If a writer of prose knows enough of what he is writing about he may omit things that he knows and the reader, if the writer is writing truly enough, will have a feeling of those things as strongly as though the writer had stated them. The dignity of movement of an ice-berg is due to only one- eighth of it being above water (Hemingway, Death in the Afternoon).
Write a thesis-driven essay about the above prompt.
KEEP IN MIND:
1. Support with evidence drawn from the text rom Ernest Hemingways Big Two-Hearted River
2. DO NOT EXPLAIN/DESCRIBE what’s going on, arguments supported by citations only.
REFER BELOW:
Address the prompt above in a thesis-driven essay of at least four full pages (double-spaced, in 12-point Times New Roman). Be sure to support your argument with specific evidence drawn from the text. Avoid simply rehearsing remarks already covered in class and strive instead for an original reading that showcases your own interpretation. Remember that what follows is a prompt rather than a simple series of questions, and you need not account for every suggestion it raises. Narrow your response to a single, well-defined thesis that can be defended with appropriate citations. Also, bear in mind that an argumentative paper (especially one this short) generally avoids summary and long quotation. Assume that your reader is already an expert (or is at least posing as one). Dont retell the story; argue for your particular reading.
Choose a series of details, images, or phrases from Ernest Hemingways Big Two-Hearted River and use them to develop a thesis about how the story employs his iceberg theory of writing. What do the moments youve selected reveal about the unwritten truth beneath the surface of the text? How do they suggest what remains unsaid? How does this contribute to the meaning of the piece? In your view, is Hemingways style effective? You may wish to consider the deleted ending of the story (which we encountered as On Writing). Was Hemingway right to cut this section? How might the inclusion of these pages change our reading of the story?
