INGL Essay 2 - Grade: A PDF

Preview

Summary

Ensayo de inglés...

Description

Analyzing the acceptance speeches of John Steinbeck and Ernest Hemingway The two authors observed in this essay received the highest awards for their work, because in every word they wrote they left their beliefs, their passions, and themselves. They were awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature which is one of the most prestigious awards anyone can receive. John Steinbeck is recognized for writing stories about characters immensely complex, he created people that were relatable, real, and dreamers. His characters represented mostly minorities and with them he depicted all the struggles these groups faced in real life, his ability to be able to cause empathy with the readers was incredible. Ernest Hemingway on the other side liked to create masculine characters and his style of writing was more simplistic and straightforward. Hemingway mastered the art of the dialogue and much like Steinbeck he could create an incredible picture for the readers. Both writers were part of the “Lost Generation” which was the term used to describe the people that came of age during World War I, however Ernest Hemingway was a more prominent figure of the movement and its credited for the widespread of the term. This generation grew up in horrible conditions and because of this they wrote about decadence, death, gender, and idealization. As stated, these authors received the Nobel Prize for Literature for their contributions to writing. When comparing their acceptance speeches, it is incredibly easy to notice how different their both are and how similar their individual literature is. John Steinbeck wrote a longer speech filled with details, quotes, and philosophical thinking. Ernest Hemingway was not present to receive his award because of health problems, but even then, his speech was short, concise, and simple; he went straight to the point. Regardless of the differences between the speeches the audience can make out how passionate they are about their work and how grateful they feel for that opportunity. Both have very different writing styles that is a given, but after reading the

Mendoza Ortiz 2 judges rationale they were both praised for their ability to observe the human behavior and write about it. John Steinbeck, in one hand, was praised for: “In your writings, crowned with popular success in many countries, you have been a bold observer of human behaviour in both tragic and comic situations. This you have described to the reading public of the entire world with vigour and realism.” (Steinbeck “Banquet speech”), he had the ability to portray exactly what he saw in words. Ernest Hemingway was awarded the prize for this ability also: “for the eagle eye with which he has observed, and for the accuracy with which he has interpreted the human existence of our turbulent times; also for the admirable restraint with which he has described their naked struggle.”(Hemingway “Banquet speech”). The judges emphasized the same ability, and so their differences lie on their actual words, not on how they are perceived. Steinbeck and Hemingway wrote incredibly different speeches and through those words people can learn more about them. For instance, Steinbeck started talking about the beginnings of literature and highlighted that the role of the writer was to show how the human truly is. He believed his function as a writer was “to declare and to celebrate man’s proven capacity for greatness of heart and spirit – for gallantry in defeat – for courage, compassion and love.”(Steinbeck “Banquet speech”), his goal was to portray humans as accurately as possible in his writing. He also mentioned how a writer “is charged with exposing our many grievous faults and failures, with dredging up to the light our dark and dangerous dreams for the purpose of improvement.”(Steinbeck “Banquet speech”), to him it was important to depict life as he saw it, he wanted to show men as they were. Ernest Hemingway thought his function as a writer was to always create something new. He expressed how writers should always strive to form new beginnings regardless of what came before them, it is individuality to him that makes the writer, “For a true writer each book should be a new beginning where he tries again for something that

Mendoza Ortiz 3 is beyond attainment. He should always try for something that has never been done or that others have tried and failed.” (Hemingway “Banquet speech”) It is here were the differences between the authors become more apparent. Now they are not only being praised for their ability to observe the human behavior, but they are also being praised on how they portray it. Steinbeck does not talk about being different, he evens mentions his predecessor, he considers the ability to write exactly what he sees as the function of the writer. Hemingway considers that the ability of being unique while also showing how men truly are is his function. These authors are not only distinguished by their opinion on the function of the writer but also by their point of view on humanity. John Steinbeck considered that by men being able to choose they had taken power from God. In the speech he holds humans to a higher standard and implied that the worst obstacle to man is himself. This sentiment is shown throughout the plot of Of Mice and Men. The obstacles these characters face are things that cannot be change. Lennie has a disability, Candy is old, Crooks is black, Curley’s wife is a woman, Curley is short, and the others are governed by their fears. When the novel was discussed in class the word used to describe the characters was dreamers, they all dreamt of a better life. The farm was always in some way unattainable, however it represented hope and that made it special. The common denominator between the characters was fear, was there truly no other path in life for themselves? Was a life of unhappiness the only thing achievable? Would things get better? With Candy’s role Steinbeck somehow linked all the fears:

They'll can me purty soon. Jus' as soon as I can't swamp out no bunk houses they'll put me on the county. Maybe if I give you guys my money, you'll let me hoe in the garden even after I ain't no good at it. An' I'll wash dishes an' little chicken stuff like that. But I'll

Mendoza Ortiz 4 be on our own place, an' I'll be let to work on our own place." He said miserably, "You seen what they done to my dog tonight? They says he wasn't no good to himself nor nobody else. When they can me here I wisht somebody'd shoot me. But they won't do nothing like that. I won't have no place to go, an' I can't get no more jobs. I'll have thirty dollars more comin', time you guys is ready to quit. (Steinbeck 61-62) He was disabled, he was old, and most of all he was tired. Candy embodied the statement that man’s only obstacle is himself, because there is no way to fight your own body. He spent his days working while being injured and with the persistent fear of having nowhere to go. In the novel Steinbeck managed to portray an example of the circle of life, he showed the grievances and failures of the human while showing how through it all man could conserve hope. Steinbeck in the speech talks about natural enemies and how sometimes humans become cowardly when they face them, and in the novel, he shows exactly that sentiment. Ernest Hemingway as mentioned before liked to create very masculine characters who in the face of adversity would not cower. In his speech he highlights the fact that writers live a lonely life; loneliness, and isolation are themes very much present in the novel The Old Man and the Sea. Unlike Steinbeck he does not mentions fear in his speech, but through his work that fear is known “For he does his work alone and if he is a good enough writer he must face eternity, or the lack of it, each day.” (Hemingway “Banquet speech”). Hemingway was afraid of what came after life, of dying, of not being masculine enough, he showed all of this in his works. Santiago the protagonist of the book went through an awful situation and his body went through a lot of trauma, but when reading the audience cannot perceived these factors. The old man is suffering but still he remains in control, he thinks he may die but still conserves the calm, it is only through the simplistic details that the reader can get a sense of what is actually going on: “You

Mendoza Ortiz 5 are killing me, fish, the old man thought. But you have a right to. Never have I seen a greater, or more beautiful, or a calmer or more noble thing than you, brother. Come on and kill me. I do not care who kills who.” (Hemingway 35). It is apparent in his writing that he also perceived humanity in a fragile way, and he consider old age as the worst enemy men had. In summary, John Steinbeck and Ernest Hemingway possessed the ability to precisely describe and depict the human behavior in their novels. They shared many similarities and were both from the same period, but their views on the function of the writer and their take on humanity differ. Steinbeck considered the ability to present men in their truest form while correctly depicting everything that entails being human the job of the writer. Hemingway consider the ability to create something new every time a writer wrote a book the job of the writer, he saw individuality as the goal. Steinbeck also saw humans as powerful and almost mighty because they could choose many things but not everything. Hemingway measured worth in actions and attitude and did not perceived humans as godly. However, they both acknowledge in the speech or their works that fear controls the man, be it fear of dying or living.

Works Cited

Mendoza Ortiz 6 Hemingway, Ernest. “Banquet speech”. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Media AB 2020. Wed. 30 Sep 2020. Hemingway, Ernest. The Old Man and the Sea. 1954. Print. O'connor, Kate. Lost Generation . 21 Oct 2020. http://writersinspire.org/content/lost-generation.

Steinbeck, John. Of Mice and Men. Penguin Books, 2013. Steinbeck, John. “Banquet speech”. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Media AB 2020. Wed. 30 Sep 2020. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/literature/1962/steinbeck/25229-johnsteinbeckbanquet-speech-1962/...