A Clean, Well-Lighted Place | Criticism

This literature criticism consists of approximately 9 pages of analysis & critique of A Clean, Well-Lighted Place.

A Clean, Well-Lighted Place | Criticism

This literature criticism consists of approximately 9 pages of analysis & critique of A Clean, Well-Lighted Place.
This section contains 2,267 words
(approx. 8 pages at 300 words per page)
Buy the Critical Essay by Charles E. May

SOURCE: “Is Hemingway's ‘Well-Lighted Place’ Really Clean Now?,” in Studies in Short Fiction, Vol. VIII, No. 2, Spring, 1971, pp. 326-30.

In the following essay, May rejects John V. Hagopian's reading of “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place” and offers his own interpretation of the dialogue of the story.

“Every professional artist has met the questioner who asks of some detail: ‘Why did you do it so clumsily like that, when you could have done it so neatly like this?’”

—Joyce Cary, New York Times Book Review, April 30, 1950.

Everyone seems satisfied and perhaps a bit relieved now that John Hagopian has tidied up Hemingway's “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place” (Studies in Short Fiction, Winter 1964). The dialogue discrepancy that had scholars counting lines in College English in 1959 and 1961 was only a typographical error after all—a thirty-year-old typographical error. And thus, following Mr. Hagopian's suggestion, Charles Scribner's Sons have cleaned up the messy “Place...

(read more)

This section contains 2,267 words
(approx. 8 pages at 300 words per page)
Buy the Critical Essay by Charles E. May
Copyrights
Gale
Critical Essay by Charles E. May from Gale. ©2005-2006 Thomson Gale, a part of the Thomson Corporation. All rights reserved.