Ford Madox Ford

I would argue that Hemingway is something of an unreliable narrator. His belief in omission leaves the reader with a lack of knowledge the same way an unreliable narrator tends to give false information. It is similar to what is known as lying as lying by omission. Hemingway’s strategy of retracting information from the story keeps the audience from knowing the whole truth. By this standard, it is arguably not wholly Realistic writing. Moreover, employing this approach to writing leaves to frustrate the reader, if they know that something has been taken out. The possibility of being wrong or not having an idea about what may have been left out can cause a reader to lose interest in or dislike the story.

Despite seeing how Hemingway’s words do not always explain the full extent show even a fictional events, it still needs to be understood that this may truly be the way he sees the world. And not everyone is always aware of what is going on in every aspect of life. For example, during a conversation, countless words and thoughts are omitted, substituted in favor of saying something else. There is an infinite number of alternate realities made up of the possibilities of what would have been. In this light, Hemingway is perhaps even more truthful than all writers who does not do this. He is writing life as it is; unknown and mysterious. This shows how much thought goes into every aspect of his books. He is observant and pays attention to details that are not directly part of the story, yet manage to affect it’s entirety.

In contrast, Ford Madox Ford is the prime example of a writer who creates the standard unreliable narrators that are possibly based on himself- whether unknowingly or not- since he is prone to exaggerating himself. We see this in his own character in his only conversation with Hemingway. Hemingway portrays him as a posh, somewhat annoying weaver of tales and judger of men. He judges specifically men in order to classify them as either gentlemen or not. The qualifying factor of being a gentleman is more similar to royal bloodlines than what the word actually pertains to, making the status unattainable if you did not have the fortune of being British. This is shallow, since being born to the right people is not a reliable method for discerning those most deserving of the title. In fact, it is a great deal of the time it brings out the opposite in said people. Perhaps it is because he belongs to this latter group of people that Ford allows himself to lie so blatantly to Hemingway in the beginning of their conversation. When he tells Hemingway that he “cut” a certain famous writer. Hemingway finds out in an embarrassing fashion that that was no such man and is actually the opposite. Whether Ford behaves this way to boost his ego or because he is simply feels authorized to since he “is a gentleman” is unclear, but it is a trait that can without a doubt be seen in his writing.