Comparing Hemingway's Big Two-Hearted River And The Open Boat

Ernest Hemingway once claimed that writing should be comparable to an iceberg, in which only a small portion of the reality should be expressed and viewable while the majority of the story should be submerged, leaving the reader with a questioning outlook on the piece. In both, Ernest Hemingway’s “Big Two-Hearted River”, and in Stephen Crane’s “The Open Boat, the authors imply a particular theme, setting, and situation but do not allow the reader to grasp the entirety of the story, leaving the readers with a sense of a submerged feeling. In Hemingway’s “Big Two-Hearted River” the narrator tells the story of a man by the name of Nick Adams and his return home after an assumed war. Hemingway never directly states that Nick was away at war,

Not only is Nick physically wounded, but he is mentally wounded as well. Hemingway embodies no dialogue within the story, and only gives his readers subtle information and background history. 
 Throughout the entirety of the story Hemingway hints at the fact that Nick has been away from home for a while; “Nick looked at the burned-over stretch of hillside, where he had expected to find the scattered houses of the town…” (Hemingway #). Hemingway also implies that things aren’t now what they once were to Nick: “It was a long time since Nick had looked into a stream and seen trout” (Hemingway #). 
 Hemingway’s distinct writing style, especially in “Big Two Hearted-River”, omits redundant and extraneous content matter; which in turn creates a sense of questioning. By creating a thought-provoking feeling, Hemingway allows his stories to become far more interesting, which can attribute to the overall success of not only Hemingway himself, but also his individual opuses. 
 Stephen Crane’s “The Open Boat”, has a similar goal, in which Crane creates a sense of uncertainty as well, but does not necessarily apply it to the entirety of the story as Hemingway