“The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber” by Ernest Hemmingway brings out several aspects of psychoanalysis in an exciting way. Through the analysis of this story it would be deemed easy to have the want to apply many different and complex psychoanalytic theories to the same characters along with the progression of the story. The foundation of the constant back and forth between these theories is caused by the very close yet dynamic relationships held and how the actual story transforms.
Initially one could want to support Francis Macomber and give him the defense of denial based on the quote “He was very wealthy, and would be much wealthier and knew she would not leave him ever now” (Hemmingway 11). Along with associating and comparing defenses with Francis one could do the same with the core issue of “fear of abandonment”. This idea would eventually solidify during the back and forth arguing when Francis woke up in the middle of the night and Margot was just walking inside the tent claiming to have gone “out to get a breath of air” (Hemmingway 12). As for the analysis of Margot Macomber, she possessed the same defense of denial to justify her core issue which was supported by the quote “Margot was too beautiful for Macomber to divorce her and Macomber had too much money for Margot ever to leave him’’(Hemmingway 11). This quote directly portrays the assurance that the couple tends to give each other as support for staying married.
The core issue where Mrs. Macomber was identical to her husband, “fear of abandonment”, was supported by the quote “His wife had been a great beauty and she was still a great beauty in Africa, but she was not a great enough beauty any more at home to able to leave him and better herself and she knew it” (Hemmingway 11). Additionally, observations pertaining to the quotes showed reciprocal characteristics, for each and could equally support both of the characters.
As the story developed and the plot began to change, that’s when one could begin to apply several differentiating psychoanalytic theories to each of the characters. One can see the completely different sides of Francis and Margot unraveling along as the plot continued. This was particularly interesting because the changes within the story affected dynamics which should have stayed constant.
It is possible that one could compare a bed with the story and how we would normally analyze it. A bed naturally has layers, whether it is the stretchy sheet, regular sheet and then the comforter. The bed would be synonymous with the story/analysis because when we read, it’s for the most part the comforter level. Furthermore one would try to go deeper or for themes sake, to the next layer. This idea isn’t only exclusive to this story because when analyzing one has to understand the top layer to interpret the next, but this story is different. When the top layer, or plot, begins to change the entire 2nd and 3rd layer, or analysis, changes regardless if it’s a drastic or subtle change. When one begins to observe the story in this way it begins to become even more unique and interesting.
To support this bizarre comparison, identification of the moment the story took a twist is crucial; and that was when Francis’ cowardly attitude switched to a courageous one. By this time, for Francis, the core issue “fear of abandonment” changed to “Insecure or unstable sense of self”. According to Tyson “this core issue makes us very vulnerable to the influence for-good or ill-of other people, and we may have a tendency to repeatedly change the way we look or behave as we become involved with different individuals or groups”(27). This was true with Francis’ change from his coward like demeanor into a tough hunter. Moreover, Francis was “vulnerable to the influence for good of the other people” (Tyson 27) and that influential individual was Wilson. The quote in support of Francis’ change was “you know I don’t think I’d ever be afraid of anything again” (Tyson 17).
Lastly, the story’s plot change equally tweaked Margot’s core issue, which arguably, was the reason why most readers think she intentionally shot her husband. Prior to the buffalo scene Margot’s core issue was “fear of abandonment”. The changed in her core issue appeared the moment she shot her husband. Support for this is present when Wilson described Francis’s actions as “coming into age” as opposed to the situation with the lion and how frightened he was. Searching deeper, the quote “Macomber felt a wild unreasonable happiness that he had never known before” (Hemmingway 17) supports the justification for why she changed because while it was describes Francis, Margot sensed the same feelings and despised it. At this moment Margot knew that her condescending ways would not help Francis remain with her if he chose to leave.
No comments:
Post a Comment