Shalonda Fields
ENG 102-55
29 October, 2014
The Literary Details in “The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber” The complicated details used by Ernest Hemingway made a stroke of genius of secrets in his story "The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber". The anonymous secrets does not reveal itself to the reader until the end of the story, yet it leaves a lot to the imagination. At the end of the story Margaret Macomber kills her husband by accident, in order to save him from being attacked by an enormous Buffalo while trying to kill it in the safari in Africa. The anonymous secret is whether or not this killing was truly accidental, or premeditated with an accomplice Robert Wilson. If it would of to be considered premeditation; therefore, it would certainly have to be evidence in the story suggesting such, with a clear motive as well. What makes this story so unique is the conflict theories that Hemingway gives the reader a very virtuously instances that would lead the reader to create a standard motive, yet Hemingway shows the reader that this killing or accident could not have been premeditated. From a virtuously impartial analysis of the story, the reader would see far more evidence supporting the theory of a premeditated killing rather than an unintentional criminal act.
The narrator of “The Short Happy Life”, Wilson, is very blunt, tough hunter and tourist. He is a realistic and static character whose awareness, thoughtful environment and impartiality to those around him greatly aid his telling of the story. His current custodies are Francis Macomber, the “very tall, very well built” realistic main character and Margot, his “extremely handsome and well-kept”, static, realistic wife. The two despise each other but are unable to be separated. Margot is older than, and prettier than Francis and dependent on Francis’s wealth and Francis knows that Francis could not interact with another woman.
Hemingway encounter to the reader that there are conflict has the struggle or encounter within the plot of two conflicting navies in this story and that many attends to create reader interest and suspense. This is found all throughout this story. Macomber faces both internal and external conflict. The author displays conflict between Macomber and his wife: She had missed the chance to leave him and he knew it. If he had been better with women she would probably have started to worry about him getting another new, beautiful wife; but she knew too much about him to worry about him either.
This conflict becomes an external one when Margot sleeps with Wilson and Macomber is awake when she returns, and they begin to fight:
"Where have you been?"
"Out to get a fresh breath of air."
"That's a new name for it. You are a bitch."
"Well you're a coward."
"There wasn't going to be any of that. You promised there wouldn't be."
"Well there is now." She said.
The conflict lies deeper than just with his wife; there is also conflict between Macomber and Wilson. Wilson is an attractive man. He provides a direct contrast to Macomber. On the surface he understands women and is not afraid of the safari lifestyle, but deeper he has earned all of his assets and success in life. He had respect, something that Macomber lacks, even from his wife of been a coward. When Macomber shoots the wounded buffalo he has overcome his fear, and for a moment shares a common respect along with Wilson. The confidence that filled him, boosted him in action and his reactions with his wife, and may have also been enough to even make him leave his adulterous wife. The reader never knows for sure though, since Margot kills him by a shot to his skull.
Hemingway view that Francis and Margaret Macomber and Wilson all reflect the views, bizarre characteristics and symbolism in “The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber”, The ending leaves the reader wondering if the conflict between Margot and Macomber was such that it drove her to murder him, or if he had finally Wilson became the marvelous man she wanted in her life and in a desperately attempt to save Francis’s heart Margot puts an end to his life by mistake. Yet this is the statement she uses to unjustified the readers, or convince them that her marriage was over .When this terrible event happens, "Stop it," she said. "Of course it's an accident," he said. "I know that." "Stop it," she said. "Don't worry," He said. "There will be a certain amount of unpleasantness but I will have some photographs taken that will be very useful at the inquest. There's the testimony of the gun-bearers and the driver too. You're perfectly all right."
"Stop it," she said.
"There's a hell of a lot to be done," he said. "And I'll have to send a truck off to Nairobi. Why didn't you poison him? That's what they do in England."
"Stop it. Stop it. Stop it," the woman cried. Wilson looked at her with his flat blue eyes. "I'm through now," he said. "I was a little angry. I'd begun to like your husband."
"Oh, please stop it," she said. "Please, please stop it." "That's better," Wilson said. "Please is much better. Now I'll stop. Both possibilities are corroborated threw effective use of plot and motive leading up to the end of this story. I like this well-fashioned use of doubt at the end of Hemingway's story. 