Faulkner and Hemmingway
...alo or her husband. It could go either way because Mr. Wilson says “that was a pretty thing to do.” And also “of course it was an accident.” In A Rose for Emily this happened again. We were left wondering what the significance of the iron-gray hair on the pillow next to the skeleton of her dead husband really was. In all three of these stories, their writers used the ending suspense of not making you wonder what truly happened. They make you think after their stories by writing about things that taught them a lesson or made them realize something. They also want you to think so they write to make you see how and what their point was. There are also many differences of Hemmingway’s and Faulkner’s styles. One distinct difference was their opposing writing styles. Hemmingway uses more dialog than narration in Hills like White Elephants. He didn’t bluntly describe the scenery around the train station; he had his characters do it. For example, the narrator never gave details on what the hills resemble the girl was the one that did that. “They look like white elephants.” Another technique he used is he didn’t tell the story through the narrator, but through the characters. By Mrs. Macomber in The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber, never actually having an affair with Mr. Wilson in the text, it leads you to believe that by what her husband says by accusing her. William Faulkner does things opposite from Hemingway’s in this topic. In his writings, he has the narrator tell the story. In A Rose for Emily, Faulkner had few direct quotes from the characters including Emily. Instead a person just knowing her told the story.” One of us lifted something from it, and leaning forward, that faint and i9nvisible dust dry and acrid ...