Rupert Owen reviewed To Have and Have Not by Ernest Hemingway
Review of 'To Have and Have Not' on 'GoodReads'
2 stars
I pleasurably read this book up until part three. The first two parts read like a beatific adventure tale with all the hooks and lines expected of such, it was the third part that was a sinker. I've only read Hemingway's A Moveable Feast, which I thoroughly enjoyed. This, however, was a bit loose on a thread. The pensive ending felt like a narrative filler, I think in the hands of a direct and understated style, it kind of flops. I'm not one to uphold a piece of writing just because surrounding works of an author have been acclaimed, and To Have And Have Not may very well be an acclaimed work, I don't know, but what I do know is that in the range of similar novels of its time, for me it doesn't stand up as being particularly well written. I should have approached it as a few …
I pleasurably read this book up until part three. The first two parts read like a beatific adventure tale with all the hooks and lines expected of such, it was the third part that was a sinker. I've only read Hemingway's A Moveable Feast, which I thoroughly enjoyed. This, however, was a bit loose on a thread. The pensive ending felt like a narrative filler, I think in the hands of a direct and understated style, it kind of flops. I'm not one to uphold a piece of writing just because surrounding works of an author have been acclaimed, and To Have And Have Not may very well be an acclaimed work, I don't know, but what I do know is that in the range of similar novels of its time, for me it doesn't stand up as being particularly well written. I should have approached it as a few short stories rather than a singular narrative, as this was its origins.
