Hemingway's `The Sea Change': what close reading and evolutionary psychology reveal. (Articles).

Nolan, Charles J., Jr.

A close reading of Hemingway's "The Sea Change," designed to demonstrate (1) that the overall arc of the piece involves Phil's gradually coming to terms with the changed nature of his relationship with his lover; (2) that the changes Hemingway made as he moved from drafts to the story's published form are always designed to focus the issue at hand more sharply; (3) that Hemingway uses repetition to highlight aspects of characterization and employs pauses to control the story's movement and architecture, often providing counterpoint; (4) that the irony pervading the work underscores Phil's bitterness; and (5) that Hemingway's portrayal of Phil's jealousy captures his feelings with psychological realism.

IN A WIDE-RANGING BUT RATHER PETULANT LETTER of 16 November 1933 to Maxwell Perkins, complaining about the response of various critics to his short fiction, Hemingway listed "The Sea Change" and several other stories as "invent[ed] completely." They were not, as one commentator had charged, merely a reporter's transcription of actual events like some of his other works. "The point is" he went on, "I want them all to sound as though they really happened. Then when I succeed those poor dumb pricks say they are all just skillful reporting" (SL 400). Over twenty-five years later, in 1959, he gave a different account of the story's genesis in "The Art of the Short Story," a preface for what was to be a student edition of his short works: "In ... `The Sea Change, everything is left out. I had seen the couple in the Bar Basque in St. Jean de Luz and I knew the story too too well, which is the squared root of well, and use any well you like except mine. So I left the story out. But it was all there. It is not visible but it is there" (Flora, Ernest Hemingway 131). (1) When The Garden of Eden was published in 1986 with its obvious similarities to the earlier story and as more biographical information about Hemingway became available, his comment about knowing the situation "too too well" should perhaps have led to a much fuller analysis of "The Sea Change." (2) Yet three years later Susan F. Beegel included an essay on the story in Hemingway's Neglected Short Fiction, suggesting the paucity of detailed attention to the work. Since that time, lengthy discussion of the piece has been slight. (3) Hence a new look may be useful.

What I hope to show here with a close reading of the story is (1) that the overall arc of the piece involves Phil's gradually coming to terms with the changed nature of his relationship with his lover; (2) that the changes Hemingway made as he moved from drafts to the story's published form are always designed to focus the issue at hand more sharply; (3) that Hemingway uses repetition to highlight aspects of characterization and employs pauses to control the story's movement and architecture, often providing counterpoint; (4) that the irony pervading the work underscores Phil's bitterness; and (5) that Hemingway's portrayal of Phil's jealousy captures his feelings with psychological realism. On this last point, recent work by psychologists and sociologists helps underline Hemingway's insightful reading of human nature. The methodology in this essay is to walk through the story almost line by line to see what such close attention can reveal, always keeping in mind what others have said about the story. What ultimately emerges is a renewed respect for Hemingway's remarkable artistry.

As Philip Young was first to remind us, the story's title comes from Ariel's song in The Tempest (178n): (4) Full fathom five thy father lies. Of his bones are coral made; Those are pearls that were his eyes; Nothing of him that doth fade But doth suffer a sea-change Into something rich and strange. (1.2.400-405)

Most readers believe the "sea change" applies to Phil, especially given his comments at the story's end, after he sends his lover off for a lesbian affair. However, Comley and Scholes also speak of the woman's "sea change of sexual preference" (88), as does Charles Oliver, who also sees a transformation occurring to both Characters (263).

The story begins in the midst of a quarrel: "All right," said the man. "What about it?" "No," said the girl," I can't. "You mean you won't." "I can't," said the girl. "That's all that I mean." (302)

Hemingway immediately puts us into the center of the struggle, compelling our attention. But it was not that way in the first draft. Originally, there were several false starts: a sentence and parts of two others that Hemingway lined and crossed out. Then came a fairly long compound sentence setting the scene with the barman and the couple (Item 679), removed in the story's second version (Item 680). Ultimately, Hemingway saw the power of starting with dialogue, withholding our understanding of what the quarrel is about.

After a few more lines of argument comes a paragraph of exposition. It is early, no one but the couple and the barman are in the cafe and it is the end of summer, symbolically important because the couple's relationship is at an end. Because they are so tanned, they seem "out of place" in the city, as if their lives have been more healthy and carefree than those of people living in Paris, although such an assumption will soon be overturned. Then comes a long sentence devoted to the woman--her tweed suit, her "smooth golden brown" skin, her short blonde hair that grows "beautifully away from her forehead." When, after that physical description and that telling adverb beautifully, Hemingway writes, "The man looked at her" we recognize his glance as one of sexual appraisal. So we are not surprised when we hear him blurt out, "I'll kill her," although initially we may think that we have misread. As the story continues, however, it becomes clear that the pronoun "her" is in fact accurate and that the couple is discussing a lesbian affair.

In the original manuscript, Hemingway gave a fuller description of the woman, detailing aspects of her hands, face, throat, mouth, and cheek bones and noting the slimness of her body (Item 679). Another sentence and part of a second were devoted to depicting the man: he too is well tanned and attractive. In the second version, however, the description of the man is cut entirely, and passages depicting various parts of the woman's body are placed at different spots in the text. Both choices strength the story. The material about Phil, who is not given a name until the second version (Item 680), would have interrupted the steady movement that leads to his exclamation. Placing details of the woman's description at diverse points in the story serves to heighten her sexual attractiveness and to underline Phil's consequent pain.

One of these points occurs immediately after his outburst. After the woman replies, "Please don't" Hemingway writes: "She had very fine hands and the man looked at them. They were slim and brown and very beautiful." Although this description is not as obviously loaded as the first, it still emphasizes the woman's beauty. The repetition of the man's looking at parts of her body sets up a pattern continued throughout the story, always to suggest the woman's sexual appeal. "Please don't" means "Please don't react so jealously." But that request seems to have no effect on Phil, who "swear[s] to God" that he will, in fact, kill her lover. As the argument continues, Phil, somewhat patronizingly, wants to know if she could not have landed herself in "some other jam," suggesting that the woman is not quite in control, that she is always in some sort of trouble. But the woman remains calm, apparently very much in control, asking him what he intends to do about the situation. Though he sputters on for a bit, he admits that he is not sure. At this admission, the woman, recognizing his pain, puts out her hand to comfort him and says, "Poor old Phil." (5) Though he looks at her hands, he refuses to take them and verbally rejects her sympathy, not yet ready to accept the changed relationship.

Now Hemingway begins another pattern when the woman asks, "It doesn't do any good to say I'm sorry?" (CSS 303). She will repeat the phrase "I'm sorry" several times in the next few lines, expressing her sadness at causing Phil so much anguish and making us aware of just how guilty she feels. But now she asks, "Nor to tell you how it is?". Phil replies that he would rather not listen to an explanation, but his refusal and obvious suffering brings forth a declaration of love from her. When he responds, "Yes, this proves it" she says she is "sorry if [he] does not understand." But he does, and that is the problem, as she recognizes when she acknowledges that his understanding "makes it worse, of course." "Sure," he replies sarcastically as he looks at her: (6) "I'll understand all the time. All day and all night. Especially all night. I'll understand. You don't have to worry about that." Again the woman apologizes, recognizing his obvious pain. When Phil suggests that, if she were leaving him for a man, it might be more understandable, the woman interrupts him, telling him that she would never have betrayed him in that way. "Don't you trust me?" she asks. Phil sees the bitter humor in that question and comments on it. Once more the woman apologizes, continuing the pattern that emphasizes how badly she feels. To show her love for him, she offers to come back to him after her affair is over, but, for the moment at least, Phil is having none of such a suggestion. Then, to create an effective pause in this headlong tumble of events, Hemingway observes that neither of them spoke for a time.

The woman is the first to break the silence, again declaring that she really does love Phil, to which he replies dismissively: "Let's not talk rot." At this point in the first version of the story, Hemingway added two sentences describing Phil, emphasizing the darkness of his face and hair,(7) noting how healthy the young man looks, and remarking that it is impossible to tell what he is thinking by observing him (Item 679). But in the second version, this description disappears. Probably Hemingway did not want to interrupt the flow of the story, told primarily through dialogue as is "Hills Like White Elephants." (8) Instead, he quickens the pace to let the reader to see just how devastating the woman's choices are for Phil. So far, Hemingway has used description only to highlight the woman's attractiveness to Phil, emphasizing that the story is as much about his sea change as it is hers. Description of Phil here would not be functional.

But Phil's anger and bitterness are clear when, in response to the woman's saying again that she loves him, he asks her to "prove it." He sounds like an adolescent, and the woman is quick to upbraid him, noting that he has never asked such a thing before and telling him plainly, "That isn't polite"--this last being a key word for her, one she will repeat later. She reminds him that he is acting like a child, violating the codes of adulthood, which specify that people must discuss their problems--however emotionally charged--in a rational manner. When he replies, "You're a funny girl" she again recognizes the pain her actions are causing and expresses her affection for him, telling him how difficult it is for her to leave him. When he asks if she has to go, her reply is freighted with meaning: "Yes, ... I have to and you know it." With "have to" she introduces the notion of compulsion, and this idea--of something too powerful to be controlled--will frame the next part of their discussion.

But first a longer pause. After noting that Phil does not respond and that the woman again puts out her hand, Hemingway focuses the rest of the paragraph on the barman. Both his face and his jacket are white, details marking his difference from the tanned couple. Hemingway introduces James to remind us of the world beyond the couple, where people have their own concerns. As James looks at Phil and the woman, he thinks to himself that they are a "handsome" couple but that he has seen many "handsome" couples break up and new pairs form "that were never so handsome long." The repetition of handsome highlights the ordinariness of such Splitting up, although, as we are aware, this situation is hardly usual. The barman does not know what the issue is between Phil and the woman, nor does he seem to care. James is not thinking about them but rather about a horse he has presumably bet on; in a short time, he can find out how his horse did. As the couple continues to argue, Hemingway will continue to use long and short pauses to keep the reader aware of the outside world, providing a counterpoint to the intensity of the drama. When the woman asks Phil whether he could not find it in himself just to release her, his response--"What do you think I'm going to do?"--marks another stage in his gradual acceptance of the situation. Hemingway highlights that acceptance with a brief pause: two patrons come into the bar, and the barman takes their order. But the woman wants more from Phil, asking him to forgive her, especially since, as she points out rather enigmatically, he knows "about it" (CSS 304). When he rejects the idea, she clarifies: "You don't think things we've had and done should make any difference in understanding?" This question prompts Phil to reply "bitterly" with a half-remembered quotation from Pope: "`Vice is a monster of such fearful mien ... that to be something or other needs but to be seen.'" As he tries to continue, he finds that he cannot recall the fines, though he gets the basic idea and final word ("embrace") right. In fact, he has misquoted even part of the first line. The actual passage, from An Essay on Man, describes the process Phil is trying to capture: Vice is a monster of so frightful mien, As, to be hated, needs but to be seen; Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face, We first endure, then pity, then embrace. (2.217--20) (9)

Describing how he came to accept the special aspects of their lovemaking, Phil rather caustically calls what they have done vice--ironic because what he is asked to accept now is so different from, yet so akin to, what he and his lover have shared. The woman, however, does not like the word "vice" remarking that it is "not polite," the same words used to object to Phil's earlier demand that she "prove" her love. "Perversion," Phil's response, drips with sarcasm;

At this point, Hemingway introduces another pause, made up of dialogue between, the barman and the two patrons who have just ordered their drinks. Like the earlier interruption, it helps us to keep in mind the larger world, but here the pause functions thematically as well. As Warren Bennett has noted, the patrons' focus on the barman's appearance ("You're fatter, James"), their affected language ("Don't neglect to insert the brandy, James") as well as Phil's later reference to them as catamites in a deleted fragment of the ending (Item 681), among other things, suggest that they are homosexuals (237). (Hemingway is clearly working with stereotypes here.) The juxtaposition of the gay patrons with the arguing couple is particularly apt, highlighting one form of the variety of sexual practice Phil sees as "perversion" In addition, James's response when reminded to add brandy to the drinks--"Trust me"--recalls the woman's earlier question to Phil ("Don't you trust me?") and underlines the connection between homosexuality and betrayal.

The word "perversion" hangs in the air as we read this exchange between the barman and the patrons, but for the couple there is no pause. The woman replies to Phil's charge by telling him--twice--that she would rather he did not use such a word. Phil wants to know what she would prefer he call their special lovemaking, and she replies that he does not need to name it. When he claims that "perversion" is the proper name for what they have done, she objects: "No.... We're made up of all sorts of things. You've known that. You've used it well enough." He argues that she does not have to say such things, and she retorts that doing so makes him understand. At this point, Phil seems to give in, but she knows that he does not agree with her and says so. Still, she tells him, she will come back to him. He rejects that statement, she reaffirms her claim, but he tells her that she will not return, at least to him. When she argues that he will see, he comments rather sarcastically that it is probably true she will come back, and she asserts the truth of what he has just said. "Go on, then," he tells her, having now mostly accepted what is about to happen and having reached a new stage in the process of resignation.

Because jealousy plays a major part in this story, it may be useful to note what psychologists and sociologists have to say about the subject. (10) Recent studies on jealousy echo contemporary discussions about the roles played by nature versus nurture in gender concerns. David Buss and his colleagues, for example, have posited a theory based on human evolutionary history, arguing that a man responds more powerfully to the sexual infidelity of his partner than to her emotional involvement with another man, whereas for a woman the reverse is true: she finds emotional rather than sexual infidelity more troubling ("Not Gone" 373). The evolutionary explanation is that for an ancestral man, sexual betrayal by a mate raised anxieties about the paternity of his children (373), whereas an ancestral woman, knowing that her children were her own, was concerned instead that her mate's emotional involvement with another might mean loss of support and resources for herself and her offspring (373). Over time, the argument goes, these responses became hard-wired in our genetic make-up.

Harris and Christenfeld offer an alternate view. Accepting research that shows men and women differ in what arouses the greatest jealousy, they argue that such responses may be "based on reasonable differences between the sexes in how they interpret evidence of infidelity" (364). Men, they suggest, believe that women have sex only when they are in love; therefore, sexual betrayal is more upsetting than simple emotional involvement because sexual unfaithfulness means that both sex and love are involved. Women, however, believing that men can have sex without being in love, are more troubled by emotional than sexual infidelity (364). Harris and Christenfeld argue, then, that this difference between men and women springs "not from any postulated innate difference in responses to the specific infidelities, but rationally from the hypothesis that men think women have sex only when in love and women think men have sex without love" (364). Hupka and Bank also argue against the sociobiological argument, finding in one of their studies that "men and women respond according to the norms and values that they have internalized from their culture" (45). Interestingly, in two other research projects on this topic, they found that both men and women saw potential emotional infidelity as more upsetting than potential sexual betrayal, although in their second attempt Hupka and Bank did find support for a "weak version" of Buss's hypothesis.

Wiederman and LaMar strike a middle ground. They generally support, evolutionary theory but note that "the gender difference in response to homosexual infidelity is equally consistent with explanations based on prevalent gender role schemas" (295). In two of three studies on the jealousy issue, they found that men were less upset when their lovers betrayed them with women rather than with other men, whereas women found same-sex infidelity more upsetting than if their mates were unfaithful with other women (289). The reasons given were that for men same-sex infidelity does not reduce "paternity confidence," while for women "Discovery of homosexual activity by a relationship partner may signal that the level of disclosure within the primary relationship is not high, or that desired emotional closeness may not be possible due to desires or needs the primary partner cannot meet" (289). In a third study, Wiederman and LaMar discovered that female-to-female sexual infidelity was less troubling for both genders (295).

What are we to make of all this with regard to Hemingway's portrait of the jealous Phil? Certainly, he has a strong reaction; yet, if Wiederman and LaMar are right, "I'll kill her" is closer to what he should say if his lover were betraying him with another man. It may be that if the woman had taken another man as her lover, Phil's reaction would have been even harsher. Still, if Young is correct that Hemingway had Zelda Fitzgerald's "Paris behavior" in mind when he wrote the story, he would have had Scott's real-life response to draw on. From a sociobiological point of view, Phil should react powerfully to his lover's sexual infidelity, because evolution has programmed him to respond that way. Her betrayal triggers innate anxiety, even though paternity issues are not involved. According to Harris and Christenfeld, Phil's response should be strong because, as a man, he would reason that women have sex only when they are in love. Hence his lover's sexual infidelity would be a sign of her emotional involvement with another, despite her obvious concern for his pain. (11) Hemingway, as adept a reader of human emotion and behavior as any psychologist or sociologist, captured perfectly what Phil was feeling and documented what social scientists would only later try to explain.

When Phil tells his partner to "Go on, then," we recognize how far he has come in his gradual accommodation to his new circumstances. At first, however, she finds it difficult to believe what he has just told her, although her voice betrays her excitement at the news. When she questions him, he reaffirms his decision: "Go on," he replies. At this point, Hemingway begins a focus on Phil's voice signals what releasing his lover has done to him. Hemingway writes: "[H]is voice sounded strange to him." The sea change of the title seems to have occurred. But the next sentence is devoted to Phil's intense look at the woman--"at the way her mouth went and the curve of her cheek bones, at her eyes and at the way her hair grew on her forehead and at the edge of her ear and at her neck"--another glance of sexual appraisal as Phil lingers over just what he is giving up. "And when you come back," he continues, "tell me all about it." Again Hemingway focuses on Phil's voice, indicating how "strange" it sounds to his protagonist, so strange that Phil does not recognize it as his own.

In his recent book, Hemingway's Fetishism, Carl Eby points out that fetishism often appears in Hemingway's works as "a swelling of the male protagonist's throat and a thickening of his voice" (41). He goes on to suggest that in this story the fact that Phil's voice sounds strange to him, which denotes "a not-so-secret desire to experience the relationship by proxy" (41). Robert Fleming, who argues that Phil is a writer, sees his change of voice as an indication of the bargain he has made with himself: he "intends, by the end of the story, to invade the sacred privacy of another human being in order to use her life as the basis of his work" (Face 48). Phil has more to gain, Fleming believes, "by sacrificing the relationship ... [he and the woman] share for his art" than by persuading her to remain with him ("Perversion" 218).

At this point, the woman recognizes that her lover has "settled into something" (CSS 305), so she asks him "seriously" if he wants her to leave. Just as "seriously" he tells her to go immediately. Again Hemingway emphasizes Phil's changed voice: "His voice was not the same and his mouth was very dry." When he tells her to go "Now," she gets up and leaves rapidly, not looking back, although he keeps his eyes on her. Then Hemingway introduces another element that he will emphasize in the remainder of the story: he tells us that Phil "was not the same-looking man" as he was before he had dismissed his lover. Picking up the check and going over to the bar to pay for the drinks, Phil announces to James that he is "a different man." When the barman reveals his puzzlement, Phil, described now as "the brown young man," replies: "Vice ... is a very strange thing, James," recalling for us, if not for the barman, the earlier discussion of Pope's lines. Looking out the door, Phil sees his lover walking away; looking in the mirror, he discovers that he really is "quite a different-looking man"--a perception that Fleming sees as recognition of the change he has Undergone and of what his decision has cost him. "Like Hawthorne's Roger Chillingworth," Fleming believes, "Phil feels that his external appearance should reflect his inner corruption" ("Perversion" 219). Eby also points to the importance of this passage, noting that "Thanks largely to the bisexual split in Hemingway's ego--and to the magic of symbolic barbering--his characters don't so much recognize themselves in the mirror as misrecognize themselves in it" (208).

As the two gay patrons at the bar move down so that Phil will have room to join them, James, ever the agreeable bartender, assents to Phil's comment about vice. Then, when the gays move down still farther so that Phil will be "quite comfortable," we recognize that Hemingway is subtly associating Phil with them. The irony here is palpable: having just sent his lover off to have a lesbian affair, Phil finds himself at the bar with two homosexuals. In a rejected version of the story's ending, Hemingway made the connection obvious: Phil asks James what the catamites are drinking and what the barman can recommend to someone who has just converted to their lifestyle (Item 681). Although Wycherley argues, that Phil "will embrace homosexuality so that he can understand" (67) and Kobler also believes that Phil is "moving toward a homosexual affair" (322), it seems more likely that in both the fragment and the published ending Phil is merely reflecting on the irony of his situation and expressing his own bitterness.

That bitterness comes out anew when, seeing himself in the mirror a second time, Phil claims again that he is a "different man." Hemingway then writes: "Looking into the mirror he saw that this was quite true." The nature of that change has been variously discussed. While Wycherley and Kobler suggest a possible shift in sexual preference as one option, Grebstein sees what happens to Phil as a degradation, but for a different reason--"By permitting the girl's adventure, he is more culpable than she in living it" (114). Fleming also believes that "the man's vice is a worse evil" than the woman's lesbian affair ("Perversion" 216); Phil's willingness to use her liaison for his writing is dehumanizing (Face 10).

But we should also remember that Phil has just received the stunning news that his lover wants to leave him to have a lesbian affair. That kind of information is devastating because it calls everything, including sexual identity, into question. Phil manifests many of the same reactions that spouses of homosexuals do when they learn of their partner's true sexual orientation. As Buxton makes clear, "The discovery of the partner's same-sex orientation often seems to spouses like a confirmation of their own sexual inadequacy. More troubling, the coming out causes many spouses to doubt their manhood or womanhood. Such a devaluation of sexuality and sexual role deals a double blow to sexual identity" (27). Whether the "confusion and anger" (1) that results is enough to change someone's basic sexual nature is doubtful, but the shock to the surprised partner is surely enough to make that person feel like a different person. The changed image of himself that Phil sees in the mirror symbolizes the wrenching experience he has just undergone. (12)

James's remark concluding this story--his response to Phil's insistence that he is a different person--is perfect: "You look very well, sir.... You must have had a very good summer." The irony here is especially effective, given what we have just seen Phil undergo, and it is just the kind of ironic conclusion that Hemingway uses so well elsewhere, notably, for example, in. The Sun Also Rises ("Isn't it pretty to think so?" [251]). But far more than irony makes this a good story. Hemingway's portrayal of Phil's painful accommodation to a new reality, his revisions to the story as he moved from draft to draft to finished product, his use of repetition to develop character and of pauses to provide counterpoint, and his psychologically insightful rendition of jealousy remind us again of just why his short fiction is so good. "The Sea Change"--an early exploration of sexual diversity--is the kind of small masterpiece on which large reputations are built.

NOTES

I am grateful to the Naval Academy Research Council for its support of the research for and the writing of this article.

(1.) A different version of this piece was ultimately published in the Paris Review 23 (1981): 85-102. Bennett gives a capacious account of the possible sources of the story (227-228); Williams adds Joyce's "The Dead" to the list (99); and Young suggests Zelda Fitzgerald's "Paris behavior--`making Scott jealous with other women'"--as the model or impetus for the work (286n). Morley Callaghan's short story, "Now That April's Here" and his novella, No Man's Meat, are also possible sources (see Callaghan 131-136, Ford 154-157, and Smith 224-226).

(2.) Critics might have heeded Carlos Baker when, in commenting on the purported Bar Basque source for the story, he reminded us that Hemingway "was notoriously apt to conceal the actual origins of some of his stories with invented fibs" (Life 227).

(3.) Since Warren Bennett's "`That's Not Very Polite': Sexual Identity in Hemingway's `The Sea Change'" in Beegel's 1989 collection, there has been only one article, by Speer and Houston, devoted to the story. Before 1989, articles focusing exclusively on the work are by Atherton, Hily-Mane, Hough, Kohler, Smith, and Wycherley. Brief discussion of the piece occurs in Baker, Life 227 and Artist 139, 418; Bakker 140, 143-44, 153; Benson, Approaches 443 and Stories 362; Brenner, Concealments 12, 20, 53 and "From `Sepi Jingan'" 161; Brian 189,190; Bruccoli 188, 191, 202; Comley and Scholes "Hemingway's Gay Blades" 128 and Genders 87-88, 90, 91, 97, 129; DeFalco 155, 176-79; Donaldson 181; Eby 5, 9, 41, 42, 158, 196, 204, 209; Fleming, Face vii, l0, 11, 25, 46, 48-53, 61, 67, 73, 80, 91, 101, 114, 121, 139, 145, 146, 151, 152, 163, 170; Flora, Ernest Hemingway 18, 66, 123 n81, 131 and Hemingway's Nick Adams 57n, 210, 215, 217, 261; Gaggin 197; Grebstein 99, 110-111, 113-114; Griffin 166; Hily-Mane, "Langage" 279-292, seriatum; Kert 251; Lynn 408; Marut 88; Mellow 399-400; Meyers 78, 200, 346; Oliver 121, 177, 263, 295-96; Peckham 69; Peterson 34, 81-83, 89-90; Rao 44, 73-74, 91,122; Reynolds 33, 87; Williams 99; Young 178, 178n, 183n, 286n.

(4.) Bennett (239-240), however, sees Eliot's "Dans le Restaurant" and The Waste Land as more fitting sources for the title: "The symbolic sense in which Hemingway appears to use the idea of sea change seems to be derived, not so much from Shakespeare as from T.S. Eliot" (239).

(5.) This is the first use of the man's name. Compare Items 679 and 680.

(6.) Bennett argues that a deleted sentence, referring to the way Phil looks at his lover, provides partial evidence that the kind of sexual activity that the couple engaged in was cunnilingus (232-233).

(7.) Comley and Scholes note the importance of the dark face and hair in their reading of the story and in the larger "Hemingway Text" (87-88).

(8.) "The Sea Change" is often compared unfavorably with "Hills Like White Elephants." See, for example, Baker, Life 227; Bakker 144; Grebstein 114; and Lynn 408.

(9.) As with the lines from The Tempest, it was Philip Young who first identified the quotation (179n).

(10.) For a discussion of jealousy in the literature of social science, see principally Buss et al., DeSteno and Salovey, Harris and Christenfeld, Hupka and Bank, and Wiederman and LaMar. Also relevant are the works of Buxton, Coleman, Falco, Gochros, Myers, Paul and Galloway, Smiley, and Steir.

(11.) Coleman points to a study by Kirkpatrick (1988) documenting that "many lesbians who have been previously married often continued to have strong feelings of attachment for a former spouse" (123). This may legitimatize the woman's response to Phil's distress.

(12.) I am indebted to Robert Fleming for the idea that "the face in the mirror" can be an "objectification" of something else. For Fleming that is "the artist's ethical dilemma" (Face 11).

WORKS CITED

Atherton, Robin Elaine. "`The Sea Change': The Pull of Moral Tides." Linguistics in Literature 4 (1979): 71-75.

Baker, Carlos. Ernest Hemingway: A Life Story. New York: Scribner's, 1969.

--. Hemingway: The Writer as Artist. 4th edn. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1972.

Bakker, J. Ernest Hemingway: The Artist as Man of Action. Assen, The Netherlands: Van Got cum, 1972.

Bennett, Warren. "`That's Not Very Polite': Sexual Identity in Hemingway's `The Sea Change.'" Hemingway's Neglected Short Fiction: New Perspectives. Ed. Susan F. Beegel. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P, 1989. 225-45.

Benson, Jackson J. Ed. New Critical Approaches to the Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway. Durham: Duke UP, 1990.

--. Ed. The Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway. Durham: Duke UP, 1975.

Brenner, Gerry. Concealments in Hemingway's Works. Columbus: Ohio State UP, 1983.

--. "From `Sepi Jingan' to `The Mother of a Queen': Hemingway's Three Epistemologic Formulas for Short Fiction." In Benson. New Critical Approaches. 156-171.

Brian, Denis. The True Gen: An Intimate Portrait of Ernest Hemingway by Those Who Knew Him. New York: Grove, 1988.

Bruccoli, Matthew J. Ed. The Only Thing That Counts: The Ernest Hemingway/Maxwell Perkins Correspondence, 1925-1947. New York: Scribner's, 1996.

Buss, David M. et al. "Sex Differences in Jealousy: Evolution, Physiology, and Psychology." Psychological Science 3.4 (1992): 251-255.

Buss, David M. et al. "Sex Differences in Jealousy: Not Gone, Not Forgotten, and Not Explained by Alternate Hypotheses." Psychological Science 7.6 (1996): 373-375.

Buxton, Amity Pierce. The Other Side of the Closet: The Coming-Out Crisis for Straight Spouses and Families. Revised edn. New York: Wiley, 1994.

Callaghan, Morley. That Summer in Paris. New York: Coward-McCann, 1963.

Coleman, Eli. "The Married Lesbian." Marriage and Family Review 14.3-4 (1989): 119-135.

Comley, Nancy R. and Robert Scholes. "Hemingway's Gay Blades." Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 5.2 (1993): 116-139.

--. Hemingway's Genders: Rereading the Hemingway Text. New Haven: Yale UP, 1994. DeFalco, Joseph. The Hero in Hemingway's Short Stories. Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburgh P, 1963.

DeSteno, David A. and Peter Salovey. "Evolutionary Origins of Sex Differences in Jealousy?: Questioning the `Fitness' of the Model." Psychological Science 7.6 (1996): 367-372.

Donaldson, Scott. By Force of Will: The Life and Art of Ernest Hemingway. New York: Viking, 1977.

Eby, Carl P. Hemingway's Fetishism: Psychoanalysis and the Mirror of Manhood. Albany: SUNY P, 1999.

Falco, Kristine L. Psychotherapy with Lesbian Clients: Theory into Practice. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1991.

Fleming, Robert. The Face in the Mirror: Hemingway's Writers. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P, 1994.

--. "Perversion and the Writer in `The Sea Change.'" Studies in American Fiction 14 (1986): 215-220.

Flora, Joseph M. Ernest Hemingway: A Study of the Short Fiction. Boston: G. K. Hall, 1989.

--. Hemingway's Nick Adams. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State UP, 1982.

Ford, Hugh. Published in Paris. New York: Macmillan, 1975.

Gaggin, John. Hemingway and Nineteenth-Century Aestheticism. Ann Arbor: UMI Research P, 1988.

Gochros, Jean S. "Wives' Reactions to Learning That Their Husbands Are Bisexual." Journal of Homosexuality 11.1-2 (1985): l01-113.

Grebstein, Sheldon Norman. Hemingway's Craft. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1973.

Griffin, Peter. Less Than a Treason: Hemingway in Paris. New York: Oxford UP, 1990.

Harris, Christine R. and Nicholas Christenfeld. "Gender, Jealousy, and Reason." Psychological Science 7.6 (1996): 364-366.

Hemingway, Ernest. "The Art of the Short Story." In Flora. Ernest Hemingway. 129-142.

--. Ernest Hemingway: Selected Letters, 1917-1961. Ed. Carlos Baker. New York: Scribner's, 1981.

--. Manuscripts of "The Sea Change." Folders 679-681. Ernest Hemingway Collection. John F. Kennedy Library. Boston, MA.

--. "The Sea Change." Tear sheets from This Quarter (Dec. 1931). Folder 222. Ernest Hemingway Collection. John F. Kennedy Library, Boston, MA.

--. "The Sea Change." The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway. New York: Scribner's, 1987.302--305.

--. The Sun Also Rises. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1954.

Hily-Mane, Genevieve. "Autour des Manuscrits de `The Sea Change.'" Etudes Anglaises 30.2 (1977): 207-209.

--. "Langage et Communication: Un Aspect Inedit de la Penske de Hemingway." Etudes Anglaises 22.3 (1969): 279-292.

Hough, Julie. "Hemingway's `The Sea Change': An Embracing of Reality." Odyssey 2.2,(1978): 16-18.

Hupka, Ralph B. and Adam L. Bank. "Sex Differences in Jealousy: Evolution or Social Construction." Cross-Cultural Research 30.1 (1996): 24-59.

Kert, Bernice. The Hemingway Women. New York: W.W. Norton, 1983.

Kobler, J. F. "Hemingway's `The Sea Change: A Sympathetic View of Homosexuality." Arizona Quarterly 26 (1970): 318-23.

Lynn, Kenneth S. Hemingway. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987.

Marut, David. "Out of the Wastebasket: Hemingway's High School Stories." Ernest Hemingway: The Oak Park Legacy. Ed. James Nagel. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P, 1996.81-95.

Mellow, James R. Hemingway: A Life Without Consequences. New York: Houghton, 1992.

Meyers, Jeffrey. Hemingway: A Biography. New York: Harper and Row, 1985.

Myers, Michael F. "Angry, Abandoned Husbands: Assessment and Treatment." Marriage and Family Review 9.3-4 (1986): 31-42.

Oliver, Charles M. Ernest Hemingway A to Z. New York: Facts On File, 1999.

Paul, Luci and Jianna Galloway. "Sexual Jealousy: Gender Differences in Response to Partner and Rival." Aggressive Behavior 20 (1994): 203-211.

Peckham, Morse. "Ernest Hemingway: Sexual Themes in His Writing." Sexual Behavior 1:4 (1971): 62-70.

Peterson, Richard K. Hemingway: Direct and Oblique. Paris: Mouton, 1974.

Pope, Alexander. "An Essay on Man." The Poems of Alexander Pope. Ed. John Butt. New Haven: Yale UP, 1963.501-547.

Rao, P. G. Rama. Ernest Hemingway: A Study in Narrative Technique. New Delhi: S. Chand, 1980.

Reynolds, Michael. Hemingway: The 1930s. New York: W.W. Norton, 1997.

Shakespeare, William. The Tempest. The Norton Shakespeare. Eds. Stephen Greenblatt et al. New York: W.W. Norton, 1997.3047-3107.

Smiley, Elizabeth B. "Counseling Bisexual Clients." Journal of Mental Health Counseling 19.4 (1997): 373-382.

Smith, Paul. A Reader's Guide to the Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway. Boston: G. K. Hall, 1989.

Speer, James R. and Neal B. Houston. "Sex and Love in Hemingway's `The Sea Change.'" RE:AL: The Journal of Liberal Arts 21:1 (1996): 132-137.

Steir, Charles. "A Bibliography on Bisexuality." Journal of Homosexuality 11.1-2 (1985): 235-248.

Wiederman, Michael W. and Lisa LaMar. "Not with Him You Don't: Gender and Emotional Reactions to Sexual Infidelity During Courtship." The Journal of Sex Research 35.3 (1998): 288-297.

Williams, Wirt. The Tragic Art of Ernest Hemingway. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State UP, 1981.

Wycherley, H. Alan. "Hemingway's `The Sea Change.'" American Notes and Queries 7.5 (1968-1969): 67-68.

Young, Philip. Ernest Hemingway: A Reconsideration. University Park: Penn State UP, 1966. CHARLES J. NOLAN, JR. United States Naval Academy