Peenie Wallie

Ah, but... Hemmingway not only attempts to address the pointlessness of war, but he also delves into the meaning of masculinity and the qualities that make one noble or heroic. I would argue that Lt. Henry is not meant to be the ideal of masculinity, and Rinaldi is meant to represent the stereotype of manhood. Somewhere in the whole picture, Hemmingway provides a definition of bravery on a personal level; one that agrees with the contemporary ideal of a man who is strong yet sensitive and thoughtful.

You can read a lot of stuff into this miserable little book, no doubt. You can also read a lot into tea leaves, palm lines, and astrology. That doesn't necessarily mean that you are divining some message of intelligent design. You're delving into the noise to try to decipher the signal. Your results may or not be valid. I personally, do see that in the book. I see a mushy love story about a guy who drops out of the war. Hemmingway is very careful to construe it so that he can't be blamed for dropping out. They were going to kill him anyway, so he had to run. He was an officer without his men, so he had to flee or face execution. So, Hemmingway gives him an easy out. This, of course, is a convenient passage into a life on the lamb, running from authority, and the people that would force him back to the front, or worse. It's an anti-war peace, love, happiness, can't-we-all-just-get-along, wistful, sappy tree-hugger apologist manual for the pseudo-intellectual elite to stick into their antique barrister bookcases next to Chomsky's trilogy so they can continue their charade as pompous, erudite, defenders of the pollitically correct manifesto. If it weren't for the will of men to answer the call to fight for the western alliances in WWI and WWII, then we'd all be speaking German. Hemmingway included.

Hemmingway would never have had the opportunity to go to Idaho and blow his brains out by putting the same double barrel shotgun that his father commited suicide with to his own forehead and pulling the trigger with his toes.

So, I say, thank God for war. Or thank God that there are still some men in this world willing to stand up and fight to preserve our way of life because they feel that some things are worth fighting for. Even dying for. And death to the pseudo-intellegentsia anti-llectuals.

"It's an anti-war peace, love, happiness, can't-we-all-just-get-along, wistful, sappy tree-hugger apologist manual for the pseudo-intellectual elite to stick into their antique barrister bookcases next to Chomsky's trilogy so they can continue their charade as pompous, erudite, defenders of the pollitically correct manifesto."

Sure. Somewhere in the midst of all this wordy gobbly gook you are basically saying people who read this book do so simply to say they have done so and tuck the book, and any literary appreciation that might go along with it, away with the other so called classics only to be brought up when it suits their own attempts at intellectual displays of arrogance. I can go along with that. What I disagree with, however, is the idea that Hemmingway might be used by the anti-war tree huggers simply to make a point. I don't believe the book is completely anti war. I think the book looks at honor and the ways in which society misplaces honor. Furthermore, any novel that looks at the psychology of war will include questioning on the part of the soldiers involved. We would not be human if we did not question the taking of lives and the potential for notions of war to be taken too casually by those in command.
I agree with your opinion to a degree, but I think we need to allow for the possiblity that the heroic men and women who are fighting for our freedom and for the freedom others have enough integrity to actually think about the big picture while they are following orders; they are more tan machines with no thoughts fears and hopes. I recommend you read The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brien. I would love to hear your thoughts on this.