User:JBawlson/sandbox: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Norman Mailer once said he didn’t have the kind of talent that Ernest Hemingway had—the kind that could reach a nation. But his work reveals otherwise. Though Mailer often downplayed Hemingway’s influence, a deeper look shows just how profoundly Hemingway shaped Mailer’s philosophy of writing and life. Both authors didn’t just write; they wanted their words to disturb, to awaken, and to transform the reader’s understanding of life, death, and art. | Norman Mailer once said he didn’t have the kind of talent that Ernest Hemingway had—the kind that could reach a nation. But his work reveals otherwise. Though Mailer often downplayed Hemingway’s influence, a deeper look shows just how profoundly Hemingway shaped Mailer’s philosophy of writing and life. Both authors didn’t just write; they wanted their words to disturb, to awaken, and to transform the reader’s understanding of life, death, and art. | ||
''page 1'' | |||
For Hemingway, great writing meant telling “honestly the things I have found true” (Death in the Afternoon 2). Mailer echoed this ethos, writing “to the limit of one’s honesty” and even scraping off a little dishonesty to get to what he called a “point of purity” (“The Hazards and Sources of Writing” 399). For both authors, honesty wasn’t just a stylistic preference—it was a moral imperative. | For Hemingway, great writing meant telling “honestly the things I have found true” (Death in the Afternoon 2). Mailer echoed this ethos, writing “to the limit of one’s honesty” and even scraping off a little dishonesty to get to what he called a “point of purity” (“The Hazards and Sources of Writing” 399). For both authors, honesty wasn’t just a stylistic preference—it was a moral imperative. | ||
| Line 29: | Line 30: | ||
Mailer may have felt he couldn’t match Hemingway’s reach, but Sanders argues—and rightly so that An American Dream proves otherwise. In fact, by Hemingway’s own definition of a great artist one who takes what has been known and “goes beyond to make something of his own” (Death 100)—Mailer earned his place as a guide and prophet for his generation. | Mailer may have felt he couldn’t match Hemingway’s reach, but Sanders argues—and rightly so that An American Dream proves otherwise. In fact, by Hemingway’s own definition of a great artist one who takes what has been known and “goes beyond to make something of his own” (Death 100)—Mailer earned his place as a guide and prophet for his generation. | ||