第1个回答 2009-09-30
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 two men at the counter read the menu. From the other end of the counter Nick Adams watched them. He had been talking to George 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 small 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 two 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 comment on what happens in the story and let readers interpret the meaning through characters’ dialogues. They are very economic when describing action:
The two of them went out the door. George 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. George 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 two men enter the establishment, George, the counterman, asks them what they would like to eat. The two 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, George 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, George tells the men that the clock is twenty minutes fast.
George 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 companion, who is similarly dressed, asks for bacon and eggs.
As Al and his companion wait for their food, they speak to George 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 companion is Max.
After George serves the men their food, he steps back and watches them eat, noting that neither man removes their gloves. Max, uncomfortable with being watched, lashes out at George. 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 George 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. George replies that Sam, the Negro cook is there. When Max tells him to bring Sam into the lunchroom, George asks why. Sensing that George 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 George alone at the counter. When George again asks Max to explain what is going on, Max responds by asking George to tell him what he thinks is going on. George does not have an answer.
Meanwhile, Al asks the two men to move from where they are standing. Again, Max asks George to tell him what he thinks is going on. When George does not respond, Max tells him that he and Al are there to kill Ole Andreson, a man that normally comes to the diner at six o'clock for dinner.
In an attempt to get him to change the subject, Max asks George if he has seen any movies recently. Rather than answer Max's question, George asks what Ole has done to the two 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 George to tell anyone that enters the lunchroom that the cook is off for the evening. Further, George is to cook whatever the person orders. As he agrees to do this, George 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 George tells him that Sam has gone out, the man decides to go to another establishment. Max compliments George 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. George 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 comes 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 George, 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 two men leave the lunchroom. George goes back to the kitchen and unties Nick and Sam. While Nick is somewhat dazed, Sam is clearly shaken by the experience. George tells them why the men were there and suggests that Nick go find Ole Andreson to tell him the two 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 George suggested Ole might want to know about what happened. Ole says that there is nothing he can do about the two men who want to kill him. He thanks Nick for coming 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 coming 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 George. 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 George that he told Ole that the men were looking for him so that he could kill them. He also tells George that Ole does not intend to protect himself. The two men agree that Ole will wind up dead. The two 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. George 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 between 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.
字数够吗本回答被提问者采纳
Outside it was getting dark. The street-light came on outside the window. The two men at the counter read the menu. From the other end of the counter Nick Adams watched them. He had been talking to George 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 small 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 two 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 comment on what happens in the story and let readers interpret the meaning through characters’ dialogues. They are very economic when describing action:
The two of them went out the door. George 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. George 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 two men enter the establishment, George, the counterman, asks them what they would like to eat. The two 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, George 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, George tells the men that the clock is twenty minutes fast.
George 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 companion, who is similarly dressed, asks for bacon and eggs.
As Al and his companion wait for their food, they speak to George 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 companion is Max.
After George serves the men their food, he steps back and watches them eat, noting that neither man removes their gloves. Max, uncomfortable with being watched, lashes out at George. 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 George 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. George replies that Sam, the Negro cook is there. When Max tells him to bring Sam into the lunchroom, George asks why. Sensing that George 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 George alone at the counter. When George again asks Max to explain what is going on, Max responds by asking George to tell him what he thinks is going on. George does not have an answer.
Meanwhile, Al asks the two men to move from where they are standing. Again, Max asks George to tell him what he thinks is going on. When George does not respond, Max tells him that he and Al are there to kill Ole Andreson, a man that normally comes to the diner at six o'clock for dinner.
In an attempt to get him to change the subject, Max asks George if he has seen any movies recently. Rather than answer Max's question, George asks what Ole has done to the two 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 George to tell anyone that enters the lunchroom that the cook is off for the evening. Further, George is to cook whatever the person orders. As he agrees to do this, George 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 George tells him that Sam has gone out, the man decides to go to another establishment. Max compliments George 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. George 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 comes 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 George, 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 two men leave the lunchroom. George goes back to the kitchen and unties Nick and Sam. While Nick is somewhat dazed, Sam is clearly shaken by the experience. George tells them why the men were there and suggests that Nick go find Ole Andreson to tell him the two 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 George suggested Ole might want to know about what happened. Ole says that there is nothing he can do about the two men who want to kill him. He thanks Nick for coming 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 coming 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 George. 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 George that he told Ole that the men were looking for him so that he could kill them. He also tells George that Ole does not intend to protect himself. The two men agree that Ole will wind up dead. The two 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. George 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 between 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.
字数够吗本回答被提问者采纳
海明威的小说The killers的读后感(英文的)
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 stre...
海明威的小说The killers的主题是什么,200左右,英文的~谢谢~
写作思路：首先要了解海明威的小说《杀手》的主要内容，然后梳理文章的主要情节，比如海明威的《杀手》是一篇耐人寻味、含义深刻的故事，从其结构形式和思想主题上来考察，都是一篇完美无缺的短篇小说典范。正文："The killer" is about two killers who are hired to come to a small restaurant. They t...
海明威的the killers 的英文主要内容?很急!
海明威的the killers 的英文意思是虎鲸（杀手），专门帮助猎鲸者捕捉须鲸的一种猛鲸。
杀手:海明威短篇小说目录
在经典阅读的当下，欧内斯特·海明威的作品依然熠熠生辉。他的短篇小说集，如同一把锐利的刀，刻画出人性的复杂与矛盾。首先，我们来到"The Killers"，这部作品揭示了杀手与猎物之间微妙的心理较量，展现了一个冷酷而深邃的世界。紧接着，"The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber"讲述了主人公麦康伯短暂...
海明威小说the killers中的海明威式硬汉是谁
你说的是他那篇短篇小说 the killers? 这篇小说塑造的海明威式硬汉应该是职业拳击手奥勒．安德普逊 小说前半段写有两个杀手宣称要杀奥勒．安德普逊，然而当尼克把这个消息告诉奥勒的时候，奥勒并不打算逃走，反而是从容淡定地面对。奥勒面对危险，冷漠，无所谓的态度，令常人难以理解，其实这正是海明威笔下...
海明威的小说Thekillers的主题是什么,200左右,英文的~谢谢~
7.First published in 1927, "The Killer" reflects Hemingway's disillusionment following World War I and demonstrates his unique narrative style.8.The story is emblematic of the "Lost Generation" label, which refers to the disenfranchised youth of the post-war era, disillusioned and ...
the killers 海明威里面的尼克是一个什么样的人,为什么?
这是英美文学分析里的常用材料，好像是尼克目睹父亲杀死难产女人，心智突然成熟，不再是懵懂 少年。
杀手:海明威短篇小说的目录
总序：经典阅读的当下意义关于欧内斯特?海明威The KillersThe Short Happy Life of Francis MacomberThe Snows of KilimanjaroIndian CampThe Three-Day BlowSoldier’s HomeCat in the RainCross-Country SnowA Clean, Well-Lighted PlaceThe UndefeatedIn Another CountryHills Like White ElephantsThe Light ...
杀人者是怎样出狱的
此篇小说主要通过对话反映情节、塑造人物。全篇自然流畅，不动声色地描述了一桩进行中的杀人事件，而无一句褒贬，更无大事渲染，乃海明威小说的极品。以上所述皆为海明威的一贯特点 杀人者死 刘邦进入关中后对百姓说："杀人者死，伤人及盗抵罪"凡杀人的判处死刑，打伤人的和偷盗的，处以相应的刑罚。
哪位知道海明威死于哪年?什么原因?能不能用英文翻译出来?
He was the second of six children to Doctor Clarence Hemingway and Grace Hemingway (daughter of an English immigrant). His father's interests in history and literature, as well as his outdoorsy hobbies - fishing and hunting, became a lifestyle for Hemingway. His mother was a domineering type...
相似回答
