Answer the following question by Sunday at midnight. Be sure to thoroughly explain and discuss your reasoning using supporting evidence from the text. (2 paragraphs minimum) - 15 Points
After you have responded respond to a classmate's response. (1 paragraph at least 5 sentences). - 5 Points each
Would you feel differently about the story if the roles of Jig and the man were reversed; that is, if Jig wanted the abortion and the man wanted her to marry him and keep the baby? How would the feel of the story be different if the narrator was from 3rd person omniscient?
If the roles of Jig and the man were reversed, the story would probably be similar, but in different ways. The man would probably still be as adamant as he was in the original, but in order to convince Jig to marry him and have the baby. Jig would also be just as annoyed with the American as she was when he wanted her to have an abortion. If the story were to change, I would still feel as strongly as I would for my stance on abortion; however, I would just agree with a different character.
ReplyDeleteThe feel of the story would be very different if the narrator was from 3rd person omniscient. This point of view would give readers insight as to how each character feels about what is going on. Maybe the man has some sort of memory from his childhood regarding his father that scares him into not wanting the responsibility of becoming a father. Or Jig could have been an orphan and was never loved, so she feels the obligation to keep the baby and love it endlessly. It could completely change a reader's view on the story.
I agree with you. If the narrator was 3rd person omniscient events and memories would enter the story. Maybe the man did have a horrible father figure. Maybe the man had a old witch say that his child will be a demon with five horns. Who knows? Maybe Jig was an orphan. Maybe Jig had multiple miscarriages, and she thinks that this is the only time which she will actually have a child. Who knows? I think if the narrator was 3rd person omniscient there will be more of a connection with the characters or, at least, the characters will be a little less flat.
DeleteIf the roles were reversed and Jig wanted the abortion, meanwhile The American wanted to marry and keep the baby I would of been surprised. I would of been surprised because during this time period women were seen as inferior to men in all aspects of life. For him to actually care about the baby and Jig, shows that he would of been distinct from many men during this era. Most men would see their wives as their servants and only able to stay home and take care of the family. Also, if Jig wanted to abort it the baby it would raise the question. Why does she want to abort it? Raises the question more than the man wanting to abort because during this time all medical procedures carried an extreme risk, an abortion during this with no modern-day medicine would have a high fatality rate.
ReplyDeleteIf "Hills Like White Elephants" been told in a 3rd person omniscient POV, we would know more about the feelings of The American and Jig and what lead them to this decision and why they believed it should be done.
I totally agree with you. I like your point where you stated that, during that time period, women were inferior to men. That point completely slipped my mind, however, what you said is true, about him actually caring about the baby and getting married. I would have been surprised as well since it was extremely rare for a man to want that back then. Also, the consideration of an abortion was a big deal in that era since medical procedures were not as skilled and simple as they are today.
DeleteI agree that the man wanting the baby would be a bit surprising. I actually believe he may have of the same resemblance to Winston, in terms of being the unique one with a different opinion. Jig wanting to abort would obviously be due to her fear of what to do; what she believes is right. It is also very possible that the medical procedures that were done back then were also a bit more gruesome than they are now.
DeleteIf the roles of Jig and the man were reversed I would feel differently about the story. In the story now, I feel as if the American man has most of the say as to what is going to happen to the baby since Jig tends to agree with him. She says "Then I'll do it. Because I don't care about me." pg. 280; which implies that she will go for whatever he wants because she doesn't want to lose him. However, if their roles were switched, Jig would have more of the say as to what will happen to the baby. The man would probably get mad, but since the girl would have more of the authority like the man does in the story, then they would most likely have the abortion. Of course the man would go along with her because then he wouldn't want to lose her as she doesn't want to lose him in the story.
ReplyDeleteThe feel of the story would be different if the narrator was from 3rd person omniscient by the reader having an insight as to how the characters truly feel about wanting an abortion or keeping the baby. There would be more detail as to how Jig or the man feel about the situation. In the story, neither of the characters thoroughly say what they want to happen even though the reader can kind of guess on what they want. However, we still are not fully sure as to what they want to do. If the story was in 3rd person omniscient, we would know all of these things and maybe even more, like if the man really does care about the girl or if he just wants her to have an abortion and then leave her so he doesn't have to worry about a baby. The reader would also probably understand what is going on in the story better if we weren't just reading the characters dialogue, which is partial feelings. "It's really an awfully simple operation, Jig" pg.279
Good point! In the original roles, the woman would do what the man wants just to keep him. However, now the roles switch which could possibly mean that the man will have to compromise to keep her. The woman would perhaps care a bit more about her. At the moment when she does want to keep the baby, she doesn't really care about herself because she might believe that she could have another one. However, if she doesn't want the baby, it would be more difficult for her to be indifferent.
DeleteI agree with you about the 3rd person omniscient. If it was told in this manner we would of have learned why the man wants to abort the baby. Also why does the woman not want to? We would get more information about this and more helping us the readers see what is going in in their minds. Instead we are just given dialogue and we must infer what they are trying to say and what emotions they would be portraying.
DeleteIf the woman wanted the abortion and the man wanted to keep the kid, the story would be pretty different. The characters would be different. Jig would be even more frustrated and hostile. She wouldn't want to talk about it even more because the man is about to leave and because she is the one who has to deal with giving birth. The man would be more compassionate and, maybe, a bit more angry because he wants to keep the baby. Perhaps, the man is about to leave but return with his things. The conversation would be much more blunt and aggressive.
ReplyDeleteIf the story was 3rd person omniscient, the story will have much more emotion and sentiment. It would be easier to know the topic of the conversation since the thoughts of each person will be within the story. The narrator would allow us to see beyond the dialogue. Perhaps, the narrator would give some background and other important details. The narrator being 3rd person omniscient would probably make the story in favor of one side than the other due to that the narrator will expose hidden emotions and clear up any words not said.
I agree with you on where, if the roles were switched, that their conversation would have been more aggressive. Jig would have been more frustrated since she, now, would be "wearing the pants". She would probably get upset that the man doesn't agree with her and just not talk to him and go ahead with the abortion. Jig would not want to go through the struggle of giving birth alone since the man is leaving. Yes, he does invite her to go with him, but, most likely, she would be too mad to even consider going.
DeleteIf the roles of Jig and the man were reversed, that would make me feel entirely different about the story. Throughout the story, I felt sorry for Jig due to the situation she was in and the huge decisions she would have to make. On page 281, she asks the man to "please please please. . . stop talking," it reveals that she is very afraid of the situation and rather not discus it. Although, if it were the man that wanted to keep the baby, and the woman that wanted the abortion, I would feel pity for the man, not the woman. Especially due to the fact that the man would not be able to do anything because ultimately, it is Jig's decision whether to keep the baby or not.
ReplyDeleteThe story would have a different feel if the narrator was from 3rd person omniscient because one would know exactly how the two are feeling, instead of assuming. This would remove almost all of the suspense in the story or any assumptions that can be made about either of the characters. The story would also be substantially longer than it was; describing how the couple felt about each other and the pregnancy. It would give us a clearer idea on how each person thought and their tendencies. It would, although, make the story more interesting for the readers.
I agree on your point that a third person omniscient view would let the audience know the inside thoughts of the characters. It would make the story loses a lot of suspense and discussion points. However, I do not agree that it is up to Jig whether to keep the baby or not. The story was set in the Catholic country of Spain and it was published a while back. Under the big environment at the time, abortion was clearly against the norm of the public and man was the superior gender. Under both of these influences, I think the man would have final say on the issue of abortion.
DeleteI would feel differently if the roles of Jig and the man were reversed. In the story, it seems as if the American man will have the final say as to what is going to happen to the baby because Jig tends to agree with him. However, if their roles were switched, Jig would have the last word about what happens to the baby. Although the man would probably be angry or upset about Jig's decision, they would most likely have the abortion because Jig would have the final say.
ReplyDeleteIf the point of view was from 3rd person omniscient, the feel of the story would be different because the reader would be able to see how the characters truly feel about the situation due to more detail. In the story, the characters don't come straight out & say what they want to happen to the baby even though the reader begins to understand their opinions. If the story was in 3rd person omniscient, we would be able to truly understand their opinions towards the situation as well as how they feel about each other. If the reader didn't have to read just dialogue, he/she would probably understand what is going on in the story more easily.
I disagree with your stance that Jig would have the last word because society at that time would not have allowed such decisions (in this case, whether or not to terminate a fetus) to be made by a person of that gender. Regardless of her opinion, the American man would be the one to make the ultimate decision. Her and her fetus' fate depended on him and whether or not her would take her hand in marriage.
DeleteI agree with your statement that if the point of view changed to 3rd person omniscient, the story would change. Our answers to the second question were essentially the same. :)
I agree with Victoria R in that Jig would not have the last word in the decision if the roles were reversed. Women did not have much of a say in any decision at this point in time. Especially such a big one as we see in this story, the American would have made the ultimate decision. You also bring up a good point concerning the point of view. No one ever straight up says what they mean, so knowing what was going on in both Jig's and the man's heads would have made a significant impact on the way the story is viewed.
DeleteI also agree with Victoria and Anessa. I believe that the man would have the last say so if the roles were reversed. I believe this because the man would have the final say so in if he wanted to marry and support Jig and the baby. That decision, I feel would greatly affect Jig's decision. I know first hand from my sister that being a single parent is extremely difficult especially at such a young age. If the point of view was changed the story would be a lot more straight forward and the word abortion would more than likely actually be used.
DeleteYou have a good point, but I disagree that the story seemed to have the American with the final say with this situation. I do believe that if the story were extended, Jig would have the final say. I do, although, agree that in 3rd person omniscient, there would be more detail due to the character's true emotions. I also believe that it would be easy to select sides if it were in 3rd person omniscient.
ReplyDeleteI would not feel differently about the story if the roles of Jig and the man were reserved. If Jig had wanted the abortion and the man had wanted to marry and keep the baby, the decision of the story would have changed but the person making it wouldn't have. The man's decision was ultimately the only one that mattered because of the time period of the story. The short story was published in 1927; at this time in history a single woman with a child was worthless. It didn't matter one way or the other whether or not Jig wanted the baby. On page 280, Jig agrees to have the abortion stating that she'll do so because she “doesn't care” about herself. The woman having the abortion is the more logical move in terms of her socioeconomic well-being, unless the man does decide to marry her. I wouldn't feel any differently about the story if the roles were reserved because the status of the decision on whether or not to terminate her fetus and of her socioeconomic status are still reliant upon the man.
ReplyDeleteThe feel of the story would be different if the narrator was from 3rd person omniscient because that point of view would showcase not only the actual words and actions of the characters but their history, feelings, and thoughts. This would have shed new light on the situation in the story. Being able to see more of the story than what is at face-value could possibly sway the audience's opinion on the topic at hand. The story would have been an easier read if he had given such details. The sensitivity of this topic is not one that would have talked about so openly, especially in this time period, so an all-knowing point of view might had halted the short story's publication.
I disagree with what you said about the American's decision being the only one that mattered. Yes, the time period has a great affect on Jig's image if she was a single mother but, she has the final decision. The American is in a foreign country with a woman he probably just met and they are already expecting a child. I think the man's image would be affected greatly in this situation as well. If Jig was adamant about keeping the child, there really isn't anything the man could do to change her mind. If the American wanted to marry her and keep the child the story would have a happier mood and ending but the decision still would lie with jig.
DeleteI agree with Gloria. Ultimately, Jig could have done whatever she wanted to do with her child. The American, at this point, was just along for the ride. If he were to return home with a pregnant mistress, his personal image could have definitely been tarnished, which would be the exact same thing as Jig walking into her mother's home with her fatherless child. Ultimately, the situation they were presented with had no happy ending, and the only way you as a reader could feel happy about the ending is if Jig and the American ended up happily married, which is, knowing how literature works ("Everything We Read Is Dark and Depressing." -Mr. Lear) isn't quite how it happened.
DeleteI agree with both Kale and Gloria, the American's decision wouldn't have really mattered. Jig would have done what she wanted with the child.Gloria said that the time period has a great effect on Jig, and this I think is true. In this time period single mothers and women in general were viewed as inferior. Kale also stated that ''The American was just along for the ride", and I also think that this is true, because at the end the only one that has the right to decide what is going to be done with the child is Jig.
DeleteIf Jig wanted the abortion and the American man wanted her to marry him and keep the baby I would feel very different about this story. In the original story, i felt sorry for Jig because the American was pushing her to get an abortion and she wanted to avoid the conversation all together. If the roles were reversed however, then the American would come off as much more compassionate than he originally was in the story. I would feel sympathy for the American instead of Jig. If Jig wanted the abortion I feel that it would have been a surprise because in the time period that this story was written women were supposed to conform to what society wanted. Abortion was, and possibly always will be, a hot topic to discuss.
ReplyDeleteIf the narrator was from 3rd person omniscient the story would be clearer and longer. The story would be much more detailed because we would be able to know what each character was thinking and the topic of abortion would be very clear from the start. As the reader we could better understand Jig and the American's stances on why each wants the abortion and if having the abortion is what Jig truly wants. The feel of the story would change because we would know the truth behind the vague dialogue we are given.
I agree on both parts of your argument. During the 1900's Catholic Spain, abortion was not the norm of most people and women were traditionally inferior. I totally expect that Jig will listen to the man and keeps the baby. I also think that a third person omniscient view would make the story lot easier to understand. There would be less guess work and more concrete details to look for in the story.
DeleteI agree with you that it would have been quite a surprise if Jig wanted an abortion. The time period would have been a definite factor when deciding what to do - abortion was even more taboo than it is now, back then. The American would have seemed like more of the 'good guy' than he in the original set up of the story. The 3rd person omniscient would have been more detailed, like you said. I also think that the feel would have become more tense because of the thoughts that would have been revealed to us.
DeleteI agree with both of you for this. Jig would be an outcast if she were to get an abortion, and this particular culture may have even done worse. The american would be a bit more of a "good guy," but once they found out that he had a baby out of wedlock, he would be just as looked down upon as Jig. And I agree with Gloria's statement about the the change in narration. We would have access to much better descriptive details and the thoughts of the American. However, we would also side with one or the other immediately, because if we knew the reasons why each wanted what they did, we would agree with one path of logic over the other.
DeleteIf the roles of Jig and the man were reversed, then I would feel differently about the story. If feel as though the woman would be hostile and avoid talking to the man completely. I think abortion was illegal at the time that the story takes place, and Spain being a Catholic society she would have been incarcerated. Also, since the man wanted to get married and have the baby, then the woman would not have much of a choice since women usually had to listen to men.
ReplyDeleteIf the story were narrated from a 3rd person omniscient point of view, then the whole story would have had a different mood to it. We would be able to know the feelings and thoughts going through the characters' heads. Also, we could possibly get a bit of their history that led them to their decision about the baby. The 3rd person omniscient point of view would definitely make this a one-sided discussion in my opinion.
If the roles of Jig and the man were reversed, the story would definitely have a different feel about it. First of all, the story takes place in Spain, a catholic country where most people are against the concept of abortion. Jig also seems to follow the advice of the man often, as evidence when she asks the American "is it good with water? (page idk, i forgot the book). She had to wait until the man answers before she made her decision. Jig probably will probably listen to the American due to the double influence of the Catholic atmosphere and the superiority of men in society. The story would probably be shorter and there would be less arguments.
ReplyDeleteThe story would definitely have a different feel to it if it was narrated from a 3rd person omniscient point of view. Third person omniscient would give us details to the thought process of each character. It would explain the reasons behind their stands on the issue of abortion. It would also make the story a lot easier to understand. However, if the story was narrated from a 3rd person omniscient, the story would lose a lot of discussion points due to the exposition of the thoughts of the characters.
I agree with you here Chino, as you and Kale basically said the story would be a lot easier to understand and we'd know almost everything about the characters. The story wouldn't create as much suspense as it does when it's being told from both the main characters.
DeleteIf the roles of Jig and the American were reversed, I wouldn't feel differently about the story, I would just be agreeing with a different person. I think as much as Jig would have wanted to have an abortion, if the roles would have reversed, she wouldn't have. The society in that time period was very clear in their feelings towards abortion and towards a single mother; she would have been belittled to the extent that she would have been completely isolated. Especially since the two were on vacation in Spain, a very catholic and conservative nation. Even if the opinions were switched, I don't think that the fire behind them would have changed - the man would have still been as determined to talk about it while the women refuses to even mention it.
ReplyDeleteIf the story were told from 3rd person omniscient, there would be a different mood and tone to it. Instead of the abruptness of the dialogue in the original short story, there would be thoughts from both the American and Jig and maybe even the waitress and the people that surround them at the train station. There would be more emotions involved rather than just indications of emotions from their diction. The fact that the story was about abortion would probably have been revealed to us a lot sooner with the thoughts of both Jig and the American. The 3rd person omniscient point of view would cause us to see more from each side of the argument.
I agree with you Valeria. Though the roles of the couple would have changed, the aspect of pregnant women being judged by whether or not they are married is still there. Women in this time period relied on men, example given in the story, when Jig needed the man to talk in Spanish for the women to order her a drink. Having that in mind, the man would have eventually influenced Jig to keep the baby. Also, the third person point of view would have made readers feel sympathy for the man who would have wanted to keep the baby
DeleteIf the roles of the characters in the story had been reversed, my opinion of the book would change drastically. I would probably view the book as revolutionary in a sense. The time period that the book is written in had a social image of women was, basically, have the children and take care of them and the husband. An abortion at the time would be seen as almost heretic compared to how we view it now. Jig would have been shunned and a cast away of society. Great, just what we needed: Another Holden Caulfield.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, the conversation would not have changed all too much. Jig would still be the angry, arguing one who just wants to be left alone with her decision, whereas the American would still be asking all kinds of questions and trying to find out what's wrong. It would just be extremely awkward for the generation during which it was published.
If the story were told from a 3rd person omniscient, the story would probably be rather boring, and wouldn't be remembered as that one story everyone had to read in Literature class. We would immediately know what is bothering the couple and what their individual thoughts are. It would, however, include the views of other people in the story, which would provide a greater form of characterization, although that isn't quite necessary in this case. But it would immediately force the reader to pick a side, which is probably why Hemingway didn't include it.
I somewhat agree with you here Kale. The story would probably be boring due to the immediate fact that we'd know what's bothering the couple. Then again we'd know what's bothering the couple but we wouldn't know exactly WHY it was bothering the couple.
DeleteThe story would be more interesting if the roles were reversed in, “Hills like White Elephants”. Jig is madly in love with the man. She was ready to abort her child just for the man’s sake. Jig is a bit confused and uncertain about what she wants and gets convinced by the man easily. She is in love with the man and will do anything for him, even if she doesn’t like it. The man seems very influential and convincing towards Jig, if the man wanted Jig to have the baby he could’ve easily convinced her.
ReplyDeleteIf the story were told in a Third Person omniscient the story and the mood would completely change. We'd know a little bit more about the characters and why they have their thoughts on the baby. It might be more interesting due to a maybe background story that might be provided about both the Man and Jig. The story would also be a bit more interesting considering that this story just started out with a couple out at a train stop in Madrid, Spain. Maybe just MAYBE if the story was told in third person we'd be provided with a background story on both characters.
Shemar, i'd have to agree with you. Jig is easy to influence, and i also believe that the American would influence her easy if he actually did want the baby to be born. Shows that Jig is weak minded in a way, since she allows the man to influence her that much. And i agree that the story would be a little more interesting since we'd get thoughts of the man as well.
DeleteIf the roles of Jig and the American were reversed, I'd have a different opinion towards the man. If the man were to say that he actually wanted to keep the baby and marry her, that would take away the masculine pride every man possesses, and would be a totally different man from the original story. Here Jig would be portrayed as a cruel, cold hearted woman wanting to kill a baby. In this time period women were described as gentle, compassionate beings relied on men. Jig would seem to command power over the man and would be in search for independence rather than a cover up since pregnant unmarried women were frowned upon in this time period.
ReplyDeleteIf the story was told in a third person point of view, the story would lose its mood and tone. The readers would know what both future parents were thinking and how they felt towards the "operation". The reader would become more aware of other character's opinions towards the couple, like the bartender and the waitress. The mysterious background towards what the couple is actually talking about would be figured out too quickly and would ruin the implied meanings of the story. The third person point of view would also lead the reader into feeling sympathy for one of the sides.
If the roles were switched i would have a different opinion of both characters. as for the American i would think he actually cares about the baby on the way and Jig herself. but as for Jig, i'd think of her as a bad women. the idea of knowing that she wouldn't want the baby would seem wrong. Even though she's young it would seem bad since she has the American trying to marry her and provide for the baby. The readers would think of her as a cruel person for trying to take away an innocent life.
ReplyDeleteAs for the 3rd person, i think the story would change just a bit. You'll be able to not only read about Jigs thoughts, but also the Americans. Which could change the story since we really don't get to see his thoughts that much. Even though it'd change the tone, it still provide more details about the Americans and Jigs conversation.
I agree with you on that, "I would believe that Jig would be a bad woman." I think that if the man was supporting the baby there would be no reason for Jig to have an abortion. If the point of view was changed, and the story was still told in the sense that the man does not support the baby, then I believe that the man would be thinking like "why is this so hard for you, why can't you just get the abortion?"
DeleteIf the roles were reversed and Jig was the one who wanted to get the abortion that would change the story completely. If that was the case I feel that they would be directly discussing the issue of apportion. Jig and the man would not be dancing around the subject of abortion. I feel that Jig would more than likely keep the baby if the man wanted to keep the baby and marry her. I believe this because I feel that Jig would have that stability that she need and she would feel a little better about getting pregnant at a young age.
ReplyDeleteThe story would be different if the narrator was third person omniscient because we would hear the thoughts of both characters, as well as other people that may have been at or around the train station. As readers, we would be able to know whether or not Jig is thinking about going along with the abortion or if she is against it. The man’s thoughts would probably be something like “Why is it such a big deal to you, it is the better thing to do for the two of us right now.” The other people around are probably curious to know what Jig and the man’s conversation is about.
If the roles of Jig and the man were reversed, meaning Jig were to be the one wanting the abortion and the man actually wanted to marry her and care for the baby. I think the story would still be the same. I would feel the same about the story, the only thing that would change would be the side that I would be on. The characters would also change, because now Jig would be the one to want to talk about the subject more, and the man would not even want to mention the subject of abortion. Jig would do what she wanted to do with the baby and she would probably care more about herself. Thee an on the other hand would be careless about himself, het he would always look out for Jig and the well being of their child.
ReplyDeleteIf the story were to be narrated in third person omniscient, the feel of the story would completely change. The tone would change also, because we would be able read what Jig and the American thought about the situation and their feelings towards it. Third omniscient would also allow the reader to figure out what the story is about from the beginning, because the story would not refer to the situation as a "situation", but it would refer to it as what it actually is an abortion. The word abortion would most likely have had been used if the story had been written in third person omniscient.