convince her to go through with it. Despite this being the central conflict of the story, Hemingway never mentions the word "abortion" and alludes to it only indirectly.

The man argues that the abortion is a simple procedure "just to let the air in," although in those days it was illegal and not at all as simple as he claims. It is obvious that he is making light of it so that the woman will agree to go through with it. The woman, on the other hand, is unsure about what she wants to do. She is concerned that things will not go back to normal for them afterwards either way. Her remark about the hills being like white elephants is a reflection of this.

She first alludes to the hills being like white elephants as a simple comparison while they are sipping their drinks, but even this remark stirs up a disagreement between them about whether or not the man has ever seen an elephant. As they continue to talk, their argument becomes more heated, and it becomes obvious that it is about the proposed abortion. When she says, "If I do it, then it will be nice again if I say things are like white elephants, and you'll like it," what she is doing is asking for a confirmation that if she goes through with the abortion, then things will return to the way they were between them. The "hills like white elephants," of the title, then, stands for the fanciful life that they had before she got pregnant, that she hopes that they can go back to but somehow realizes that they probably never will.

This is an interesting question that has more than one answer. The best and most accurate way to understand Hemingway's title is as a double symbol that also represents the overarching theme of the story. First: The title represents Jig's interior references to "hills like white elephants," thus pointing out the main meaning and overarching theme. In other words, that Jig speaks of "white elephants" is a central motif and a central theme of the story that is pointed to and emphasized by the title; thus "white elephants" is the key titular phrase that unlocks the deepest meaning of the story.

Second: "Hills like white elephants" is a double symbol: it symbolizes two things, one of which also symbolizes the other thing. You might think of this double-compound symbol as one umbrella with two people sharing it.

To begin with, "white elephants" are a symbol for that which is holy and sacred. White elephants are a rare kind of elephant, which are not Albinos, that are held sacred in some countries, like India, and in some religions, like Hinduism and Buddhism. Thus the "hills like white elephants" represent a natural monument (hills) that is sacred and powerfully good.

To go one step further into the second symbol, the "hills like white elephants"--now tagged symbolically as sacred and good--symbolizeJig's pregnancy, the natural monumental event that is also an obstacle to advancing along life's path, just as hills can be obstacles on journeys. Now we have two closely related symbols underneath the representative "umbrella" of the title.

Therefore, Hemingway uses the title "Hills Like White Elephants" to point out the deepest meaning of the story; to symbolize the sacred nature of propagating children; to symbolize the pregnancy that is being debated by the American man and Jig. 

This story is narrated form a third-person objective point of view. This means that the narrator is not a participant in the events that take place and does not use first-person pronouns like I or we; this is the third-person part of the label. The word objective, here, means that the narrator can only report on what is visible or audible to any person who might be present. The objective narrator cannot report on what the characters are thinking or feeling but, rather, can only report what is said or what actions are taken. For example, early on, the narrator reports,

"What should we drink?" the girl asked. She had taken off her hat and put in on the table.

Again, the narrator does not tell us if the girl, who we learn is called Jig, is nervous, upset, angry, or hopeful; the narrator can only tell us what she says and what she does. Later, this point of view seems to place the reader in a position similar to that of the characters, who do not understand one another and want to know what the other is thinking without, it seems, revealing their own wishes. Jig doesn't say exactly how she feels, and she clearly gets frustrated with the American as she asks him to "please please please please please please please stop talking." Jig wants to know how he really feels, and he seems to want her to get the abortion but doesn't want to seem to pressure her into it. With the objective narrator, the reader feels the awkward silences and is made uncomfortable by the stilted dialogue because they are not softened with descriptions of thoughts or feelings. We see and hear what the characters do and must come to conclusions based on that, just as they must.

"Hills Like White Elephants" is told by a third-person, objective narrator who primarily observes and records what he sees from the outside. In other words, he does not get inside the two main characters' heads and tell us what they are thinking and feeling. After an opening passage of description, he primarily relies on dialogue to communicate the dysfunction in this relationship.

It is as if the narrator is taping the scene with a videocamera, although the main characters' bodies are in the shade or gloom so that we can't see them as more than outlines. Primarily, we can hear what they say.

The dialogue is spare. We don't even get a "he said" or "she said" to show who is speaking. Hemingway relies on the reader to do the work of figuring this out. He also relies on the reader to do the work of deciphering the tone of the conversation without the narrator intruding and cluttering the text with explanations.

This stark, minimalist, journalistic style is characteristic of Hemingway's modernism.

In "Hills Like White Elephants," Hemingway makes masterful use of the objective point of view. In so doing, he brings the reader deeper into the conversation of the main characters because the reader must try to understand the content and emotional import of the conversation without any aid from the narrator. 

The objective point of view is a variety of third-person narration in which the narrator's function is to relate events that occur in the story from a context external to the thoughts and feelings of the characters in the story. This type of third-person narrator may also be referred to as a camera-on-the-wall or fly-on-the-wall narrator, as the point of view is of a non-sentient thing or device that merely captures the events of the story.

Hemingway uses this type of narrator in “Hills Like White Elephants” to force the reader to pay attention to the conversation itself, not the people having it. To enhance the effect he wants to achieve, he also limits his descriptions of the setting and the main characters. We know almost nothing about how they look or act, and even the expressions they may have while talking are a mystery to us. All the reader can do is try to understand what the characters are saying and then extrapolate what they are feeling from what they say and do not say. Thus, the reader in essence becomes an eavesdropper on the conversation—a third person to that conversation in terms of conversational roles—who must use his or her own experiences and understanding of the world to make sense of the meaning of the overheard conversation.

To say the least, the relationship between Jig and the unnamed American man waiting for the train with her is complicated. They have clearly been in a romantic and sexual relationship, which has led to Jig being pregnant. However, it is clear that the two are very different. While the man's attitude seems bored and disinterested, both in their surroundings and in Jig's pregnancy, Jig’s approach to both their surroundings and her pregnancy seems lively and imaginative.

She is focused on the surrounding hills, noticing their resemblance to white elephants, while her partner simply sits quietly, waiting for the train to arrive. It is apparent that there is significant tension between the two, and the point of contention appears to be that he wants her to have an abortion, while she wants to keep her baby.

Jig has agreed, unhappily, to have the abortion when the two arrive in Madrid, and it is part of the man’s attempt to keep Jig on board with this plan that he keeps assuring her that the procedure is a simple one, and that having it done will result in their relationship being unchanged. It was perfectly natural for Jig to be afraid given that, at the time, abortion was illegal just about everywhere in the world.

The relationship between the two characters in the story, an unnamed man and a woman called Jig, appears to be quite complex. Though they are clearly lovers—Jig is carrying the man's unborn child—there doesn't appear to be much in the way of real intimacy between them.

The way they conduct themselves around each other is awkward, to say the least. When Jig expresses her opinion that the surrounding hills look like white elephants, it's notable that the man's response is dour and phlegmatic. Among other things, this tells us that her world isn't his world. These lovers are like ships that pass in the night, as distant from each other as if they'd never even met.

Jig's focus is on the outside world, which is somewhat ironic given that she is carrying her lover's baby, which one would've thought would be her main preoccupation. And it this imaginative connection with the world around her that forms the main bone of contention between herself and her lover. Far from being imaginative, the man is brusque and down-to-earth—a man of few words, none of which are in the least bit memorable.

Jig and her lover are clearly on completely different wavelengths. It isn't surprising, then, that there is so much tension between them. The only surprise is that they ever got together in the first place.

The two characters in the story—an unnamed American man and a woman called "Jig"—are involved romantically. Jig asks the American if soon things will be like they were before and "you'll love me?" He assures her that he does love her "now" but that he is simply worried and preoccupied. He claims that she "know[s] how [he] get[s]." Jig, however, seems more concerned about their being happy and things going back to the way they were "before," while the American is thinking about an "operation" that he clearly seems to want Jig to have.

The point of contention, as you put it, between them is what the American says is "really an awfully simple operation" where "they just let the air in and then its all perfectly natural." Jig seems to be unconvinced by the American's assurances that the couple will be "fine afterward. Just like [they] were before." He claims that "That" is the only thing that "bothers [them]" and makes them "unhappy." We have to do some reading between the lines here, but it seems as though they are discussing the possibility of Jig having an abortion.

This makes sense in the context of the hills that she says look like "white elephants," as well as the title of the story. White elephants were sometimes given as gifts by monarchs in southeast Asia. Because these elephants were considered sacred, they could not be put to work, they would cost a small fortune to feed and house, and receivers could be bankrupted by the cost of caring for these animals. Thus, the "gift" could become a sort of curse, though it was meant to be a blessing. It seems, then, that Jig is thinking of how this baby could be seen as a blessing, that the couple "could have everything," but the American man sees it as a curse to be gotten rid of.

There are several metaphors and similes in Hemingway's story. The most prominent one is the hills, which Jig compares to white elephants. The hills represent many possible things, one of which is a pregnant woman's stomach. The hills also stand for an obstacle to overcome, and the comparison of them to white elephants speak to the idea of something that is rare and valued but not practical, as white elephants are in some culture.

Another metaphor is the absinthe the couple drinks. Absinthe is a drink that is a hallucinogen and can make one forget. The American wants the situation that he and the girl are in to go away--he wants to forget and for her to forget as well. They also have many beers, which symbolize a kind of numbing effect--again, something they both seem to want because of this difficult predicament in which they find themselves.

Another important metaphor in the story is the number two. The number two appears several times in the story. There are two cervasas (beers), two felt pads, two suitcases, and two bead on the curtain. This number is significant because at the end of the story, Hemingway leaves the fate of the couple unresolved, but what the reader can surmise from the repetition of the number two is that there will be only two people left--either the American and Jig or Jig and her child. However from this metaphor, it is clear that there will not be three--the American, Jig, and their child. The ending is not happy for these characters.

I believe that when the man and the girl say, "Everything tastes like licorice," this can be considered a metaphor, even though it contains the word "like" and might be construed as a simile. Everything does not really taste like licorice. Saying that everything tastes like licorice is implying that everything in life turns out to be a disappointment. 

"Yes," said the girl. "Everything tastes of licorice. Especially all the things you've waited so long for, like absinthe."

In this instance the word "like" is not used, so it is even more of a metaphor. It is an ingenious one. Hemingway is using a simile, or an analogy, as a metaphor.

The title of the story is "Hills Like White Elephants." The hills may look "like" white elephants, but the whole simile is also a metaphor. White elephants are symbols of anything of great value that is not wanted. The hills may be "like" white elephants, but the white elephants are metaphors for the unwanted baby which the man is pressuring the girl to abort. It is obvious throughout the story that the girl wants the baby and the man doesn't.

Another thing about white elephants, which may affect the outcome of the conflict, is that a white elephant is only a white elephant because you can't get rid of it. If you could get rid of it, it would no longer be a white elephant. So maybe the man will not succeed in persuading the girl to go ahead with the abortion after all?

Jig and the American never actually name the subject of their conversation. The closest they get is by referring to some kind of medical procedure, what the man calls "an awfully simply operation." He tells her that she will not "mind it" and that the procedure is "just to let the air in." The American says that the two of them will be "fine afterwards. Just like [they] were before." Though it is not explicitly said, it is implied that this procedure might be an abortion.

Jig asks if the American man thinks that they will be "all right and . . . happy" after the operation. The man seems not to want to pressure her, saying she does not have to have this operation if she does not want to and that he would not have her do it if she does not want to, but he continues to stress how "simple" and "natural" a thing it is to do.

The fact that Jig seems so concerned that things will "be like they were" and that he will "still love [her]" seems to indicate that this procedure has something to do with their relationship, and his description of it—that it will only "let the air in"—makes it seem as though its purpose is to get rid of something, to make room for air, just as we might open a window to let out stale air inside a house. However, we know this would be an elective procedure, not something required to save Jig's life, because it is discussed as something optional, something possible, and not something required.

The iceberg technique, here, means that the couple never explicitly names what they are discussing. This omission is so glaring and so obvious that it adds to the reader's sense that their communication is absolutely terrible. They do not communicate well at all. The American man appears to really want her to get the "operation" but he will not come right out and say so. Jig seems apprehensive about the operation, and she is not comforted by the man's attempts to reassure her. In fact, she really wants them to stop talking altogether. She ultimately insists that she "feel[s] fine," even though it is totally clear that she doesn't. This technique, then, adds to their characterization and the development of their relationship, which is coming apart, it seems, because they just cannot communicate effectively.

Ernest Hemingway believed that leaving out important details in his stories (often called the "iceberg theory") tended to make them more powerful. In his novel The Sun Also Rises, Hemingway leaves out the important fact that Jake Barnes has been castrated in World War I. The fact is implied but never overtly stated. Likewise, in the short story "Hills Like White Elephants," Hemingway never explicitly states the nature of the argument between the American and Jig, yet a close reading of the text identifies the topic as abortion. Two important references in the story reveal that abortion is the subject. First, Jig mentions how the hills resemble white elephants. A white elephant is often considered a gift which is burdensome and not really wanted. These hills are like the baby that Jig is carrying. Second, the American wants Jig to have an abortion and tends to refer to the medical procedure as simple and natural. He says,

"It's really an awfully simple operation, Jig...It's really not anything. It's just to let the air in."

For her part, Jig seems to resist the American's request to abort her baby but the issue is never resolved. Often analyzed by critics, some seem to feel that, judging by her perceived acquiescence to whatever the American wants, Jig will have the abortion. Others cite the fact that at the end of the story Jig and the American drink in different places (her at the table and him at the bar) to suggest that Jig will break off her relationship with the American and have the baby.  

In order for something to be a symbol, it must be have both literal meaning and figurative meaning. Therefore, there would actually have to be white elephants present in some literal way, and then they'd have to carry some figurative meaning on top of that (such as referring to something that is generally unwanted, or a burden, as other educators have said), in order to function as a symbol. Since there is no literal white elephant, it is not a symbol.

That being said, a simile is, technically speaking, literal, because a simile only says that something is like or as something else, not that it is something else (as a metaphor does). If the title of the story were "The Hills Are White Elephants," this would be a clear-cut metaphor). At the same time, however, I have sometimes seen the simile, as a figure of speech, lumped in under the broader category of "metaphor" because similes are similar to, though less powerful than, strict metaphors. Therefore, if you are only given two options—either symbolic or metaphorical—I would place the title in the metaphorical category.

Because this title contains the word "like," it is technically a simile. Any comparison using like or as qualifies as a simile. On a deeper level, however, the "white elephants" within the title are actually symbols.

They represent anything that is not wanted, be that a pregnancy, a child, or something else entirely. Inasmuch as the white elephants represent an abstract concept, they qualify as symbols: one concrete thing standing for something less tangible.

The expression itself, "hills like white elephants," is actually a simile, not a metaphor, since it uses "like." White elephants are used to refer to something unwanted or undesired. In this context, they are also symbolic in the story of her undesired pregnancy. The story also develops the relationship between the man and the woman. She isn't convinced that she wants to have the abortion, and he wants her to have it, and pressures her to have it, all the while he says that the choice is hers.

First, this story conveys the idea that it is often difficult for human beings to honestly communicate their feelings to one another. Jig, the girl, struggles with this, as does the American man. The American seems to want Jig to have an abortion, though he does not want to pressure her, so he doesn't come right out and name his preference. Instead, he says things like, "'It's really an awfully simple operation . . . It's not really an operation at all.'" Jig seems quite unsure, perhaps wanting to keep the baby. However, she wants to please the man. She asks things like, "'And if I do it you'll be happy and things will be like they were and you'll love me?'" Neither really says how they feel honestly.

Second, this story conveys the idea that some gifts feel more like burdens than blessings. Jig's statement that the hills in the distance "'looked like white elephants'" draws attention to this idea. White elephants used to be quite valuable, however, they are very expensive to care for. One might get a white elephant as a gift from royalty, but this gift could actually bankrupt the recipient, and so it felt more like a burden than a gift. This seems to be how Jig feels about the baby she is evidently carrying, or it's what she thinks the American man feels about it. She even mentions this again later, saying, "'I said the mountains looked like white elephants. Wasn't that bright?'" in response to the man's irritation with her attitude.

Third, this story conveys the idea that our failure to communicate our feelings honestly keeps us, ultimately, alienated from one another. Jig, growing more and more frustrated, finally asks, "'Would you please please please please please please please stop talking?'" In the end, she says, unconvincingly, "'I feel fine . . . There's nothing wrong with me. I feel fine.'" She obviously is not fine, but the couple's failure to communicate effectively opens up a gulf between them that neither can bridge.

"Hills Like White Elephants" depicts a relationship stuck in limbo. The man wants his girlfriend, Jig, to get an operation (usually interpreted as an abortion). Jig wants to keep the baby. For such a spare story, using a minimum of words, Hemingway spends a good deal of time describing setting and locating the characters carefully within it. The setting reflects the unhappy situation of this couple.

First, we see that Jig and her boyfriend are stuck at a train station in Spain, seemingly in the middle of nowhere. After moving their luggage, the boyfriend looks up in hopes of the train's arrival:

He looked up the tracks but could not see the train.

This mirrors the way their relationship is at an impasse, going nowhere. They are waiting for a train—for movement forward—but in the story, that never comes, revealing how stuck they are not only at the train station but also with their decision about the abortion and in their relationship as a whole.

Hemingway also puts the couple alone together at a table outside a bar, separated from it by a beaded curtain that is meant to keep the flies out. Are they the flies, buzzing at each other but not communicating anything meaningful? When the narrator goes to put the luggage on the platform, he passes through the bar, which is filled with people. The couple, however, is isolated, reflecting their inner isolation as well as their isolation from other people. They don't seem to have anyone to turn to for help in their crisis, which they won't even admit is a crisis.

Jig looks for solid ground, something physical to hold on to as her boyfriend pushes the abortion. She wants an anchor, but her boyfriend isn't providing it. A bead curtain is fairly insubstantial, but Jig holds it anyway:

The girl looked at the bead curtain, put her hand out and took hold of two of the strings of beads . . .

We also learn that the train station is set between a fertile valley on one side—

Across, on the other side, were fields of grain and trees along the banks of the Ebro. Far away, beyond the river, were mountains . . .

—and a dry, barren valley on the other:

the hills on the dry side of the valley.

This setting mirrors the choice the couple must make between barrenness (abortion) and fertility (having the baby).

The loneliness, isolation, and limbo of their setting, along with the choice represented by the two valleys around them, symbolizes the plight of the couple. Their future seems bleak and not very hopeful, even though they could, if they wanted, choose fertile ground.

In “Hills Like White Elephants” the American man, and the woman, “Jig,” are a couple sitting outside a café’ drinking beer while they await a train.  These characters are discussing a pregnancy and an abortion.  The relationship is very unstable at the moment because the couple is unable to connect with each other.  Jig seems to want to have the baby but the man wants her to have an abortion.  He is very selfish and independent.  He tells her he loves her but the reader does not feel that from him.  He appears to be very cynical and unfeeling toward Jig.  His words do not match what we feel from him.  There seems to be a sense of aloofness between them because they can’t agree on which direction to go concerning the baby.  They do not understand one another. Their though processes are nowhere near close to each other and this is what drives the story toward what appears to be a no win situation for the relationship.  Jig doesn’t speak Spanish but the man does, this indicates that she is extremely dependent on her lover and she must consider his feelings more than if she were not dependent. This has a big effect on how they interact during their relationship. He is in control and continues to suggest that this decision is an easy one.

I think that the third person narrative point of view is used in a stellar manner in Hemingway's short story.  One of the elements that makes the third person point of view so effective is that it helps to recreate a moment in time.  In his book, Testaments Betrayed, Milan Kundera suggests that part of what makes this story so powerful is that the third person point of view is mastered to recreate a conversation in time.  If one reflects on this, it is a difficult task to accomplish for every time we consider our own past and a past moment in time, it turns out that our own point of view colors the event, making exact recreation impossible.  At the same time, the web of language is one where a moment can be hinted at or intimated, but never fully recreated so that another person can recognized exactly the moment as the characters involved.  Hemingway's style of the third person narration is one where "the tip of the iceberg" is exposed, meaning that there is much more present in the conversation and in the moment, but the point of view allows the reader to fully explore this "tip" while recognizing that much more exists and much more is present.  The point of view helps to deliver the themes in a strong manner.  In doing so, we, as the reader, receive an almost "bird's eye view" of what is happening, whereby we understand the situation in perfect detail and are left to our own choices for interpretation, just as the main characters are left to their own choices and the implications that result from the predicament.

Hemingway begins his story with a description of the bleak, hot, dry setting, which is obviously in Spain. He chose not to explain much about his two main characters, but it would seem that he realized he had to identify one of them as either English or American in order to avoid having the reader make the logical assumption that the man and woman were Spanish and were talking in Spanish which was rendered or transliterated into English. Since it turns out that the girl obviously knows virtually nothing about Spanish, and since only the man is called an American, we are likely to assume that Jig is English. We can only guess what they look like. We guess that the American looks like a stereotypical American-in-Europe -- tall, gaunt, outdoorsy. The girl is pregnant but doesn't show it yet. She is probably pretty but looks very unhappy and withdrawn. We might assume from her nickname that she is rather petite, cute rather than beautiful, normally a good sport with a good sense of humor, intelligent, witty, a good mixer and a good companion.

There are two main characters in Ernest Hemingway's short story "Hills Like White Elephants." The story takes place in Spain (as denoted by the Ebro Valley the hills overlook). Readers are told very specifically about the young man's nationality, but is not told about the young woman's:

The American and the girl with him sat at a table in the shade, outside the building.

The young man is American and the young girl's nationality is not given. The American, at one point, calls the girl Jig, but readers are never given the America's name.

Over the course of the story little information is given about the characters themselves. Instead, readers can only conclude that they are arguing about an operation, which has been popularity assumed to be an abortion. The girl is only worried if the yo9ung man will still love her after her operation.

One of the objectives of Hemingway's style of minimalist writing is to open the truth of subjects up to thoughtful contemplation. For this reason, his narrators are objective though sympathetic and distanced though astutely observant. Since Hemingway often chooses settings for their symbolic value, the narrator's observation of the surroundings reveals as much as the narration of events.

Since Hemingway aims to expose the truth of difficult situations and open them to contemplation, it may be hard to assert a "claim" in his stories, particularly since he aims to be objective and inclusively sympathetic in "Hills Like White Elephants." Having said this, the one thing that is most clear from this short story is that Jig's pregnancy is going to radically change the lives of both adults. Perhaps Hemingway's "claim" might be best describe as claiming that loose relationships that aren't bound by the expectations present in marital relationships are like time bombs waiting to go off; these kinds of relationships will shatter and destroy everything dreamed of:

[F]ields of grain and trees along the banks of the Ebro. ... beyond the river, were mountains. The shadow of a cloud moved across the field of grain ...
     "And we could have all this," she said. "And we could have everything and every day we make it more impossible."
     "What did you say?"
     "I said we could have everything."
     "We can have everything."
     "No, we can't."

The hills represent objectification and symbolize permanency while simultaneously symbolizing illusion, specifically, the illusion of how one thing can be reminiscent of another wholly dissimilar thing.

Hemingway chose this representation and symbol for the story title because the story's themes include

• objective point of view and objectification of an issue.
• the question of permanency in seemingly impermanent post-World War life.
• illusion and illusionary relationships.

It is "the girl," Jig, who sits gazing at the hills and seeing in them reminiscence of other unrelated things. First, however, the narrator introduces the hills as the first and foremost part of the setting:

The hills across the valley of the Ebro were long and white. On this side there was no shade and no trees ....

Then Jig is shown by Hemingway as being preoccupied with the hills: "The girl was looking off at the line of hills." In her distancing preoccupation, she identifies the hills with something whimsical and far-fetched: "They look like white elephants." Jig's preoccupation is in part escapism and in part distancing and in part, perhaps, also yearning, too.

She escapes the saddening conversation about the unstated topic by submerging herself in daydreams about the hills as one might submerge oneself in daydreams about clouds. She distances herself from the topic and conversation and from "the American" by gazing at, thinking about, and talking idly about the distant, illusionary hills.

They sat down at the table and the girl looked across at the hills on the dry side of the valley and the man looked at her and at the table.

Permanency and illusion represent the relationship Jig has with the American man. The longest exchange of dialogue in the story begins with a repetition of whether or not they can "have everything," with Jig quietly insisting that they cannot have because it is taken away. Jig insists their happiness has no permanency.

Illusion applies to the hills--their illusion of being like "white elephants"--and to the relationship between Jig and the man. The illusion of their relationship is revealed to Jig and to us when he slips and says "if it means anything to you." Jig, noticing, asks, "Doesn’t it mean anything to you?" His reply continues the illusion, "Of course it does," then shatters it again, "And I know it's perfectly simple."

In summary, Hemingway chose the title for all that it represents and symbolizes, especially as it symbolizes the illusionary and impermanent nature of the man's relationship with Jig and the opportunity created in which they "could get along."

As an aside, the issue of abortion is pinpointed as the man describes the "procedure," a description that fits abortion as performed in that era. Also, Jig is drinking beer and absinthe because it was only in the 1960s and 1970s that significant attention was given to whether pregnant women should or should not drink. This story is set in the post-World War I era as it was first published in 1926.

The speaker in this excellent short story is a character who is external to the story, and not involved in it. As a third person narrator, the speaker is notable by his extremely detached perspective on the story. In no way can the narrator be described as omniscient, as he does not reveal the thoughts and feelings experienced by Jig and her American partner. The narrator is very careful only to report what is said and what can be observed, and this is shown through the way that the majority of the text is reported dialogue rather than introspective comments about the thoughts and emotions of the characters. Note the following example:

"It's really an awfully simple operation, Jig," the man said. "It's not really an operation at all."

Here, the reader is left to infer that what the man keeps on trying to discuss with Jig is that he wants her to have an abortion. This is not stated at all, but rather the detached narrative perspective means that the reader needs to infer this from what is said and how they conduct their speech. In short, this excellent short story is a perfect example of how Hemmingway shows the reader what is going on rather than telling them directly, and as a result his narrative voice in this text is detached and not intrusive.

Yes, I agree with #2 and #3 - the dialogue is what makes this a difficult story to work out. So much of what is really going on between Jig and her partner is completely unsaid and it is necessary to infer everything from their strained and empty dialogue. Jig in particular is desperately trying to put a "happy face" on to the situation, but becomes overwhelmed easily and ends up getting more and more depressed until she accepts the inevitable.

Ernest Hemingway’s fiction is famous for revealing more in its sparseness than the writing of many authors. The dialogue in ‘‘Hills Like White Elephants’’ may seem trivial or empty at first glance because Hemingway is forcing the reader to delve more closely in the real issues in this relationship. With so little else present, the weight and the meaning of the story depend on the reader’'s ability to decipher the cryptic comments the two characters make to each other.The characters seem to talk in a trivial or empty manner because their relationship has been rather trivial and empty. However, now they are facing a crisis and Hemingway controls the narrative so tightly with dialogue, he reveals the crisis without once using the word ‘‘abortion’’. Hemingway graphically evokes the tension between a man and woman waiting for a train as they discuss whether she should have this operation. The author’s use of repetition in the dialogue emphasizes the division between the couple. Hemingway conveys the man’s selfish temperament and willingness to rationalize through dialogue. This contrasts with the woman’s more emotional and arguably deeper view of the situation. However, the dialogue seems so subtle that the reader must work to see its significance.

The dialogue of the two characters, Jig and her boyfriend, is tense and short in nature.  The two avoid saying the word "abortion," but it is clear they are referring to it.  This shows their inability to connect with one another.  They are clearly worlds apart when it comes to communication levels and they are both getting nowhere with each other concerning their points of view. They disagree and it seems neither one will back down about what they want.  Jig is more emotional about it, which the reader would assume, because she is the one who is pregnant and the abortion would be painful and traumatic for her.  Her boyfriend is more detached.  He does not want a baby and has made himself treat it as a burden, so he does not have that "attachment" to it.

The time period and the cultural context go well with the physical location of the story. The narrative takes place in a train station, and the characters are in a state of transition. They are implied to have been traveling together, moving freely and aimlessly about on trains throughout Europe. The location of the story in the train station suggests that these two people have not found a home for themselves (emotionally, socially, philosophically, etc.).

When Hemingway wrote the story, the trend toward "modern" thinking, living, and designing was widespread. Hemingway himself was quite a free spirit who traveled about Europe, partied with his friends, and wrote novels and short stories about people like himself.

The cultural world was in a state of transition just like these characters—literally and figuratively. Nonetheless, certain subject matters were still not openly discussed or written about. Homosexuality, for instance, was rarely mentioned except in veiled, coded language. The story's focus, never overtly stated, is the question of whether Jig should get an abortion. Readers have argued endlessly about whether the story is pro-woman, anti-woman, sexist, or feminist, but the impact rests heavily on the taboo of its subject matter at the time.

Although it loses some of that shock value for current readers, though, the unspoken, awkward, and glaringly important detail still has a pretty heavy impact, probably because the problems troubling this young couple have not disappeared from the world in the past century.

I would like to add a little bit of Hemingway's personal background to help understand the unsettled, and unsettling, conclusion, of "Hills."

Hemingway had to deal with the problem of abortion when he was married to Hadley Richardson. David Wych explains in his 2002 article from "The Hemingway Review":

Before Hadley's second pregnancy proved a false alarm, Sally Bird urged him to "[s]top acting like a damn fool and crybaby" and offered him the obvious ultimatum: "Either you do something about not having it, or you have it" (McAlmon 277). Reynolds, noting that "[t]hey all knew abortions were available in Paris," nonetheless asserts that "a boy raised in Oak Park did not easily accept that solution" (The Paris Years 219). Just how Hemingway did think of abortion is reflected in letters he wrote to Pauline Pfeiffer in the fall of 1926, some eighteen months prior to the completion of "Hills" when the lovers were expecting to remain apart for one hundred days. The separation was imposed by Hadley, according to an agreement under which she would grant Hemingway a divorce at the end of the prescribed period. To his future wife he wrote, "when two people love each other terribly much and need each other in every way and then go away from each other it works almost as bad as an abortion" (Lynn 363). With this statement, Hemingway set a precedent for using the termination of a pregnancy as a metaphor for the pain of separation between lovers.

There is very little conclusion to this story. The man and woman, who have been arguing over whether or not she should have an abortion, cease their argument. The woman pleads for the man to stop talking to her about it, threatening to make a public scene if he doesn't. He moves their bags and gets himself a drink. When he returns, and asks if she is ok, she responds that she is fine. Obviously she isn't. But by this word, she has ended the argument. No decision has been made.

However, many readers feel that by giving up the argument, the woman is agreeing to be led by the man, and that - were the story to continue - she would have an abortion.

This is a tough question on a couple of levels.  The first is that any discussion of a central issue of the short story remains unfulfilled because Hemingway does not render much in way of absolute judgment and clear certainty.  I would say that one issue that comes out of the short story is the difficulty in relationships.  Jig and the American are involved with one another, certainly reflecting some level of commitment to one another.  Yet, there is difficulty in both of them in terms of their approach of the "procedure" that is the center of their discussion.  On one hand, the American continually stresses that he is fine with whatever Jig chooses to do.  Yet, there is an undercurrent in his conversation and discussion with her that he wants her to go with the abortion.  This psychological dynamic is only mirrored by Jig's challenges with trying to determine what the right thing is to do and how to reconcile with this in her relationship.  The questions that end up dominating her mind only add to the complexity of the choice needing to be made.  In this, the central issue of the short story becomes evident in that relationships make choices and consequences even more complex than they already are. The traditional thinking would be that a relationship would make the issue of choice and the reality of consequences clearer because of two reasonable people engaging in a process of reasonability and clarity.  I think that this becomes the central issue of the short story, and something that makes clear the often confusing and lack of clarity that exists in relationships and the emotional challenges within them.

Characters, as you probably know, are the agents in a work of fiction that cause action and create conflict and drive plot. They are the personalities about whom we care, with whom our imaginations interact, who develop images and themes of life and living. In some instances, characters can be non-human creatures or, in rare instances, inanimate objects. The Wind in the Willows is an illustration of the first for it is peopled with moles, rats, badgers, toads. The House of the Seven Gables is an illustration of the second in which the house where Hepzibah lives is an integral part of all that occurs.

In "Hills Like White Elephants" there are two central characters, and one central character who is inferred though never introduced. There is one minor character who interacts with the first two and facilitates their interaction. There are characters who are mentioned and provide insight into the character of the American man but who have no discernible role in the action.

Coming back, he walked through the bar-room, where people waiting for the train were drinking. He drank an Anis at the bar and looked at the people. They were all waiting reasonably for the train.

The two central characters are the American man and his girlfriend who is the only one who has a name--she is called Jig.

The American and the girl with him sat at a table in the shade, outside the building. It was very hot and the express from Barcelona would come in forty minutes.

The character who is inferred is the unborn baby of Jig's pregnancy. The minor character is the woman who brings them their drinks through the symbolic beads that represent separation or dividedness. The other characters are the people in the "bar-room" who are "all waiting reasonably for the train."

I think what strikes me most about this story is how language operates on so many levels. To understand this story truly you have to be able to read between the lines and consider what is being not said just as much as what is being said. What is fascinating about this story is the sheer amount of dialogue that is just reported with little or no comment from the narrator - we become eavesdroppers trying to piece together the tragedy that is about to happen.

As this story was written in 1926 between the two World Wars and after Hemingway had been involved in war efforts as an ambulance driver, his experiences continued to influence his thought.  The terrible sense of man's alienation and isolation that Hemingway felt permeates this story.  His male character captures this sense of aimlessness and loss of values that Hemingway felt was characteristic of the "lost generation."

First, Hemingway experiments with the limitation of language. Through the couples' strained dialogue, "Hills..." explores the painful inadequacy of communication.  The story's central tension creates a great place for Hemingway to develop and test his terse, limited, and concise prose style.  If you leave the story confused, then Hemingway has succeeds in pointing out that language itself is often broken, powerless, and frustrating.

Second, the story explores the dark side of the carefree, drunken, and exotic life of American expatriates in the 1920s -- a life that Hemingway lived and knew well.  Without resorting to the heavy-handed moralizing found in much of early-twentieth-century American literature,  Hemingway's story reminds his readers that the every good party is followed by a bad hangover.  In part, the story is great because it delivers a strong, old-fashioned, Victorian, moral warning in a style that is wonderfully indirect, intriguing, engaging, and modernist. In other words, Hemingway gets away with a bit of preaching about the cost of sexual freedom without ever sounding 'preachy'.

Third, Hemingway offers a feminist message.  Yes, Hemingway.  Yes, feminist.  By the end of the story, Hemingway succeeds in making the man, and to some extent men, seem cowardly, selfish, and detestable.  At the same time, the woman earns a degree of our pity when we realize what she must put up with.   However, the woman is not pitifully weak.  Her now-famous request that the man "please, please, please... stop talking" is a moment of empowerment in a story that otherwise offers only disempowered language.  Because the man is pushy, deceptive, and manipulative about the abortion; and because the woman sees the man's weakness and worthlessness; the story offers a warning to women.  The story suggests that women watch out for themselves, rely on themselves, and avoid the sexual traps that men set.  By making us feel just how horribly trapped the woman is, Hemingway asks women: would you want to be in her situation?  If not, watch out for manipulative men and rely on your own female judgement and decisions.

Ernest Hemingway's short story "Hills Like White Elephants" is an iceberg of a narrative; a story in which practically all the drama and tension is below the surface. The action is almost non-existent: A couple wait at a small railway station for the train to Madrid, order drinks and discuss whether the girl will have a "procedure" or not. That is all that happens. Beneath the surface, however, is all the guilt and trauma attached to abortion (illegal in most European countries at the time and particularly taboo in Catholic Spain) and the misery of a failed, unequal relationship. The story comes from a collection called Men Without Women, a bitterly appropriate title given the isolation of the two central characters.

There are a myriad of themes: the sterility and boredom of relationships in the modern world, the conflict of reason and emotion, the poverty of a life without values or attachment. The man in the story is perfectly reasonable, but Hemingway seems to be pointing how reason such as his is an unsatisfactory standard by which to live. A life which might seem enviable from the outside, that of a rich man without responsibilities, with nothing to do but see new sights and try new drinks, is in fact so hollow and meaningless that it is bound to degenerate into squalid, miserable scenes like this one.

The central symbol in "Hills Like White Elephants" is the setting, with the hills in the distance. One side of the train station in Spain is covered with vegetation and fertile while the other side is devoid of vegatation and stark.  As the conversation unfolds between the man and Jig, it is seen that the fertile side of the setting symbolizes the point of view and feelings of the Jig while the barren stark side symbolizes the point of view and feelings of the man. It further symbolizes the ultimate resolution of thier conversation, which is only hinted at. The train rails separate the two sides of the setting, thus symbolizing that the rails of disagreement will persist in dividing Jig and the man as thoroughly as the trains rails divide the fertile land from the barren. In addition, the hills symbolize Jig's ability to still see the romantic optimistic potential in the realities of life although the man's response to her ("I've never seen one") indicates a refusal to think of anything other than the practical and objective. Thus the hills symbolize the nature of the divide between them, what can now be theirs and what can't:

Jig: "Then what will we do afterwards?"
"We’ll be fine afterwards. Just like we were before."
"What makes you think so?"

The shadow of a cloud moved across the field of grain and she saw the river through the trees.
‘And we could have all this,’ she said. ‘And we could have everything and every day we make it more impossible.’
‘What did you say?’
‘I said we could have everything.’
‘We can have everything.’
‘No, we can’t.’
‘We can have the whole world.’
‘No, we can’t.’
‘We can go everywhere.’
‘No, we can’t. It isn’t ours any more.’
‘It’s ours.’
‘No, it isn’t. And once they take it away, you never get it back.’
‘But they haven’t taken it away.’
‘We’ll wait and see.’
‘Come on back in the shade,’ he said. ‘You mustn’t feel that way.’
‘I don’t feel any way,’ the girl said. ‘I just know things.’

Several important themes are choices and consequences; doubt and ambiguity; and men's perspective versus women's perspective. To my mind, however, the most important theme is honesty versus dishonesty.

The foremost instance of this theme is that the American man persists in saying that he only wants Jig to undergo the operation if she wants to yet, at the same time, he persists in claiming that it is a simple and perfectly natural procedure and that he is sure she wouldn't even mind, since it really is nothing. One of these sets of expressions of sentiment and opinion is dishonest. Either he is putting her wishes first or he is putting his wishes for what her feelings and experience will be first. Both can't be true at one and the same time.

'I don’t want you to do anything that you don’t want to do -’
‘Nor that isn’t good for me,’ she said. ...
‘You’ve got to realize,’ he said, ‘that I don’t want you to do it if you don’t want to. I’m perfectly willing to go through with it if it means anything to you.’

Another example is that he presumes to fathom what a woman's feelings and experience will be in a realm of life that is exclusively female. This too is dishonest. Honesty would require an admission of limited perspective and empathy. Honesty would require the courage to refrain from trying to shape Jig's sentiments and feelings. Honesty would require an unveiled, unambiguous expression of his wishes, which--by all evidence in the text--is that he wishes to not be the father of a living child.

'I’m perfectly willing to go through with it if it means anything to you.’
‘Doesn’t it mean anything to you? We could get along.’
‘Of course it does. But I don’t want anybody but you. I don’t want anyone else. ....'

Finally, the conversation excerpted above further expresses the man's dishonesty. Jig is expressing her perspective of the finality of the circumstance. On one hand, if she has the abortion, her world will be changed forever since an abortion is not an insignificant thing, either physically or spiritually. On the other hand, if she does not have an abortion, her world will be changed forever but in a very different direction: she will lose the frivolous and fun relationship she has with the man--as they travel and collect luggage labels and taste new drinks--and she will have his child to mother. Dishonesty is represented because the man won't admit to the change in dynamics the pregnancy brings into their relationship as a result of the change in dynamics it brings to Jig's life.

From a feminist point of view, Hemingway's "Hills Like White Elephants" supports gender norms, specifically the gender norm of female weakness, in several ways. Although it is true that Jig wants to discuss her pregnancy more than the man and could be seen as braver because of that, Jig's continual questioning and signs of reliance on the American man demonstrate a sense of female dependence and subservience. This dependence is what ultimately supports traditional gender roles in the story, rather than challenging them.

Jig's questioning of her companion shows a lack of confidence. Even when ordering drinks, she relies on the man to know the details and complete the order. When they make conversation, she looks to him for affirmation and compliments when she asks questions such as, "Wasn't that bright?" Likewise, she speaks about herself in demeaning ways in a seeming test of support from him. She says, "I don't care about me" several times to elicit a reaction from him.

Hemingway is known for masculine, heroic characters and these characters tend to dominate his stories. In this story, Jig, is more of a hero(ine) than the male narrator. This has nothing to do with a debate on abortion. She is more of a hero because she is the only one brave enough (dare we say “man enough”) to face the consequences of the pregnancy and she is the only one willing to take the difficult path and abandon their itinerant life of partying and traveling. The man persuades her to have the abortion but then leaves the burden of the decision entirely up to her. She is righteous in confronting the problem head on. He is passive aggressive and cowardly.

Additionally, in either scenario (keeping or losing the baby), she is the one who must live more intimately with the consequences. From a feminist point of view, she is the more responsible, stronger and braver character of the two.

Hemingway does not give details about the appearance of either character.  The most we are told is that it is an American and a girl, and that the girl was wearing a hat - a detail that says more about the time period than it does about the girl herself.

The reason that Hemingway does not give details is very specific.  Hemingway was a modernist writer who believed in simplicity.  Unlike the authors who came before him, Hemingway's style used a lack of detail and a lack of wording in order to get his point across.  This is known as imagist writing - the simple images and words provided are meant to convey emotion.  The emotion in this story is that of conflict, and of ambiguity.  The girl and man are at a crossroads and don't know how to communicate about it to one another, much less how to proceed.  That uncertainty is echoed in our ignorance of their past and their appearance - even their names.

The one woman shown in any detail in the story, Jig, is depicted as frustrated and unhappy. She is trapped in a dead-end relationship.

She is pregnant and clearly wants to keep the baby. She seems to hope her lover will accept her wish and that somehow they can be a family. He, on the other hand, repeatedly tries to pressure her into having an abortion. He says over and over that he will do whatever she wants, but the incessant way he pushes the abortion shows that he is being insincere. He tells her if she gets rid of the baby, everything will go back to the way it was, but that is hard to believe.

She expresses her anger by telling him to "please" just be quiet.

We feel for Jig. Her lover is not committed to her the way she would like him to be, and she is caught between being a single parent—as it seems clear he won't stick around if she has the baby—and having an abortion that she doesn't want.

Although it isn't stated, readers can infer that this couple is discussing whether Jig should have an abortion.

When they initially sit down for drinks, the man and Jig exchange fairly meaningless commentary about beer and the scenery. The tone changes when he suddenly insists that "it's really an awfully simple operation." Upon hearing this comment, Jig looks at the ground and avoids replying. The man continues to pressure Jig, maintaining that he is certain she "wouldn't mind it" and that "it's really not anything." Despite Jig's silence, the man continues his persuasive commentary, swearing that he will "stay with [her] all the time" and that the procedure is "perfectly natural."

Jig has doubts and wonders what they will do "afterward." When the man assures her that they will be "fine," she questions what makes him think such a thing. The man reflects that this situation is the "only thing that's made [them] unhappy."

It's important to note that the man speaks in statements; on the other hand, Jig asks questions, such as asking him whether he really wants her to have the procedure and whether he will love her afterward. She wonders if this procedure is what she must sacrifice in order to continue their relationship, asking if he will once again be "happy" with her if she goes through with it.

Jig is justifiably concerned about her own health during this procedure. The story was written in 1927 when the the maternal mortality rate was high, and women who sought abortions often faced serious complications or even death. Still, Jig comments that she will go through with the procedure because she doesn't care about herself. Agreeing to have the procedure so that "everything will be fine" only applies to the man's life; from his safe vantage point, the situation seems "simple" to solve. It is Jig who must face the risk and the outcomes.

Finally, Jig asks her companion to just stop talking. When he refuses to listen, she questions whether "it means anything to [him]." The "it" refers to her pregnancy, and she insists that they could "get along," implying that they have enough resources to raise a child together. Still, the man returns to his repetitive argument that the procedure is "perfectly simple."

After enduring the same comments again, Jig begs the man to "please please please please please please please stop talking." She is weary of listening to the man's incessant opinions, and when he adds that he "doesn't care anything about it," implying the baby, Jig threatens to scream.

Although the man and Jig never use the term "abortion" or even "baby," it is clear that the subject of their conversation is causing great emotional turmoil between them. We know that he wants Jig to have a "procedure" that he thinks is simple and which she believes is needed to make him "happy" and restore things to the way they were in the past. Jig conveys concerns about the personal risks she must endure for this procedure and wonders if they can just "get along" without forcing her to endure the procedure. All of these are clues that point to an unwanted pregnancy.

I think that there are different elements to take on this.  Much of this is going to depend on what approach you are going to take in the paper.  I think that focusing on Jig and how she can represent a feminist character might be something to pursue.  Jig represents the ideas of feminism in that she articulates what is a woman's condition to a man who represents a form of the patriarchy.  She does not remain in silence.  Rather, she speaks her mind, articulating a condition that she, and other women, endure.  At the same time, she seeks to establish some level of power in a relationship that is naturally tilted towards the male side of power.  Another approach to take is to examine how Jig is a feminist character at the end of the story. How does she represent feminism at the end of the narrative?  Where is the articulation of voice evident and where is it absent?  I think that exploring this dimension might also help to develop a feminist point of view on the story.  Finally, I would spend some time exploring where the man is in this particular configuration.  Once the story ends, how will power be reestablished in the relationship?  I think that exploring this would be a good approach in any study of feminism in the short story.

This is a tricky question because, in a day of strides toward humanity as one instead of as divided into groups and sectors, it suggests that men and women authors have vastly different perspectives. Perhaps it might be better to ask "How would it be different if told by a non-minimalist and non-modernist?" Perhaps it would be better to ask "How would it be different if told by someone from the 21st century instead of from the 20th century?" or "... if by someone who had never experienced World War instead by someone who had?" or "... if by another man?"

Having said this, let's assume the woman telling the story is a minimalist and a modernist. Let's also assume that she'd have a reason and preference for telling the story from the focalization of Jig's point of view. Let's also assume that the facts of the story are as Hemingway reported them and that the location is the same; the woman serving them drinks is the same; the drinks are the same; the conversation and the movements are the same.

With these stipulations, a woman's version of the story would be equally devoid of expressions of emotions. Her version of the story would be equally fragmented in meaning. Her version of the story would be equally fragmented in regard to character personality. The reason for this is that the era producing the genres of minimalism and modernism fostered these perspectives.   

With these conditions in place, the opening would vary only in so far as to say, "The girl and the American man with her sat at a table in the shade." The last of the falling action of the narrative--which reports statements and actions without delving into private emotion or thoughts that go unrevealed in word, expression or deed--would undergo a significant change: the narrator would stay with Jig and report Jig's behavior and observations:

‘I’d better take the bags over to the other side of the station,’ the man said. She smiled at him.

‘All right. Then come back and we’ll finish the beer.’

He picked up the two heavy bags and carried them around the station to the other tracks. He looked up the tracks but could not see the train. Coming back, he walked through the bar-room, where people waiting for the train were drinking. He drank an Anis at the bar and looked at the people. They were all waiting reasonably for the train. He went out through the bead curtain. She was sitting at the table and smiled at him.

The original might become something like the following:

She watched him pick up the two heavy bags and carry them around the station toward the other tracks. She  looked into the distance along those tracks but her vision was blocked by the building behind which he carried the bags. Sitting alone, she looked again at the distant white hills, then stood and slowly walked toward the door and toyed with the beads covering it. She rubbed her hand across her forehead with her eyes clenched shut. She blinked into the white light then walked back over and resumed her seat in her chair. When he came back out through the bead curtain, she was sitting at the table and smiled at him.

This exercise demonstrates that it may be more true to consider differences produced by what genre and philosophical school of thought an author adheres to than to consider differences produced by gender, ethnic, or other groups.

I would like to suggest that you take the unpopular position that the American and Jig are married. Most people who have commented on this story believe they are just living together. I can offer a number of reasons to support the position that they are actually married.

The subject of marriage is never mentioned by either of them, although it seems unlikely that Jig would want to have a baby--in those days--without being married.

The American repeatedly tells Jig that she can have the baby if it is important to her, but he does not say that he will marry her. This strongly suggests to me that they are already married but he doesn't want a baby. Here are instances in which he tells her she can have the baby:

"Well," the man said, "if you don't want to you don't have to [i.e. have the abortion]. I wouldn't have you do it if you didn't want to. But I know it's perfectly simple."

"I don't want you to do it if you feel that way."

"I don't want you to do anything that you don't want to do--"

At one point the girl asks him:

"Doesn't it mean anything to you? We could get along."

This sounds like wife talking to her husband about their financial status. She thinks perhaps he is opposed to having a baby because of the expense. This may in fact be true.

Again:

"I don't want you to," he said. "I don't care anything about it."

He actually tells her five times that she can have the baby if she wants it, but never a word about their getting married. He could not ask her to have a baby without their being married. It was just unthinkable in the 1920s.

Their luggage is covered with stickers from all the hotels they have stayed at together. In those days it would have been quite difficult for unmarried people to share a room in a respectable hotel. They would actually have been turned away. In Europe travelers have to show their passports, which would prove they were not married.

He did not say anything but looked at the bags against the wall of the station. There were labels on them from all the hotels where they had spent nights.

Hemingway and his first wife Hadley actually did have a baby a short while before Hemiingway wrote this story. They nicknamed the baby Bumby. Hemingway was trying desperately to make a living as a freelance writer, and having a baby would have made his task nearly impossible. They were living in Europe because the exchange rate was extremely favorable to the American dollar, and Spain was the cheapest country of all. He would have had to take some kind of paying job, which might have necessitated moving back to America. This suggests that Hemingway might have been opposed to Hadley's having the baby but gave in.

Jig might have been less careless and more careful about avoiding pregnancy if she had not been married. She may have wanted to present her husband with a "fait accompli." Women does these kinds of things, don't they?

The only reason for supposing that the American and Jig are not married is that the author doesn't not say so. But this story is told in a purely objective fly-on-the-wall-viewpoint technique. The reader has to do a lot of guessing and make a lot of assumptions and deductions.

This is my suggestion for your argumentative essay about the relationship between the man and the woman.