into this article. I reverted the insertion, as another assertion by Lynn is currently under review. A quick look at the medal as awarded in World War I leads me to question the assertion: the Gold Medal of Military Valor was awarded only 368 times, while the Silver Medal was awarded 38,614 times. I'd argue, from these figures, that 'carrying an Italian soldier to safety' fits the Silver Medal award better than the Gold (even upon reading the description at http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2006/spring/hemingway.html, "Hemingway carried a wounded Italian soldier to safety and was injured again by machine-gun fire", the Silver seems a fit), and the assertion should be discussed on this talk page. - Neonorange (talk) 02:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Neonorange, yes the Putnam piece is a strong source and has the benefit of being available online. That he received the Silver Medal of Honor is not disputed. Here's what Meyers has to say about the event:

According to a contemporary Red Cross report, probably written by Hemingway's superior Captain Jim Gamble, "Hemingway was wounded by the explosion of the shell which landed about three feet from him, killing a soldier who stood between him and the point of the explosion and wounding others." Ted Brunswick, in a letter to Ed Hemingway written on July 14, six days after the event, stated that Hemingway, though badly wounded and nearly killed had acted heroically. "An enormous trench bomb hit within a few feet of Ernest while he was giving out chocolate. The concussion of the explosion knocked him unconscious and buried him with earth. There was an Italian between Ernest and the shell. He was instantly killed while another, standing a few feet away, had both legs blown off. A third Italian was badly wounded and this one Ernest, after he had regained conciousness, picked up on his back and carried to the first-aid dugout." (Meyers, Jeffrey. (1985). Hemingway: A Biography. New York: Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-333-42126-0, 30-31)

I think that's fairly indisputable and the edit you reverted changed the meaning of the cited material.
I don't have a copy of Lynn's book but will try to get it from the library. I've thought for a long time this article needs a top-to-bottom rewrite (it's been four years since achieving FA) and so I'll put that on my to-do list and with the rewrite will most likely add a scholarship section where I can address the various biographers (including Lynn). Sorry for being longwinded, but it's best for people to see the cited material directly. Oh, and I'll try to get to the edit request above this weekend, but it really only needs a bit of tweaking. Victoria (tk) 15:23, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Michael Reynolds' Hemingway: The Early Years (part of his five-volume biography, still the most authoritative account of Hemingway's life) also dismisses the story that Hemingway carried a wounded soldier on his back, and explains how Hemingway got the myth started. (He also points out that Hemingway in effect retracted the story when Frederic in The Sun also Rises explicitly denies performing any heroic act like the one Hemingway earlier attributed to himself.) No biographer since Meyers treats the story as anything other than Hemingway's invention. Why should WP continue to endorse exploded myths? I hope an editor who works regularly on this page will look at Reynolds and revise accordingly. - Macspaunday (talk) 01:58, 9 June 2014 (UTC
"(A)n editor who works regularly on this page": that could be Victoria (tk) (see article history); in fact, that's the editor to whom you just replied. I am sure this can all be worked out, after, what, nearly a century, ten days is ... - Neonorange (talk) 03:21, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I've tweaked it slightly, [1], and cited to James Mellow (1992). Mellow says, (page 60-61), "Hemingway would describe the event in several fictional and factual accounts of his baptism by fire, most of them contradictory and many of them elaborated over the years. He once claimed that the depiction of Frederic Henry's wounding in a A Farewell to Arms came closest to the truth. There, except for the fact that the three wounded soldiers, one of whom was dead, were depicted as four Italian ambulance drivers, Hemingway's account seems to jibe with the official citation for his receiving of the Medaglia 'd Argento al Valore … "Gravely wounded by numerous pieces of shrapnel from an enemy shell, with an admirable spirit of brotherhood, before taking care of himself, he rendered generous assistance to the Italian soldiers more seriously wounded by the same explosion and did not allow himself to be carried elsewhere until after they had been evacuated."
Re Reynolds (four volumes, by the way), yes, he explains the perpetuation of the myth, which to a degree had to do with Scribners PR efforts. I think some of that material should probably go to A Farewell to Arms, which is still in need of full expansion. One more thing, as the "editor who works regularly on this page" (1600 + edits), I found the tone a little demeaning. Just saying. Victoria (tk) 15:58, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Wait, wait! I, at least, absolutely was NOT referring to anyone in particular when I wrote "an editor who regularly works on this page," meaning, of course, any one of the many editors who would inevitably have worked on a page as extensive as this one. Someone else identified that phrase with a particular person, but it never even occurred to me that that meaning could have been drawn from the phrase. I was simply showing respect to the editors who regularly work on this page, just as I hope that visitors to pages that I work on would defer to those who regularly work on it. Please look again at the comment, and you'll see that nothing even remotely demeaning could have been intended by it.
I'm appalled at the thought what was (I thought) clearly intended as statement of deference to those who work here could have been taken as anything else. (Incidentally, it never even occurred to me until two minutes ago to look at the history of the page to see who has edited it; it's clear to anyone that a page about a major writer would have had many editors over the course of time. It's simply not the case that anyone who offers a single edit to a page like this would take the time to study the edit history of the page. To the casual visitor, what matters is what's on the page, not the history of how it got that way.) - Macspaunday (talk) 02:05, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi Macspaunday, it's probably not worth belaboring, and, as you've explained, is perhaps a simple misunderstanding or an issue of indenting. I thought in this post you were responding to my previous post in the thread. Had that been the case, then yes, replying to the person who does make a lot of edits here along the lines of "Why should WP continue to endorse exploded myths? I hope an editor who works regularly on this page will look at Reynolds and revise accordingly", can be read as asking for someone else to take a look, revise, review, fix, or whatever. But anyway, I've tweaked, I hope to your satisfaction, and let's just leave it at that. Thanks, Victoria (tk) 20:25, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
I finally understand how my comment could have been taken as a comment on the preceding post, because, thanks to the indentation, it appears on the page as if it's an indented comment on it. But in fact I wrote my comment nine days after you wrote yours, and, when I wrote it, I didn't take the trouble to look back at what came before; I was simply adding another bit of evidence after reading Reynolds' book. And I indented simply so that there would be a visible distinction between contributions, not with any idea of responding to the immediately preceding text. My comment was simply adding to what I remembered of the thread, not responding to anything specific. This is why I was puzzled to read that I had "responded" to anyone's post, because I wasn't responding at all - I was merely coming back and having my say. Anyway, I'm glad to know that no offense has been taken because nothing of the sort was ever intended. - Macspaunday (talk) 02:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Ancestry[edit]

Why is the origin of his family never discussed in the opening article? What nationality were his parents? Were they Italian, German, English, French, Dutch, Spanish? Both of his parents last names are English but that is just a guess. I would like to see his ancestry listed in the article as is the case with most notable people on wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.42.116.19 (talk) 07:58, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, okay. I have information about this in sources and will add a sentence or so. Victoria (tk) 21:47, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

where are the archives?[edit]

clearly there are older versions of this talk page that have been archived, however unlike any other site where this is the case, there is no link to any of the archived content. someone mind creating them? i have no idea how --92.193.26.186 (talk) 10:22, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Huge thanks for pointing that out! Comments are archiving but who knows where! It will take some untangling, that's for sure. This weekend's project. Victoria (tk) 16:47, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
The archive box was missing, now added, please see the top of this page. --Mirokado (talk) 22:26, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Phew! Thanks, Mirokado. That was easy. Victoria (tk) 03:04, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Nagel[edit]

I don't know how to properly edit so I'm sorry if the formatting of my post messes things up.

In the Writing Style section, it is said that "The Sun Also Rises is written in spare, tight prose that influenced countless crime and pulp fiction novels and made Hemingway famous"[158]. The source given is Nagel, James. (1996). "Brett and the Other Women in The Sun Also Rises". in Donaldson, Scott (ed). The Cambridge Companion to Ernest Hemingway. New York: Cambridge UP. ISBN 978-0-521-45574-9 However, nowhere in this source is crime fiction mentioned. I'm wondering where, if anywhere, a critic has discussed Heminway's impact of crime fiction/hardboiled stylistics?


Nagel, James. (1996). "Brett and the Other Women in The Sun Also Rises". in Donaldson, Scott (ed). The Cambridge Companion to Ernest Hemingway. New York: Cambridge UP. ISBN 978-0-521-45574-9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.133.118 (talk) 18:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for posting. I've moved your post to the bottom (where we put new posts), checked the source and rewrote accordingly. Thanks so much for noting this - it was wrong. Regarding the question about crime fiction, I'll try to see what I can find and post here. Victoria (tk) 23:39, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Misattributed Quote.[edit]

The following quote is misattributed to "Death in the Afternoon." Shouldn't this be cited as from "A Farewell to Arms"? The quote is below (footnote 162 is the authority given ...):

The world breaks everyone and afterward many are strong in the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these you can be sure it will kill you too but there will be no special hurry.

Wikiquote agrees it is misattributed. [1]

So does Google Books. [2]

--18:51, 12 November 2014 (UTC)John A Kelly (talk)

Thanks for noting! It looks like the mark-up for the quote box was copied and a quote added without changing the attribution. I've commented it out for now. The quote boxes need some work and I'll get back in a few days or so to sort them out. Victoria (tk) 20:10, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
I removed the comment notation and updated/fixed the reference. FWIW, the reference was correct, once upon a time, and then it was changed, apparently. (It may not be perfect, but it should do, for now.) This is a quote that we don't want to lose, IMHO. Elizabeth Blandra (talk) 05:40, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
John Kelly, Thanks for drawing attention to this and finding a reference. John and Victoriaearle, We can always update the reference but, for now, the quote is back in place. My understanding, given very limited time to explore the issue, is that one version of the book contains the quotation and another does not, FWIW. I'm still trying to locate it in my version -- the Google Books link may help me to find it. When time permits, I'll fix the reference that we're using now. (As I noted in my quick response last night, the reference was correct a long time ago, though there wasn't a page number. Much later, the attribution was apparently changed, inadvertently, it would seem.) I like the quote and would hate to see it removed or get lost in the shuffle, as I noted above. We can always fine-tune it. Hope we're all in agreement. Elizabeth Blandra (talk) 19:23, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I thought I'd fixed this, but apparently not. Anyway, I see that page numbers are needed. Off to sort through the bookcases to find the book. Back in a bit. Victoria (tk) 20:12, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I see from this discussion (where I had a different user name!) that I couldn't find my copy of A Farewell to Arms in 2012. I do remember locating it, but it's disappeared again. Anyway, I decided to go with the Scribner's 1929 version from g-books, with a link (but it's only a snippet view) instead of using the reprinted Simon and Shuster editions. In the meantime I'll keep looking and when I find the book will probably update again. I've also updated the sources to it reflects the edition used, and I updated the other quote box too. Thanks Elizabeth Blandra for noting and responding here! And thanks for the help. Busy holidays and all that, and I'd completely forgotten. Victoria (tk) 21:14, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2015[edit]

Please add to the notable awards section:

Bronze Star

Thank you

80.110.50.173 (talk) 08:10, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 12:18, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Here's a reference: www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2006/spring/hemingway.html Elizabeth Blandra (talk) 16:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

It would seem that we should honor the request. Here's a supporting quote from the reference that follows it (and also highlighted, above):

"In a small ceremony in June 1947 at the U.S. embassy in Cuba, Hemingway was awarded a Bronze Star for his service as a war correspondent for having circulated "freely under fire in combat areas in order to obtain an accurate picture of conditions. Through his talent of expression, Mr. Hemingway enabled readers to obtain a vivid picture of the difficulties and triumphs of the front-line soldier and his organization in combat."" www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2006/spring/hemingway.html Elizabeth Blandra (talk) 16:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Edgars2007 Hemingway's Bronze Medal award is already covered; the last paragraph in section 1.8 World War II (and cited). If, on the other hand, the request is for addition to the Notable awards section of the infobox, well, that section is, for a person whose primary notability is as an author, for awards in the literary field. —Neonorange (talk) 22:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)