~
Works of Ernest Hemingway initiated minimalist movement in American fiction and had an enormous influence on the work of Raymond Carver and other minimalist authors. Comparing the style of Ernest Hemingway’s “The Killers” and Raymond Carver’s “What We Talk About When We Talk About Love”, one can notice numerous similarities. The first one can be seen in the description of the setting. Ernest Hemingway writes:Outside it was getting dark. The street-light came on outside the window. The o men at the counter read the menu. From the other end of the counter Nick Adams watched them. He had been talking to Gee when they came in. (The Killers)Raymond Carver’s passage seem to be strikingly similar:The four of us were sitting around the kitchen table drinking gin. Sunlight filled the kitchen from the big window behind the sink. There were Mel and me and his second wife, Teresa-Terri, we called her-and my wife, Laura. (What We Talk About When We Talk About Love)Both authors use only few short sentences to introduce and enumerate characters, and to describe the atmosphere. They both do it by avoiding pronouns and using the same nouns they have been using in previous sentences. The vocabulary is very simple and devoid of florid excess.Clarity and precision are also present in the description of characters:She was a bone-thin woman with a pretty face, dark eyes, and brown hair that hung down her back. She liked necklaces made of turquoise, and long pendant earrings. (What We Talk About When We Talk About Love)He wore a derby hat and a black overcoat buttoned across the chest. His face was *** all and white and he had tight lips. He wore a silk muffler and gloves. (The Killers)Describing characters, both authors employ luminous details which seem to be very carefully chosen. As if according to the saying that “less is more”, Hemingway and Carver use only o or three sentences for character description. The rest is to be found in action and dialogues since characters are presented dramatically: readers learn about them through their dialogues. The interpretation of character’s tone and feeling is based on the context and other character’s response. This way of presenting characters makes the role of dialogue to be of paramount importance. Especially when the are almost none editorializing instances:“It gets worse,” Terri said. “He shot himself in the mouth. But he bungled that too. Poor Ed,” she said. Terri shook her head. “Poor Ed nothing,” Mel said.Another thing that can be said about Hemingway and Carver’s style is that they frequently make use of lexical and syntactical repetition. In the example above there are repeatedly used same words and the same structure: “Terri said”, “Mel said”. This technique, as the stylistician M.A.K. Halliday observes, generates motivated prominence.In both ?The Killers” and ?What We Talk About When We Talk About Love” story, which is what we learn about characters and their past, dominates over action, which is what physically happens. It is very different from popular fiction where there is almost only action. Hemingway and Carver do not ment on what happens in the story and let readers interpret the meaning through characters’ dialogues. They are very economic when describing action:The o of them went out the door. Gee watched them, through the window, pass under the arc-light and cross the street. In their tight overcoats and derby hats they looked like a vaudeville team. Gee went back through the swinging-door into the kitchen and untied Nick and the cook. (The Killers)He poured more gin into his glass. He added an ice cube and a sliver of lime. We waited and sipped our drinks. Laura and I touched knees again. I put a hand on her warm thigh and left it there. (What We Talk About When We Talk About Love)This story takes place primarily within the confines of Henry's Lunch-Room. As o men enter the establishment, Gee, the counterman, asks them what they would like to eat. The o men are not sure what they would like and take a few minutes to look at the menu. The only other person at the counter is Nick Adams.When one of the men orders roast pork tenderloin, Gee informs him that that item is only available for dinner which will not be served until 6 o'clock. According to the clock in the lunchroom, the time is 5:20. However, Gee tells the men that the clock is enty minutes fast.Gee then tells the man that he can serve sandwiches, steak or eggs. The man asks for chicken croquettes, but again he is told that that is a dinner item. Frustrated, the man asks for ham and eggs. This man's name is Al, and he is wearing a derby hat, buttoned up, black overcoat, a silk muffler and gloves. Al's panion, who is similarly dressed, asks for bacon and eggs.As Al and his panion wait for their food, they speak to Gee and Nick in a condescending manner, referring to them as "bright boys" and making fun of the town in which they live. In the course of the conversation, we learn that the name of Al's panion is Max.After Gee serves the men their food, he steps back and watches them eat, noting that neither man removes their gloves. Max, unfortable with being watched, lashes out at Gee. Returning to their food, Al asks Max if he knows the name of the young man at the other end of the counter. Max calls out to Nick and tells him to join Gee on the other side of the counter. Nicks asks why they want him to do this, but does not get a reply.Next, Al asks if there is anyone in the kitchen. Gee replies that Sam, the Negro cook is there. When Max tells him to bring Sam into the lunchroom, Gee asks why. Sensing that Gee is suspicious of them, Al assures him they will not be hurt and asks again for Sam to join them. When Sam enters the lunchroom, Al gets off his stool and takes Nick and Sam back to the kitchen, leaving Max and Gee alone at the counter. When Gee again asks Max to explain what is going on, Max responds by asking Gee to tell him what he thinks is going on. Gee does not have an answer.Meanwhile, Al asks the o men to move from where they are standing. Again, Max asks Gee to tell him what he thinks is going on. When Gee does not respond, Max tells him that he and Al are there to kill Ole Andreson, a man that normally es to the diner at six o'clock for dinner.In an attempt to get him to change the subject, Max asks Gee if he has seen any movies recently. Rather than answer Max's question, Gee asks what Ole has done to the o men that has caused them to want to kill him. Max replies that they have never met Ole; rather, they have been hired to assassinate him. Al thinks that Max is providing too much information and suggests to Max that perhaps he should keep quiet. He tells Max that he has Nick and Sam tied up in the kitchen.Max instructs Gee to tell anyone that enters the lunchroom that the cook is off for the evening. Further, Gee is to cook whatever the person orders. As he agrees to do this, Gee asks what is going to happen to them. Max tells him that he really cannot predict his fate.Shortly after this, a man enters the lunchroom for supper. When Gee tells him that Sam has gone out, the man decides to go to another establishment. Max pliments Gee on his handling of the situation and once again refers to him as a "bright boy."By five minutes to seven, Ole still has not arrived. Gee tells Max that if Ole has not arrived by now, he will not be there that night. Al decides they should wait five more minutes. While they wait, another man es in, and upon hearing that Sam is not there to cook, he abruptly leaves.After five minutes have passed, Max suggests to Al that it is time to leave. Al wonders what they should do with Gee, Nick and Sam. Max tries to assure him that they do not need to harm them; Al is not totally convinced as he thinks Max as told them too much.Even so, the o men leave the lunchroom. Gee goes back to the kitchen and unties Nick and Sam. While Nick is somewhat dazed, Sam is clearly shaken by the experience. Gee tells them why the men were there and suggests that Nick go find Ole Andreson to tell him the o men want to kill him. Sam tries to dissuade Nick from doing this, but Nick goes anyway.Nick arrives at the boarding house where Ole lives to find him lying on his bed, fully dressed. (Ole had been a heavyweight prizefighter in his younger years.)Nick reports the evening's events to Ole. When he does not get a response, he tells Ole that Gee suggested Ole might want to know about what happened. Ole says that there is nothing he can do about the o men who want to kill him. He thanks Nick for ing to tell him. He also refuses Nick's offer to alert the police.Before Nick leaves, Ole says that he has not been able to bring himself to leave his room all day. Nick asks if he can do anything to alleviate Ole's troubles, but Ole tells him that he has taken the wrong path and nothing can change the past. Ole thanks Nick again for ing and Nick leaves.On his way out of the boarding house, Nick runs into the landlady and they discuss Ole's reluctance to leave his room. Nick returns to the lunchroom and reports what has happened to Gee. Sam hears him enter, but once Nick starts to speak, he retreats to the kitchen saying that he does not want to hear what Nick has to say.Nick tells Gee that he told Ole that the men were looking for him so that he could kill them. He also tells Gee that Ole does not intend to protect himself. The o men agree that Ole will wind up dead. The o men wonder what Ole did to get himself into so much trouble. Nick decides that he wants to leave town; knowing that Ole is sure to be killed the moment he leaves his room is too much for him to handle. Gee agrees that this is probably a wise thing for Nick to do.Sentences are short and simple. They are often joined by coordinate conjunction “and”, which is a characteristic of paratactic style. Neither Hamingway nor Carvver explain relation or connection beeen sentences. Lack of subordinate sentences gives effect of clarity and directness. By saying less, both authors leave their readers with the freedom to interpret the text and to imply their own meaning.The other thing worth mentioning is the choice of vocabulary. Both authors use everyday language in characters’ dialogues, which makes them appear very realistic.字数够吗
荷泽市17039202995：
《the giver》＂感受是短暂的;情感是永恒的＂的英文原文 - ？
迟玛沙汀： Feelings are temporary, whilst emotions are perpetual.
荷泽市17039202995：
《肖申克的救赎》读后感(英语)!如题!包括中文翻译,大概80到100字, - ？
迟玛沙汀：[答案] 1.Remember, Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things and no good thing ever dies!希望是美好的,也许是人间至善,而美好的事物永不消逝. 2.I guess it comes down to a simple choice: get busy living or get busy dying.生活可以归结为一种简...
荷泽市17039202995：
谁能帮我弄一篇《傲慢与偏见》英文读后感,500字以上!!急需!! - ？
迟玛沙汀： 傲慢与偏见读后感 The first sentence in this book is impressive. It reads: “It is a truth well known to all the world that an unmarried man in possession of a large fortune must be in need of a wife”. The undertone is very clear: the foundation of the ...
荷泽市17039202995：
the giver chinese - ？
迟玛沙汀： the giver 译为赐予者或授者,洛伊丝·洛利的作品.是她最著名的也是最受争议的作品.《The Giver》描述了一个作者Lois Lowry自己想像出来的理想乌托邦世界.在这个community里,人们的生活都被安排得好好的,人们不用决定工作,不用决定...
荷泽市17039202995：
傲慢与偏见 英文读后感100字左右 - ？
迟玛沙汀： Story summary /Brilliant statement精彩语句 This is the famous British writer Jane Austen masterpiece ＂Pride and Prejudice＂ in the opening section, leads some in the early nineteenth century England and on the value of the classic love story. As ...
荷泽市17039202995：
钢铁是怎样炼成的读后感英语作文 - ？
迟玛沙汀： summer,i saw ＂how the steel was tempered＂,can not help much inspiration.＂how the steel was tempered＂ author - ostrovsky,born in a worker's family,suffered human suffering,aged 20,attended the party members,led by overwork paralyzed,after...
荷泽市17039202995：
金刚狼的英文观后感 急需~! - ？
迟玛沙汀： First, is the special effects experts Americans. Different educational environment to create different talents, I am very envious of the United States, the United States educational system has created so much talent, you believe that? Anyway, we ...
荷泽市17039202995：
《狮子王》的读后感,英语的! - ？
迟玛沙汀： 今天老师让我们看了《狮子王》,我很感动,让我学到了很多道理,要勇敢、坚强,不要学刀疤欺负小朋友.《狮子王》这部片子,大体内容是:辛巴的爸爸是百兽之王,只要有光明的地方全是辛巴的爸爸管得,黑暗的地方没有动物管着,全是...
荷泽市17039202995：
求《傲慢与偏见》英语读后感!!! - ？
迟玛沙汀： 我非常喜欢傲慢与偏见,所以尽力写了给你==但是我已经将近四个月没学英语了,语法拼写神马的错误请自行改过来吧==抱歉~ 'IT is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife.........
