For Whom the Bell Tolls

Hello readers, my name is Latta Baraiya and I'm a student of the department of English, Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University. This blog is part of my thinking activity, assigned by Heenaba Zala ma'am.  Today I'm going to discuss Hemingway's writing style in this blog. 




Ernest Miller Hemingway was an American novelist, short-story writer, journalist, and sportsman. His economical and understated style which he termed the iceberg theory had a strong influence on 20th-century fiction, while his adventurous lifestyle and his public image brought him admiration from later generations. 


A great deal has been written about Hemingway's distinctive style. In fact, the two great stylists of twentieth century American literature are William Faulkner and Ernest Hemingway, and the styles of the two writers are so vastly different that there can be no comparison. For example, their styles have become so famous and so individually unique that yearly contests award prizes to people who write the best parodies of their styles. The parodies of Hemingway's writing style are perhaps the more fun to read because of Hemingway's ultimate simplicity and because he so often used the same style and the same themes in much of his work.


Ernest Hemingway is one of the most widely read and well-known authors of the 20th century. His more famous works, 

helped cement Hemingway's place among the best writers of his day. 


One of the things that sets Hemingway's works apart is the way in which he writes. Ever since his writing career started in the 1920s, Hemingway has been known for his short, straightforward style that is both simplistic and unadorned. His writing style stood out among his peers who were writing at the time in a very flowery, complex way.


Hemingway's style is remarkably similar to the writing style of a journalist, and for good reason. His early background included journalistic training, a style of writing that relies heavily on presenting the facts in a crisp and clear way and allowing dialogue or conversations to shine through, and a stint at the newspaper, Kansas City Star. In short, Hemingway wrote the way people really talked or experienced things, rather than embellishing them for a more ornate style of prose. The author himself once said that a writer's style should be direct and personal with wording that is simple and vigorous.


Hemingway's writing style is sometimes referred to as the iceberg theory. The general idea of the iceberg theory is that a writer should focus on a minimalistic style without explicitly stating the underlying issues or themes. Essentially, the importance of a story lies beneath the surface and cannot be directly seen. This is like an iceberg in that you may notice a small portion of the ice above the water line, but cannot see the larger structure beneath. 


Basically, a typical Hemingway novel or short story is written in simple, direct, unadorned prose. Possibly, the style developed because of his early journalistic training. The reality, however, is this: Before Hemingway began publishing his short stories and sketches, American writers affected British mannerisms. Adjectives piled on top of one another; adverbs tripped over each other. Colons clogged the flow of even short paragraphs, and the plethora of semicolons often caused readers to throw up their hands in exasperation. And then came Hemingway.


Hemingway has often been described as a master of dialogue, in story after story, novel after novel, readers and critics have remarked, 


"This is the way that these characters would really talk." 


Yet, a close examination of his dialogue reveals that this is rarely the way people really speak. The effect is accomplished, rather, by calculated emphasis and repetition that makes us remember what has been said.


◆Style in "Hills Like White Elephants" :-


Perhaps some of the best of Hemingway's much-celebrated use of dialogue occurs in "Hills Like White Elephants." When the story opens, two characters, a man and a woman, are sitting at a table. We finally learn that the girl's nickname is "Jig." Eventually we learn that they are in the cafe of a train station in Spain. But Hemingway tells us nothing about them or about their past or about their future. There is no description of them. We don't know their ages. We know virtually nothing about them. The only information that we have about them is what we learn from their dialogue, thus this story must be read very carefully.




This spare, carefully honed and polished writing style of Hemingway was by no means spontaneous. When he worked as a journalist, he learned to report facts crisply and succinctly. He was also an obsessive revisionist. It is reported that he wrote and rewrote all, or portions, of The Old Man and the Sea more than two hundred times before he was ready to release it for publication.


◆Style in "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" :-




An excellent example of Hemingway's style is found in "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place." In this story, there is no maudlin sentimentality; the plot is simple, yet highly complex and difficult. Focusing on an old man and two waiters, Hemingway says as little as possible. He lets the characters speak, and, from them, we discover the inner loneliness of two of the men and the callous prejudices of the other. When Hemingway was awarded the Nobel Prize in literature in 1954, his writing style was singled out as one of his foremost achievements. The committee recognized his 


"forceful and style-making mastery of the art of modern narration."


◆Style in The "Old Man and The Sea" :-


History tells us that Hemingway wrote and revised his most famous novella hundreds of times before it was ready to be published. The day he finished writing, he called his publisher, telling him it was the best work he had ever done. Still, it followed Hemingway's general theory of writing in a number of ways:


First, it is simple. What could be simpler than a story about a fisherman attempting a great catch?


Simplicity is not in the story alone, but also in the way the novella is structured. Short, simple sentences help to make the work a very quick read. When short sentences are not used, Hemingway is fond of using 'and' to connect thoughts together.


For example: 


''He was an old man who fished alone in a skiff in the Gulf Stream and he had gone eighty-four days now without taking a fish.''


This is the first sentence in Hemingway's book and shows immediately the simplicity with which he plans to tell this story. There is no fancy language or emotion conveyed, just simple facts.


Second, it is direct. Hemingway's style is effective because of the uncomplicated choice of wording he uses in writing his piece. In short, he uses very specific and direct word choice that contributes to his overall style of writing that is direct and unbothered. 




Thus we can say that Hemingway took great pains with his work, he revised tirelessly. "A writer's style," he said, 


"should be direct and personal, his imagery rich and earthy, and his words simple and vigorous." 


Hemingway more than fulfilled his own requirements for good writing. His words are simple and vigorous, burnished and uniquely brilliant. 

Thinking task : Transcendentalism

Hello everyone, myself Latta Baraiya, and I'm a student at the department of English, Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University. This thinking task is given by Vaidehi ma'am. So in this blog I'm going to share my views about transcendentalism. So let's discuss about this theory,

First of all we have to clear a concept of what is the theory of transcendentalism ? And what is the connection of transcendentalism  with nature ? 

Transcendentalism is an American theory. It is a very formal word that describes a very simple idea. People, men and women equally, have knowledge about themselves and the world around them that "transcends" or goes beyond what they can see, hear, taste, touch or feel. Five predominant elements of Transcendentalism are nonconformity, self-reliance, free thought, confidence, and the importance of nature. These concepts are liberally sprinkled throughout Emerson's essay "Nature." When Emerson says that we should 

"demand our own works and laws and worship," 

He espouses nonconformity. Transcendentalism, or American Transcendentalism, was a multi-faceted movement. It introduced freethinking in religion, intuitive idealism in philosophy, individualism in literature, new spirit in social reforms, and new optimism in peoples’ minds. This New England movement flourished in a period between 1830 and 1860. After clarification of this theory of transcendentalism, here are my answers regarding this activity.


◆Transcendentalists talk about Individual’s relation with Nature. What is Nature for you? Share your views. 


According to me, nature is objects like trees, wind, sun, moon, Star, water, flowers, grass, land, river, sea, mountain, valley, snow and the atmosphere.




Whenever we are in trouble we like to accompany nature. Nature gives us solutions to every problem. When we think of nature, most people believe that nature is the creator and it has all power to control over the world's people and everything it's about heaven and hell. People think that nature(God) will publish them if they do bad karma. This theory is also included in nature. But nature is that environment that gives us spirit. It's obvious that when we have any issues or we fail we clearly bleme nature. But nature also gave us solutions to problems. When I feel sad, I used to sit outside at home at night. Looking into the sky and watching the stars and moon. It gives me peace of mind. If we think in that way we can understand that, nature provides us the opportunity to be a good being. For me it's easy to stay moral with nature. They also provide morality. As we know that Thoreau and Emerson emphasized on the transcendentalist idea of human harmony with nature. They believed that,


Nature can help us improve spiritually and help us connect to the rest of the world. 


According to Transcendental ideas, everything is connected, everything is one. I also believe that nature helps us to connect to the mind also. It has the power to conjunct and destroy. Nature also teaches us to be calm. So there are no special classes required to learn how to learn with nature. So I can say that nature is one my teacher. 


◆Transcendentalism is an American Philosophy that influenced American Literature at length. Can you find any Indian/Regional literature or Philosophy that came up with such similar thoughts?


As we know, transcendentalism was the first American intellectual movement that showed true interests in Eastern philosophy. Emerson started to read about Indian philosophy and mythology in The Edinburgh Review between 1820 and 1825. His interest in Indian thought grew when he was a young Harvard graduate, and it continued until the end of his writing career. We see similar thoughts in this philosophy of the concept of Brahma and Karma. There is also very much similarity of this theory in the Bhagavad Gita also. 


The Indian concept of Brahma had great influence. Brahma is the god of creation, and one of the Hindu trinity others being Visnu, the preserver and savior of the world, and Siva, the destroyer or dissolver of the world. Three concepts crucial to understanding Brahman are: 


  • Para and Apara Brahma, 

  • Atman, and 

  • Maya. 


There are two forms of Brahm: para and apara Brahman, one is the formed and the other formless. In the Upanishads, the form is described as unreal and the formless as real. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad states that,


“Truly, there are two aspects of Brahman, the formed and the formless, the mortal and the immortal, the unmoving and moving, the existent and that which is beyond existence”. 


The immortal Brahma enters into the mortal Brahma. When this happens, a human, a mortal Brahma, becomes united with the immortal. In this way, humans can be united with the “formless” Brahma, which can be difficult even for the strong gods. Another metaphysical concept of Brahma is Atman, which is synonymous with the Supreme Self or Spirit. Atman is the impersonal God, godlikeness, or the power of creation in the universe, which is found in all beings. We see this conception of atman in Emerson’s “Divinity School Address,” in which he says that: Jesus Christ belonged to the true race of prophets. He saw with open eyes the mystery of the soul….He saw that God incarnates himself in man, and evermore goes forth anew to take possession of his world. He said, in this jubilee of sublime emotion, 


“I am divine. Through me, God acts; through me, speaks. Would you see God, see me; or, see thee, when thou also thinkest as I now think.” 


In addition, Emerson constructs his own God and names Him the Over Soul. He believes that the nature of the relationship between the Over-Soul and the individual is one-to-one. There is no place for any mediators, such as churches or priests, in this sacred and organic relationship. 

The idea of Maya is probably most important for understanding the concept of Brahma and its influence on Emerson. In its simplest form, Maya means a magical power in which the Creator reveals Himself and the mystery of His creation. Maya has a double meaning because it is simultaneously a product of power of creativity and the power itself. The Svetasvatara Upanisad says, 


“Know that nature (prakriti) is maya and that the user of maya is great Isvara. And the whole world is filled with beings that are part of him”. 




The concept of Maya is also related to that of atman, where all beings of the world are seen as parts of the Supreme Being. The way Maya works seems to be contradictory at times because we have to unite ourselves with Maya, and at the same time, we have to remain distinct from it. Thus, Emerson’s writings illustrate that he was heavily influenced by the concept of Maya. 

So in that way we see the similar philosophy of transcendentalism. 


Thanks. 😊

Sunday reading : Flipped Learning & Existentialism

Hello everyone,


Today I'm going to talk about flipped learning. This is obviously our Sunday reading task, assigned by our Prof Dr. Dilip Barad sir. So this Sunday sir gave us an interesting activity. In this task we are supposed to watch 10 short videos and after watching videos we have to write one quote from each video. We also have to ask questions from each video which we don't understand. So here I'm sharing the link to Sir's blog to understand the task, as well as to know more about flipped learning, absurdity and existentialism. 

 https://blog.dilipbarad.com/2016/01/flipped-learning-network.html


Here are my quotes and my questions regarding the videos :


Video 1




"Philosophic things in existence begin within the thinking subject namely the individual."


Video 2




"We are concern here are flights with the relationship; it's been individual thoughts and prepared within silence of heart, as is a great work of art."

-Camus


Video 3




"Reason is useless and there is nothing beyond reason in absurdity."


"Faith is the objective uncertainty with the repulsion of the absurd."


Video 4




"The absurd doesn't frighten me, because from a more elevated point of view, i consider everything in life to be absurd."


Video 5




"It is you who judge every value and choose your own meaning in life and once you are done that you should take responsibility for the choice you made and accept the consequences of that."


Video 6




"At twenty we rage against the heavens and the filth they hid, then we grow. Tired of it. The tragic attitude suits only an extended and ridiculous puberty."

-Soren Kjerkegor


Video 7




"Human, all too human"


"Religious and philological systems which offer such definitive answers to life's questions. Have been very attractive throughout history."


Video 8




"Make your own rules." 


"Do whatever you want."


Video 9




"Existential things much more straightforward than average about many aspects of life."


"Love and compassion are necessities not luxuries without them humanity cannot survive."


Video 10 




"You have to recognize your life has been given to it by you." 


"The literal meaning of life is whatever you're doing that prevents you from killing yourself."


"If there are no guidelines for our actions, then each of us is forced to design our own moral code, to invent a morality to live by."


◆Questions regarding this videos:-


Video 1 

Duration 01:09

As a part of existentialism how passions and freedom works ?


Video 2

Duration 01:48

Does only absurdity leads people for suicide ? How absurdity takes place in the human mind ? What are the reasons ?


Video 3

Duration 04:11

According to Camus what is the difference between absurdity and existentialism ? 


Video 4

Duration 00:12

Is there any connection between Dadaism and Nihilism ? And what is the role of art in Dadaism ?


Video 6

Duration 00:18

According to Soren Kjerkegor Nihilism is the loss of individuality. So what does it mean ? I want to know more about it.


◆Which video do you like the most ?


I like video number five(5), nine(9), ten(10) the most. In video number five I'm very much influenced by one thought of this video is that,


It is you who judge every value and choose your own meaning in life and once you are done that you should take responsibility for the choice you made and accept the consequences of that.


Here we can see that all situations depend on our decision. Once we take the decision the outcome is also acceptable by us, it's necessary. When we judge any value and choose any meaning of life we should take responsibility for the choice which we made. Furthermore I like video number nine(9) and ten(10) most. In video number Nine there is a statement that "Do whatever you want". It also gave me confidence about my goals. Video number ten inspires me a lot. There is also one purpose behind our birth. So with the existential things we can understand what we want to do, the real meaning of our life. So in this way I like these three videos. 


◆Learning outcome from video:-


After watching all these videos the concept of existentialism is clear in my mind. Before I didn't have much idea about existentialism, but after reading and watching I got an idea about existentialism. I also understand about the absurdity. After watching all the videos I came to know that there is purpose by our birth. We are not not born to follow the path which is created and founded by others, but create our own path and rules. After all this is our process of learning. In video nine there is fine sentence that,


"Learning is a gift. Even when pain is your teacher"


We learn from our experiences. And that teaches us the best lessons of life. And existentialism also teaches us how to look over the situation with a positive response. The meaning of your life must be given by you. So this all things I learned from this concept of existentialism and absurdity. I think existentialism removes absurdity from our mind. And at last i want to tell that existentialism teach me, 


"Don't follow others, make your own rules."

Thinking activity : For Whom the Bell Tolls & Catch 22

Hello everyone, myself Latta Baraiya and today I'm going to do compare and contrast between two war novels. This task is assigned by Heenaba Zala ma'am. So let's talk about "For Whom The Bell Tolls" and "Catch 22".




War has regrettably been the answer to many conflicts in human history, ranging from the Sumerian’s conquests to the invasion of Iraq by the US and its allies. During its long history, war has been questioned and contemplated, especially through culture: music, poetry, literature, etc. Two prominent pieces of anti-war literature include Catch-22 by Joseph Heller and For Whom The Bell Tolls by Ernest Hemingway. Both novels express contemporary fears and questions on war, its impact, its conduct, and its purpose, as well as frustrations and dangers of a modernizing society, industry, and bureaucracy. 


◆Tone of the Novels◆ 


In Catch-22 and For Whom the Bell Tolls, the tone realizes the nature of the systems being explored. One system is a vicious circle, the other a balanced cycle. This tone is accomplished through a combination of language, setting, plot, character, and theme. Both stories use language in a precise manner to establish tone. In For Whom the Bell Tolls the language is detail-laden, very much stream of consciousness style, following Robert Jordan for the most part. Catch-22 also has many details but they tend to be used in a more ordinary story way, that is, only when necessary. 


An interesting note in tone as related to setting comes in For Whom the Bell Tolls when Andres is sent to the camp with the message. The tone in that part of the novel, especially with the addition of the crazy Andre Marty, veers wildly from the tone of the rest of the novel and towards satire, more like the tone of Catch-22, this is inextricably linked to setting.


In both novels we can see the former has a comedic tone, while the latter is serious. Tone is a very powerful and moving tool for both Heller and Hemingway in their novels. In Catch-22, comedy through absurdity is the overwhelming tone. Heller uses the comedic tone to explain that 


“[w]ar is irrational”, 


and leave the reader with a 


“catharsis in which the grimness of war provides the dominant memory” 


Heller does so by creating absurd situations that may begin as funny, however leave one with a “bitter pessimism” (Hasley). An example of this is the tale of Captain Half-Oat, whose family had been Native Americans who, whenever they settled, would happen to settle directly over an oil deposit and be evicted by oil companies. This happens several times, and while Native American oppression is obviously a dark topic, it is presented in a humorous tone. 


◆Setting of both Novel◆


Setting of both stories are mainly focused on one distinct and relatively isolated and small place, “islands” in a sense Catch-22 takes place, literally, on an island, reinforcing the sense of claustrophobia, which in a bit of meta-irony is in real life actually the site of a prison. In For Whom the Bell Tolls the main setting of the cave in the mountains is no less an island, though a metaphorical one, the chief difference is in purpose: though no less a trap, it is also a refuge, a safe haven in a place where the outside world is more chaotic and unpredictable than the island. The imagery of islands is used not only on a setting but on a character level, “no man is an island” appears in the front quote of For Whom the Bell Tolls, and it encapsulates the theme of the story, that of connectedness to others. Robert Jordan has made himself believe he is an island, and that he is content to be alienated in that manner; he finds he is not. In Catch-22, Yossarian wants connection desperately, but is alienated again and again by the larger forces of bureaucracy and power and everyone else’s utter state of alienation, with everyone too afraid to reach out, they live in their own islands of isolation within the island: the most obvious example being the Major, who cuts himself off from interaction with others entirely, twisting the law of catch-22 to his advantage. 


Though both stories take place within the larger setting of a war, the specifics are very important to the tone, Catch-22 takes place in the camp; the people there are soldiers caught within the rules and regulations which actively works against meaningful and lasting connection. On the other hand, For Whom the Bell Tolls takes place outside the enclosures of man, the people are guerilla soldiers, who work together as more of a family or community, with relationships more central.


◆Plot of both novel◆


The plots of both stories are in a way circular, but with crucial differences. The plot of Catch-22 is that of an endless loop, the story itself told in a circular manner that doubles back on itself in confusion, the format of the story mirroring the situation of those in it, whereas in For Whom the Bell Tolls the cycles present are natural and the problems lie around accepting such, and accepting life. Therefore the structure of the story also forms a circle of a different sort, with the ending of the story mirroring the beginning, the key difference is that in For Whom the Bell Tolls the presence of a cycle is a function of growth instead of stagnation.


◆Key moment◆


In each story, the blowing up of a bridge is a key moment in both the plot and character arcs. Robert Jordan and Yossarian both have orders to blow up a bridge which, in the end, turn out to be meaningless, they both give up much to carry out those orders. Both lose a man in the attempt. In Catch-22, Yossarian blows the bridge, coming over the target twice in an act of great bravery to make sure the mission succeeds, and comes back to the camp and the realization that all that he gave for the cause of the bridge was meaningless to his superiors, they don’t like his actions and want only to deal with the PR. In a parody of all it should have stood for Yossarian suggests they give him a medal so they can deal with their problem, and they do so, his bravery and accomplishment don’t even matter. From that time on he gives up all store in cause. Robert Jordan carried out the bombing because he had to, but in the end, what he died for was the people he knew and cared about personally. 


◆Characterization◆


Characters, of course, are what drive plot more than anything else, and also heavily influence tone. The orientations and mindsets of the characters greatly impact the tone of the novel they exist within, and vice versa. The main characters of each story are Yossarian and Robert Jordan. Their characters, and arcs, differ: though they have some similarities. They are both philosophical to an extent. They both end up giving hope to others at the end of their story, Robert Jordan by sacrificing himself for others in a natural continuance of his character arc of actually letting other people matter to him emotionally, and Yossarian by getting away when he has, throughout the whole story, been caught within not just a place but a mindset, whose effects grow slowly worse as time goes on: so slowly there is no alarm, like the proverbial slow-boiling frog. His escape, and his insubordination, gives hope to others that escape is indeed possible, that catch-22 is not everything; this important moment for each of these characters comes with the letting go of the fear which has burdened them throughout the rest of the story. 


The Old Man (Catch-22) and Pilar (For Whom the Bell Tolls) sometimes serve similar functions story wise, they are both older and wiser than the majority of the characters, and each give true advice. The difference is that the Old Man is cynical whereas Pilar is hopeful. Each predict the death of a character and warn them; Pilar in the very beginning of the book when she reads Robert Jordan’s palm (she never actually says he will die, but it’s implied), and the Old Man when he talks to Nately and tells him 


“they are going to kill you if you don’t watch out, and I can see now that you are not going to watch out” 


Ironically, in the end, Nately knows he might die but stays regardless, when he could have left, out of love, Robert Jordan knows going to blow the bridge that he will die but ends up surviving to his surprise, only to be wounded, and he lets the others get away while he protects them.


Michaela (Catch-22) and Maria (For Whom the Bell Tolls), also parallel one another in some ways, both were violated in the same manner, both stories symbolize loss of innocence, but the great difference is that Michaela dies while Maria goes on to live; in For Whom the Bell Tolls innocence has been lost but goodness remains, and life continues. This is how, while Michaela remains a symbol, whose character is hardly elaborated on in the story and whose death has most impact for the sheer arbitrary horror, Maria, though also a symbol, is growing as the story continues, she is known as a character and a person, and in that way, even though the symbol of innocence dies she can live on as a woman. 


◆Effect of War in Both Novel◆


One of the main goals of Catch-22 is to satirize the dehumanizing machinery of war by showing the irremovable survival impulse at the heart of every individual. By constantly making fun of wartime situations and by carrying arguments to their extreme, absurd conclusions, the novel shows the conflict that arises when a war’s course is determined by factors alien to the people who are fighting the war. Through a maze of characters and events, Catch-22 explores war and bureaucracy and their effects on ordinary people. 


At first glance Hemingway's novel For Whom The Bell Tolls appears to be an action packed war novel. But underneath all the action there are underlying ideas that reveal much about how war changes a man and causes him to realize the importance of time.


Hemingway reveals these ideas about war through the narrator's thoughts and through the interaction between the major characters. Hemingway shows that war brings about a personal change, that reveals much about man's individuality and that time is limited. Hemingway reveals much about the individuality of men through the relationship of Robert Jordan and Maria. When Jordan is dying at the end of the novel he says to Maria 


"Thou wilt go now, rabbit. But I go for thee. As long as there is one of us there is both of us. Do you understand?" 


We begin to understand how we as people are never truly alone but instead are always surrounded by the memories and thoughts of those we love. When two people truly fall in love they become as one. Where one goes, both go. Robert finally says to her 


"The me in thee. Now you go for us both. Truly. We both go in thee now. This I have promised thee. Stand up. Thou art me now. Thou art all there will be of me. Stand up".


By saying this Jordan reveals how man is never an individual but instead is made up of all the influences, experiences, and memories that we have shared with others. 


◆Some center points◆


In both stories, hope is the center point. Robert Jordan and Pilar give hope to Maria, Maria and Pilar give hope to him, hope of life and living in life instead of merely surviving, a reawakening, in Catch-22 Yossarian and the Chaplain get hope from Orr, and Yossarian (and perhaps the Chaplain it’s impossible to know, since this takes place at the end of the story) gives hope to all the men left behind, that one can stand up to unjustness and not be defeated. 


◆Themes of both novel◆ 


First we see the theme of From Whom The Bell Tolls, and there are some major themes like,


●The Loss of Innocence in War :- Each of the characters in For Whom the Bell Tolls loses his or her psychological or physical innocence to the war. Some endure tangible traumas: Joaquin loses both his parents and is forced to grow up quickly, while Maria loses her physical innocence when she is raped by a group of Fascist soldiers. On top of these tangible, physical costs of the war come many psychological costs. Robert Jordan initially came to Spain with idealism about the Republican cause and believed confidently that he was joining the good side. But after fighting in the war, Robert Jordan becomes cynical about the Republican cause and loses much of his initial idealism. 


●The Value of Human Life:- Many characters die during the course of the novel, and we see characters repeatedly question what can possibly justify killing another human being. Anselmo and Pablo represent two extremes with regard to this question. Anselmo hates killing people in all circumstances, although he will do so if he must. Pablo, on the other hand, accepts killing as a part of his life and ultimately demonstrates that he is willing to kill his own men just to take their horses. Robert Jordan’s position about killing falls somewhere between Anselmo’s and Pablo’s positions. Although Robert Jordan doesn’t like to think about killing, he has killed many people in the line of duty. His personal struggle with this question ends on a note of compromise. Although war can’t fully absolve him of guilt, and he has “no right to forget any of it,” Robert Jordan knows both that he must kill people as part of his duties in the war, and that dwelling on his guilt during wartime is not productive. 


●Romantic Love as Salvation:- Even though many of the characters in For Whom the Bell Tolls take a cynical view of human nature and feel fatigued by the war, the novel still holds out hope for romantic love. Even the worldly-wise Pilar, in her memories of Finito, reveals traces of a romantic, idealistic outlook on the world. Robert Jordan and Maria fall in love at first sight, and their love is grand and idealistic. Love endows Robert Jordan’s life with new meaning and gives him new reasons to fight in the wake of the disillusionment he feels for the Republican cause. 


Now let's see the themes of Catch-22,


●The Absolute Power of Bureaucracy :- One of the most terrifying aspects of Catch-22 is the fact that the lives and deaths of the men in Yossarian’s squadron are governed not by their own decisions concerning dangerous risks but by the decisions of an impersonal, frightening bureaucracy. The men must risk their lives even when they know that their missions are useless, as when they are forced to keep flying combat missions late in the novel even after they learn that the Allies have essentially won the war. The bureaucrats are absolutely deaf to any attempts that the men make to reason with them logically; they defy logic at every turn. Major Major, for example, will see people in his office only when he is not there, and Doc Daneeka won’t ground Yossarian for insanity because Yossarian’s desire to be grounded reveals that he must be sane.


●Loss of Religious Faith:- Even the chaplain begins to doubt his faith in God by the end of Catch-22. His disillusionment stems in part from Colonel Cathcart’s constant attempts to use the outward manifestations of religion to further his own ambition. Heller’s treatment of the subject of God is most focused in the Thanksgiving discussion between Yossarian and Scheisskopf’s wife. Both are atheists: Mrs. Scheisskopf does not believe in a just and loving God, whereas the God in whom Yossarian does not believe is a bumbling fool. Yossarian points out that no truly good, omniscient God would have created phlegm and tooth decay, let alone human suffering. Yossarian has experienced so many terrible things that he cannot believe in a God who would create such a wide array of options when it comes to pain and death. But the loss of faith in God does not mean a world without morals for the characters. 


●The Inevitability of Death:- Yossarian’s one goal to stay alive or die trying is based on the assumption that he must ultimately fail. He believes that Snowden’s gory death revealed a secret: that man is, ultimately, garbage. The specter of death haunts Yossarian constantly, in forms ranging from the dead man in his tent to his memories of Snowden. 


So we can see that the themes of Catch-22 are friendship and obedience through fear, while the themes of For Whom the Bell Tolls are love and connection, and obedience through earned loyalty. The difference in themes shows clearly the difference in tone between the two works. Theme influences tone, because tone, being the feeling image of the entire work, relies on all that is contained within it, as such you cannot have tone without substance, no matter how shallow, tone is the result of a combination of parts and cannot exist without those constituent parts.


So with all these things we can compare both novel. We can see some similarities and some differences in these novels. We can say that In Catch-22, that impression is of a vicious circle; in For Whom the Bell Tolls, it is a surprisingly life giving cycle. 


Happy learning 😊

"The Alchemist" Book Review

The Alchemist Book written by Paulo Coelho is very interesting book to read. Paulo Coelho is a Brazilian lyricist and novelist. The novel s...