Hills Like White Elephants Analysis

The Domination and Conquest of Nature
Humanity’s attributes can be encapsulated with one specific characteristic: the seemingly intrinsic yearn to conquer nature. Archaeologist often cite the invention of agriculture as humanity’s key development, and, fundamentally, agriculture also represents man’s supremacy and superiority over the earth and over other animals. Humans tend to see the repression of nature as an accomplishment, and those who argue for conservation are often seen as weak, passive, and effeminate. Ernest Hemingway’s “Hills like White Elephants” is centered on the relationship and the discourse between a man and a woman. Throughout the story, the man attempts to convince the woman undergo an abortion, but the woman continues

to be unsure. Timothy D. O’Brien claims in “Allusion, Word-Play, and the Central Conflict in Hemingway’s ‘Hills like White Elephants’” that the man represents all of mankind (21). In fact, the man and woman’s argument represents the clash of artificial and natural, the former representing the aggressive tendency of mankind and the latter representing nature and life. “Hills like White Elephants” is an exploration into two modes of thoughts - mankind’s urge to conquer nature and its subsequent morality and implications - and it is mostly demonstrated through the symbolism of the setting, the nature of the fetus, and the misbalance of power between the man and the woman.
In the story, the man is frequently gazing at and interacting with the artificial and the woman at the natural, suggesting the setting to be symbolic.

For example, the man focuses on the station and the track tracks, and the woman is focusing on the environment, namely the hills. The woman compares the hills to white elephants (Hemingway #). When the man does not seem to understand the comparison, she expounds upon the metaphor, saying, “[t]hey don’t really look like white elephants. I just meant the coloring of their skin through the trees,” but the man ignores and dismisses her comment (Hemingway #). The metaphor is representative of both the fetus and nature. The woman, representing nature, supports the conservation of the fetus, and the man, representing artificial, argues for its destruction. The man cites that they will be happy, and the woman is unsure (Hemingway #). This is a reflection on the central argument; mankind argues for the domination of nature, but people are unsure. O’Brien claims the comparison between the hills and the white elephant is important because white elephants are seen as “both ‘annoyingly useless’ and a precious gift, something to be discarded and something to be… cherished” (23). Thus, the hills represent the dichotomy in humanity; nature must be cherished, but

discarded.
The abortion itself is symbolic between the struggles of nature and artificial. While the woman is unsure about the operation, the man believes the couple will “be all right and be happy” once they have the operation and that “it’s the best thing to do” (Heminway #). Those who want to destroy nature believe it will best the best thing for humanity. The man assumes the pregnancy is “some sort of illness,” one that the woman can recover from (Citing). Thus, nature is seen as these people as something that can be controlled and destroyed for the betterment of humanity.
There is an obvious different in power balance between the two, representing the argument between nature and artificial. The man is American, a nationality that is known for its aggressive, brash ways. The woman is reliant on the man, whether for drink information or for knowing Spanish. The man obviously has more power in the relationship. The woman is obliged to give in to the man because her emotional, metaphorical language is seen as inferior. Her name is Jig. The language of the male “overpowers her” (O’Brien 22). She changes her language when she reemphasizes the metaphor between the hills and the white elephants, becoming “more clinical than poetic” (O’Brien 24). The domination of technology and science over art and literature is mirrored by this. Those who are in the sciences and technology are often seen as more serious and thus taken more seriously, mostly because those studies are seen as better. The man thus represents the science, logical part of the world, and the woman represents the figurative.
“Hills like White Elephants” explores the argument between nature and scientific advancement by using the man and woman as mouthpieces, the former represents those who want to control nature, and the latter as those who argue against and are unsure. The hills, the fetus, and the lop-sided power balance between the two represents the argument. It is ironic that mankind wants to destroy nature when it is an intrinsic and natural belief in humans. As technology advances, humanity must find a balance between nature and the artificial.