Free The Professor’s Name Research Paper Example

“For Whom The Bell Tolls” by Ernest Hemingway:

Themes of Love and Duty in the Novel
The following paper presents an attempt to thoroughly research and analyze the use of themes of love and duty in “For Whom The Bell Tolls”, a novel by Ernest Hemingway. The paper will follow the events of the book chronologically, and depict the change and evolution in the characters’ understanding of both duty and love in their lives as the pace of the novel progresses. This research will be primarily focused on the perception of the two main themes by Robert Jordan, as well as on his character development, considering that he is the main character, and his perspective is the key point of view in the novel. However, it will also dwell on the other characters’ place within the narrative of love and duty, and upon the way these concepts are actualized through their presence and actions in the novel. The work will end with a conclusion of my own comprehension of the manner, in which the author developed the themes of duty and love throughout the book, and whether his portrayal was sufficient and realistic.

AT THE BEGINNING: BEFORE MEETING MARIA

When the reader gets acquainted with Robert Jordan for the first time, he strikes the reader as the man of duty, first and foremost. As noted by Susan Stamberg: “Jordan is tough, principled, heroic – and doomed. Yet he carries out his assignment”. His commander-in-chief entrusts him with a mission, and he is not only ready, but also willing to complete his mission by any means necessary. Such devotion is explained by the fact that he believes the successful fulfillment of his task to be crucial for the advancement of their case – the war against fascism. “He was not usually worried because he did not give any importance to what happened to himself” (Hemingway 3) - this line from Jordan’s inner monologue is meant to give the reader an understanding of the main character as utterly selfless, dutiful, obedient, and devoted to his cause. He does not care what happens to him, as long as his order is carried out; and not only that, but he would much rather accept his own death, than failure. His priorities are centered around his duty, while everything else, including his own physical (for instance, hunger) or emotional (love) needs and desires, comes secondary.
This sentiment is further proved in the flashback of the conversation that Jordan had with his commander Golz before setting out on his mission. When Golz is trying to entrust him with the details of the planned attack, Jordan abruptly stops him. Afterwards he explains his reasoning: “I would always rather not know. Then, no matter what can happen, it was not me that talked” (Hemingway 5). The point of this flashback was to demonstrate once again that Jordan would rather put his life at risk by not being enlightened as to the specifics of the attack, than to risk the success of the whole campaign by knowing something that the enemy could force him to tell. He pays no heed to the possibility of being captured and tortured, because he believes that his life is nothing compared to the war to be won.
According to Bhim Dahiya, at the beginning of the novel Robert Jordan is presented as a man, whose duty stands above all else to him. It is all about duty, and duty alone. He has no place for love in his life, nor does he think he needs it at all. In fact, he thinks of it as a mere distraction, a trifle that might distract him from the thing of real, actual importance and relevance – his responsibilities as a fighter for the just cause. He goes so far as to say: “I have enough to think about without girls” (Hemingway 6).
However, Jordan’s perception of duty is not the only one we can observe in the novel. Pablo, the leader of the small rebellion group that is meant to assist Jordan on his mission, has his own understanding of the concept of obligation and responsibility. “Every one has to do what he can do according to how it can truly be done” (Hemingway 8), - is what he says to Jordan when they meet, and thus shows to reader that he does not share Jordan’s fatalist view on duty. He is disillusioned because of the horrors of the war that he has witnessed so far; and the greater cause, the possible victory over fascists does not hold the same meaning to him anymore. He is not interested in the grand scheme of things, or what his refusal to cooperate with Jordan’s orders could mean to the outcome of the impending attack. Pablo is burdened with the awareness of the futility of his attempts to make any kind of difference in this world; yet he believes that his actions can make a difference for the small community that he leads. And that is exactly where his duty lies: “To me, now, the most important is that we be not disturbed here. To me, now, my duty is to those who are with me and to myself” (Hemingway 10).
Through the actions and the ideas of these two characters the reader can observe two different, opposite viewpoints on duty that they represent, with Pablo being the embodiment of the realist view, and Robert Jordan being of the idealist sort. Both of them are equally justified in their beliefs, both of them have their own valid reasons for choosing the path they chose, but still, they are on the opposite ends of the spectrum, which leads to inevitable animosity and eventual clash. Naturally, the author himself sides with his main hero’s standpoint, since it reflects his own views and choices and has autobiographical aspects: Hemingway, too, joined war as a volunteer and was a relentless fighter in his real life (Kumar 2).

FATEFUL MEETING: JORDAN’S CHANGE OF HEART

However, Jordan’s conviction and certainty in duty being the only God he must pray to undergo a severe test when he meets Maria, a young woman who has endured the worst horrors of the war and somehow still survived. No one and nothing has ever made Jordan doubt his assurance, his unflinching belief in the fact that not only his own life, feelings and emotions are secondary to the greater cause, but any other person’s are as well. He first comes to the hideout of the rebels with readiness and willingness to sacrifice all of them for the sake of his mission, if need be. He does not want to, of course, but he knows the price of the victory and, if the circumstances call for it, he is willing to pay it. But Maria instantly changes everything.
As opposed to the depiction of duty as one of the two main themes of the novel, the realistic portrayal of love posed a much more significant challenge for the author. As explained by Robert Trogdon, the entire course of action of the novel is packed in just three days, which made the task of portraying Jordan and Maria’s love story authentically all the more difficult. Ever since Romeo and Juliet, love at first sight has become something of a cliché: perfectly suitable for a fairy tale, but unacceptable for a naturalistic, unidealized story, which strives to be true to life. And yet, Hemingway somehow managed to make Maria and Jordan’s love believable, despite its rapid inception and resolution.
It certainly was love at first sight, for Jordan “could feel a thickness in his throat” (Hemingway 13) since the moment he first laid eyes on Maria. And since that very moment the reader experiences a substantial shift in the main character’s point of view. He falls in love, which is something he was absolutely not prepared for, never counted on happening, never even considered possible. Certainly, not with the kind of life he was living. Probably, for the first time since he dedicated himself to the war and his noble cause, he finds himself at a crossroads. A crossroads not between love and duty per se, for Jordan is as dedicated and loyal to his mission as ever. The struggle that he deals with is of much more personal nature, because Maria makes him question, whether his life does indeed hold so little weight for him, as he once thought.
He believed himself to be ready for the ultimate sacrifice, whenever and wherever, as long as his goal is fulfilled and his task is accomplished, and yet he inexplicably finds himself dreaming of a future. Yearning for a future that he never thought he would have, not for himself, but for Maria, or more accurately – for them both, because from the moment they met they became two parts of the same whole, two sides of one coin, two complementary puzzle pieces, inseparable and incomplete without one another. He wants to have this future, first and foremost, because he wants to share it with Maria. And it scares him because he no longer feels like a tool, an instrument to perform someone else’s will, regardless of his own fate. Maybe for the first time in his life, our hero feels like a man; just a man, holding a woman he loves in his arms, dreaming of taking her to Madrid, and wishing for something he knows he can never have.
It is quite interesting how Jordan himself, almost subconsciously, uses his duty as armor to protect his heart from getting wounded, as soon as he sees a possibility that it might. When Maria, albeit jokingly, rejects Jordan after he asks her whether she has a relationship with anyone in the camp (“Of no one. No one. Neither in joke nor in seriousness. Nor of thee either.” (Hemingway 15), he immediately turns to the protective embrace of his usual excuse, which is basically a repetition of what he previously said to Golz: “Good. I have no time for any woman. That is true” (Hemingway 15).
Yet the contrast between these lines within the context is striking. In the instance with Golz, Jordan actually believed in his words, or at the very least – pretended to believe, since there was no reason for him to doubt them. There was only work that needed to be done, and any kind of sentiment outside of that work was redundant to him. On the other hand, when it comes to trying to convince partially Maria, but mostly himself, of his indifference, he realizes the lie in his own voice. He is past the point of no return, and no matter what he says now, it cannot and will not change how he feels. Because just as he was saying these words, “he could feel the thickness coming in his throat again” (Hemingway 15). He knows Maria has got a firm hold of his heart now, and our hero is scared of the uncertainty that this newly discovered fact brings into his life and how it might affect his choices.
It is after his meeting with Maria, that Jordan demonstrates any kind of reluctance to carry out his order for the first time. He might have believed this task to be dubious beforehand too, but unbeknownst to the reader: the reader was meant to see him entirely as the man of duty and honor and certainty in his mission, or at least in what it is meant to accomplish. But it is not until he has met Maria and become infatuated with her, and has become friendly with some of the rebels, namely Anselmo and Pilar (for love in the novel is depicted not only by means of the romantic kind, but friendship as one of its powerful manifestations too), that his doubt is verbalized in his inner monologue: “He resented them for what they could do to him and for what they could do to this old man. They were bad orders all right for those who would have to carry them out” (Hemingway 25).
His affection and admiration for Anselmo, his respect for the old man’s strong morals, as shown in their discussion on the necessity to kill people during the war, and how absolutely revolting and repulsive it was to Anselmo, despite him realizing that it was needed to be done, played their part in Jordan’s doubts as much as falling in love with Maria did. Naturally, he instantly reprimands himself: “And that is not the way to think, he told himself, and there is not you, and there are no people that things must not happen to. Neither you nor this old man is anything. You are instruments to do your duty” (Hemingway 25). What the reader can observe here is the man who experienced a change of heart, but is neither willing nor ready to accept it. So he tries to convince himself that nothing has changed, that whatever his gut is trying to tell him is wrong, and he must proceed as originally planned. The events of the novel that followed, predictably, proved him wrong, for the man has as much power over his feelings as he has over the sunset and sunrise.

ALTERNATIVE DYNAMICS OF LOVE IN THE NOVEL

In our analysis of the depiction of love in the story, we must not fall prey to the notion that love is manifested entirely through the relationship between Maria and Robert Jordan. It is a central and focal point of the story, on par with the theme of duty, portrayed as the opposing force in the form of war and the republicans’ fight with fascists. These forces struggle with each other every step of the way, as demonstrated by Jordan’s inner battle, Pablo’s fickle loyalties, Maria’s rebirth through her love for Jordan, after everything that has been done to her as a result of war, Pilar’s wish both to protect Maria and to contribute to the fight, as her duty tells her to do. Therefore, it is important to note that the theme of love, as an antagonistic force to duty, actualizes itself not only through Jordan and Maria’s romantic love, but through many kinds of it, between a variety of characters and a variety of feelings involved.
As previously mentioned, the story highlights the importance of friendship as a medium for platonic, familiar love, as showcased through Robert Jordan’s relationship with the rebels, especially Pilar and Anselmo. It is painfully obvious how much of a lie he has told himself when trying to convince himself that the fate of these people matters not, as he is listening to the demise of El Sordo’s party. He does not let Pablo’s group come to El Sordo’s aid, and argues that it is pointless, there is nothing they can do, they can’t make any difference, and they still have their own mission to complete. And while these arguments hold some truth to them, Jordan mostly just understands that letting them go to El Sordo’s right now would mean a certain death for these people who have become his friends so quickly, and he cares too much for them to let them get killed so thoughtlessly. He seals El Sordo’s fate by giving his group a chance, and there is clearly a personal aspect to this choice. Just as there is a personal aspect to his ultimate sacrifice in the finale of the novel, which will be highlighted in detail in the conclusion to this paper.
Then there is a fascinating dynamic of Pablo and Pilar’s relationship. What they represent, in a way, is a distorted mirror image of Maria and Jordan’s relationship. The image is distorted because the roles in this dynamic are completely reversed. In the relationship between Pablo and Pilar, it is the latter who constitutes the duty side, the selfless, idealistic side that is loyal to the Republic’s cause, to the war, to the greater good that she strives for. She welcomes Jordan cordially and offers him her full support, because she understands the importance of his task, and is instantly ready to back him up for the sake of the duty that she undertook when she became a rebel. It is a matter of personal belief and conviction and honor to her, just as it is to Jordan, and she understands the importance of personal sacrifice, just as much as he does.
Pablo, on the other hand, sees no point in fighting what he believes to be a loser’s fight. This man lost his faith both in this war and in the Republic; for him the ultimate objective is to protect this small group of people that became his family and himself too, for he believes their lives to be valuable not just for the purpose of giving them up for a cause he no longer believes in, but to actually live. He is a realist, and he is selfish. He does not want Jordan to blow the bridge up, no matter how valuable or strategic it is to the Republican command, because it will surely provide an incentive for their enemies to launch an attack on his camp and kill everyone he cares about.
Of course, Pablo’s sentiment is lost on the rebels who are still passionate about their fight, which makes them turn on him. However, there is one person whose attitude greatly resembles that of Pablo. Maria shows no enthusiasm in fighting a war, which has already taken so much from her and caused her so much suffering. She would much rather her and Jordan left altogether; the prospect of him walking on that bridge and dying there because of his orders terrifies her. She does not ask him to stay back or run away with her, not once, despite it being her biggest wish, because she knows him enough by then to know he will not listen. She recognizes him for the man of duty that he is, but it does not stop her from being regretful of this fact. She wishes she did not have to share Jordan’s devotion with the Republic. Maria represents a force of love, and love is always selfish and insatiable.
Returning to the question of unconventional relationship dynamics in the novel, it is important to draw attention not only to Pilar’s relationship with Pablo, but to her involvement with Maria and Jordan’s relationship as well. Michael Reynolds makes an interesting point in his analysis of how the theme of love is presented in the novel:
The novel’s first readers saw only the love story: Jordan and Maria making the earth move out and away from them in their moment of La Gloria as Maria calls it. But there was always more to the picture. There was always Pilar. There was always the triangle: Pilar, Maria and Jordan. It is more than Jordan’s death that Pilar reads in his palm: he is the man for whom she has been preparing Maria. Pablo wanted her; the gypsy yearned for her, but Pilar, who claimed Maria for her own, gives her as a gift to Jordan in an act he neither fully understands nor questions deeply. In the end, with Jordan broken on the slope and waiting for his death to find him, Maria is sent away with Pilar holding her.
Pilar was Hemingway’s way of challenging and exploring pre-existing gender roles, for, as she says of herself, “I would have made a good man, but I am all woman and ugly. Yet many men have loved me and I have loved many men” (Hemingway 54). She loves Maria and she loves Jordan, and she loves their love too; but undeniably, there is a part of her that envies them, the depth of their feeling, their youth, their passion and tenderness for one another. In a rare moment of complete honesty, she admits to being jealous, but whether she was more jealous of Maria or Jordan remains open to the interpretation of the reader.

CONCLUSION

So what does it all come down to? Depicted throughout the novel as adverse forces, colliding every step of the way, in the end, it is when love and duty merged together the most heroic and selfless act of final sacrifice was made. Mortally wounded, Jordan realizes that he will only slow down the remaining members of the group and cause them to get captured or killed. So he makes a choice, a choice to stay back and give them a chance to flee by slowing down the enemy instead. A choice that he makes both for the sake of his friends, for the safety of his love, and for the purpose of making his very last contribution to the war by taking as many of his adversaries as possible with him. That is his final act of duty as much as it is his final act of love. Suffering from excruciating pain, on the verge of life and death, he holds on to the last shreds of conscience, because in his final moments he realizes something that should have become obvious to him long ago: love and duty are not opposing forces, they are complementary. And the man is indeed at his strongest when he lets these forces inside his heart work in conformity with one another, not against each other.
Hemingway, masterfully as ever, does a brilliant job of portraying the moral of the novel by making the reader feel Jordan’s agony and admire his refusal to give in to the pain and his resolution to hold on to life as long as possible, so that his people could have the best chance of survival. We never get to see the actual moment of his death, but maybe it is better this way, for, as Robert Jordan tells Maria, wherever she goes he goes too, and for as long as she lives, he will too. And that is the ultimate definition of love, which comes alive by virtue of the author’s skill and talent.

Works Cited

Hemingway, Ernest. For Whom The Bell Tolls. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1940. Print.
Stamberg, Susan. “Robert Jordan, Hemingway’s Bipartisan Hero.” NPR books, Oct. 2008. Web. 21 April 2015.
Kumar, Dinesh. “Autobiographical Elements in Ernest Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls”. International Journal of Research, Oct. 2014. Web. 21 April 2015.
Reynolds, Michael. “Ringing the Changes: Hemingway’s Bell Tolls Fifty.” VQR, Winter 1991. Web. 20 April 2015.
Trogdon, Robert W. “Money and Marriage: Hemingway’s Self-Censorship in For Whom the Bell Tolls.” The Hemingway Review Spring 2003: 6-18. Print.
Dahiya, Bhim S. The Hero in Hemingway: A Study in Development. Chandiragh: Bahri Publication Pvt., 1978. Print.