“What Would Jig Do?”
The Iceberg Theory of Writing stresses the effectiveness and strength of writing that lies in the details unspoken. If the writing is worded effectively, the details removed are recognized as if they were printed. The scant observations can be expanded by the in-tune reader. When the author completely knows and understands the subject, the material can be revised to minimalistic size. The visible and observed portion of the story only constitutes a fraction of the size of the overall picture, the strength and mountainous integrity of the iceberg underneath what is stated. The story is told through a journalistic omniscient tongue. The dialogue is reported without any fluffy frivolous adjectives and the intimate thoughts of the characters are not explicably mapped out. The reader is able to interpret feelings through what the characters say and how they interact. Many conclusions can be derived from this style. The story Hills Like White Elephants by Ernest Hemingway is about a young couple and the controversial issue of abortion. Though the operation is nowhere stated in the story, it is doubtlessly understood through conversation and literary elements. As the story progresses conflicting yet unspoken feelings haunt the story’s characters. Feelings get hurt, beaten, and upset in the process to ultimately make a conclusion that will change the American and Jig’s relationship; Jig chooses to avoid the simple operation and rather have the child. Jig and the American are in the midst of a nomadic excursion temporarily paused at a train station in Spain. The story quickly submerges the reader into the couple tiptoeing around a challenging decision in which there are decisively only two options, two paths, symbolized by the train tracks that pass by the station. The reasoning for the trip is never explicitly stated. Frankly, considering the opposite track paths, the decision can be made to continue in route to Madrid or turn around....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document