One of my high school english teachers despised Hemingway and termed him a 'misogynist...

One of my high school english teachers despised Hemingway and termed him a 'misogynist.' But isn't the entire book about how a bunch of orbiters agree to go on a trip with a women that leads them on. It's true that the only female character in the book is a terrible piece of shit. But the rest of the male figures agree to go along with her. Lady Brett is terrible; but a bunch of dudes who wanted to fuck her agreed to go on a week-long trip to Spain with the goal of fucking her.
I want to know other opinions on this book

>One of my high school english teachers despised Hemingway and termed him a 'misogynist.
Well who would have thought that a man born and grew up before the feminist would have traditional views on gender roles? How ridiculous!

Your teacher is an idiot.

Yeah, but I don't understand how this book displays "traditional views on gender roles." When I think of traditional gender roles, I think of Men who act and women who react. But the book robs males of all agency, the narrative is controlled by a single women

I agree. If one hates a book because you think its "sexist" then they really shouldn't be teaching children with that ignorant and simple mindset.

they're pretty much all drunken bums except the bullfighter

>man born before the feminists
lmao what?
You're right OP this book is about feminism in a sense...I mean how can we say Hemingway is this or that? He simply comments on the emerging tide of feminist epistomology. The book is about emasculation and the male identity, I don't think it's making a disparaging or a supportive comment about feminism in any way.

and I agree with I think the biggest cancer in contemporary education is the hyper moralizing of all art criticism especially novels.

Still today, lots of inadequate guys need to beat down and beat up women and children to deal with their insecurities and fears. He's merely another stupid writer of amusement.

imo every character in that book is equal parts contemptible and sympathetic. the idea that brett is targeted any more for being a woman, or cohn any more for being a jew, is incongruous with the actual content of the novel.

Hemingway, in general, was someone who was fairly powerless over women, and most of his male characters are the same.

He tries to make up for that fact with super macho activities, but the underlying powerlessness over women is always there.

If your dumbshit teacher had half a brain she'd see that.

I'm also really starting to hate how every single historical figure can be dismissed because of x flaw. Guess what? Every single person out there, including your dumb fucking teacher, has flaws. As a matter of fact, the only thing really interesting about Hemingway, or anyone in general, is his flaws. It's what makes his lit great.

Hemingway's boring.

>The book is about emasculation and the male identity, I don't think it's making a disparaging or a supportive comment about feminism in any way.
This. The book is about masculinity but that doesn't make it sexist or "against" women. Your teacher is honestly dumb.

good post

Was He? The man had numerous ex-wives. I don't understand how he was powerless in relation to women. I also can't identify the "super-machcismo" traits in his characters. I have only read a minority Hemingway, but so far I haven't encountered the hypermascullinity that's usually accredited to him

found the child

>Every single person out there, including your dumb fucking teacher, has flaws. As a matter of fact, the only thing really interesting about Hemingway, or anyone in general, is his flaws. It's what makes his lit great.
Fucking this. It's like these people are incapable of taking an objective look at their own personal life and identifying their flaws. Every single person has said, done or, at the very least, thought something despicable, at some point in the past. Maybe the reason hyper-moralists are such hypocritically shitty people in their own lives is because they're unaware of this simple truth, due to their inability to meditate on their own personal flaws.

What's the deal with this rising Puritanism ?

Seriously I don't get it

I think some people get super triggered by hunting, fishing and being in the military, as if the majority of American men a century ago didn't do all of those things in a lifetime.

I guess for these people the only acceptable role for a male protagonist is as a frustrated novelist.

There is a hierarchy of flaws, chewing with your mouth open, penchant for armed robbery

>The book is about emasculation and the male identity, I don't think it's making a disparaging or a supportive comment about feminism in any way.
Absolutely this.

>Jake is a war vet (muh violent masculinism) without a working dick
>Everyone else is either a beta orbiter without a spine
>an angry asshole who wants to fight
>a gloryhound
>some mix of the three

None of the men are successful in achieving what they truly want, or are happy with what they have. And nearly all of them want Brett in some form or fashion.

To say the book is pro or anti-feminism is wrong, but it's certainly a look at a damaged facet of masculinity. Your teacher is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole because the pieces are the same in a modern feminist-leaning-woman's mind

>One of my high school english teachers despised Hemingway and termed him a 'misogynist.' But isn't the entire book about how a bunch of orbiters agree to go on a trip with a women that leads them on.

She termed him a misogynist specifically/directly because this book?

Or she said that in general when talking about him, and now you are talking about this book, trying to tell lit there is an example of him not being misogynistic?

GR8

Womemes don't understand why he's a hack, but he really is one through and through.

Armed robbery isn't morally wrong if you're black. Then it's a tragic consequence of economic inequities and systemic racism.

t. liberal

Yes, obviously. My point is that the overwhelming majority of people have something in their history that's high enough up on that hierarchy to render them unable to really attack someone like Hemingway. Imagine that people could see what you were thinking. Would it change the way they think about you? Would it make them think you were a better or a worse person? In my own case, it would be very much the latter, and I think I'm not alone in that. In fact, I think it's near enough universally the case.

America never got rid of it's moralizing bullshit. Even if it isn't strictly the Christian ideals of the Puritans, neo-Puritanism exists in all American politics, religious or otherwise.

Sadly, since America has an influence on world pop culture, we're seeing this neo-Puritan influence in places that didn't historically have Puritans to begin with.

What makes his hackish?

I'd argue that even strict SJWs are a kind of left-leaning puritanism. There's a similar idea of silencing what is deemed morally incorrect or "wrong", a heavy belief of introducing these "rights" and "wrongs" from a young age ("teach your baby that it has white privilege before it can speak!"), strict moral guidelines that need to be followed, etc.

As Americans, we tend to go straight to puritanism to push our beliefs.

...

High school teacher, pinnacle of intellect, dislikes Hemingway. Kek.

It's the most honest book about drinking with female "friends" I've ever read.

Yeah pretty much this. Soft headed people who mean well often fuck up the message they are trying to teach. There's probably a time and place for a "misogynist" conversation, especially in high school where kids are cruel and give fuck all about their peers as humans. Scarlet letter comes to mind as a book that actually directly deals with this issue in a pretty plain and simple way. In the Hemingway book a woman exerting power over men even (if even in an evil sort of way) would actually be celebrated by most feminists especially considering she is using the weaknesses of the male ego against them.