The Ernest Hemingway works I read or saw in film were The Sun Also Rises (1926), Farewell to Arms (1929), To Have and Have Not (1937), For Whom the Bell Tolls (1940) and The Old Man and the Sea (1952). Great writer but I never liked the violence and death, even whilst I was still in high school.
Now many thanks to Alexander Lee who explained why American Ernest Hemingway (1899–1961) was an adventurer, natural sportsman, raconteur and loyal friend, yet he was also homophobic, misogynistic, racist and anti-Semitic. Hemingway’s most primitive passion was his undisguised love of bullfighting. He admitted he was obsessed to the point that bullfights had a central part in many of his best-known works. The Sun Also Rises (1926) followed friends going to a Pamplona fiesta; For Whom the Bell Tolls (1940) included the story of a consumptive matador who died of horror at seeing the mounted head of his kill; and Death in the Afternoon (1932) was a paean to the corrida/running.
Though he spoke tenderly of bulls, Hemingway described their deaths with ecstatic fervour. Why?? Once a somewhat sickly child, the author heard the call of the wild at an early age. His father taught him to hunt and fish in the Northern Michigan hills; and with the cruelty and tenderness characteristic of hard fathers, he kindled in his young son a reverence for toughness and for danger.
After distinguishing himself as an ambulance driver in WW1, the young man moved to Paris, hoping to launch his literary career. With Gertrude Steinin Paris, he first heard of bullfights and was so captivated, he immediately wrote an article on the topic.
In bullfighting, the American ex-pat found an answer to his dreams. He knew that, if he were to succeed with his writing, he needed to master the Simplest Things. What he meant in particular was Violent Death, in which was distilled the very essence of life. Of course young Ernest had seen it too often in war; but now that Europe was at peace, bulls would have to substitute.
Hemingway arranged to travel to Spain with friends in 1923. Setting out before the others, he arrived in Madrid in May and went to see a bullfight that very day. Apparently the bulls and the matadors fought poorly and the killing was mishandled, but to Hemingway it was a revelation. As he watched the proud and sweaty matador walking away, he knew he loved the sport.
![]()
Hemingway explained in Death in the Afternoon that the trick was for the matador to expose himself to as much danger as he dared, and to adopt ever more dangerous stances. Had the bull been tame, the corrida would have been nothing more than an empty spectacle, a pointless pageant of cruelty. Its death would have occurred without glory. But if the bull was courageous and dangerous, the corrida became the most immortal of tragedies.
![]()
Even so, the matador drove metal rods into the bull’s hump to tire and enrage the animal. Then he brought the bull under control with a series of passes with his cape, before leaning over its horns and stabbing it dead. Brave men! Hemingway had not abandoned the traditional element of risk; he increasingly elevated it to the status of an ideal.
Over the next five years, Hemingway immersed himself in the world of bullfighting in Spain. In bars, he struck up friendships with many leading matadors and became an expert judge of technique. Hemingway had seen thousands of bulls killed by matadors and he had read 2,000+ books or pamphlets in Spanish dealing with the topic. The people of Castile had great interest in death, he wrote. The English and French on the other hand, lived for life and so they didn't really care for bull-fights. Furthermore a good Spanish matador actually enjoyed killing. Killing that gave aesthetic pleasure had always been one of the “greatest enjoyments for the human race”, he said. I don't think so.
A great matador's skills lay in a barely concealed toughness, brooding masculinity and defiance of danger. In risking his life in the ring, the matador embodied the essence of the human condition; in defeating the bull, he defeated death itself. As Hemingway agreed that bullfighting was an art in every way, it seemed meaningful to him to compare it with sculpture and painting, or to see the matadors alongside Marlow, Shakespeare, Velasquez, Goya and Cervantes. Even such refined elements as the line of the matador's body at the critical instant made for the fans' excitement. Bull-fighting was thus an art heightened only by the possibility of death. Again I disagree.
Hemingway, who suffered profound insecurities, may also have seen in the bull a solution to his fears. Perhaps his toughness and courage could hide his doubtful manliness, a problem that tormented Hemingway all his life. After being seriously injured in 2 plane crashes in Africa, he found writing more difficult. Suffering from depression which electroshock therapy couldn’t ease, he sank into alcoholism. After a long, painful decline, he suicided (1961).
Now many thanks to Alexander Lee who explained why American Ernest Hemingway (1899–1961) was an adventurer, natural sportsman, raconteur and loyal friend, yet he was also homophobic, misogynistic, racist and anti-Semitic. Hemingway’s most primitive passion was his undisguised love of bullfighting. He admitted he was obsessed to the point that bullfights had a central part in many of his best-known works. The Sun Also Rises (1926) followed friends going to a Pamplona fiesta; For Whom the Bell Tolls (1940) included the story of a consumptive matador who died of horror at seeing the mounted head of his kill; and Death in the Afternoon (1932) was a paean to the corrida/running.
Though he spoke tenderly of bulls, Hemingway described their deaths with ecstatic fervour. Why?? Once a somewhat sickly child, the author heard the call of the wild at an early age. His father taught him to hunt and fish in the Northern Michigan hills; and with the cruelty and tenderness characteristic of hard fathers, he kindled in his young son a reverence for toughness and for danger.
After distinguishing himself as an ambulance driver in WW1, the young man moved to Paris, hoping to launch his literary career. With Gertrude Steinin Paris, he first heard of bullfights and was so captivated, he immediately wrote an article on the topic.
In bullfighting, the American ex-pat found an answer to his dreams. He knew that, if he were to succeed with his writing, he needed to master the Simplest Things. What he meant in particular was Violent Death, in which was distilled the very essence of life. Of course young Ernest had seen it too often in war; but now that Europe was at peace, bulls would have to substitute.
Hemingway arranged to travel to Spain with friends in 1923. Setting out before the others, he arrived in Madrid in May and went to see a bullfight that very day. Apparently the bulls and the matadors fought poorly and the killing was mishandled, but to Hemingway it was a revelation. As he watched the proud and sweaty matador walking away, he knew he loved the sport.
Bullfighting was popular entertainment, especially when the bull was stabbed
with sharp instruments to 'stimulate' the bull to fight on.
Global Post
Hemingway explained in Death in the Afternoon that the trick was for the matador to expose himself to as much danger as he dared, and to adopt ever more dangerous stances. Had the bull been tame, the corrida would have been nothing more than an empty spectacle, a pointless pageant of cruelty. Its death would have occurred without glory. But if the bull was courageous and dangerous, the corrida became the most immortal of tragedies.
Ernest Hemingway advising his favourite matador
History Today
Even so, the matador drove metal rods into the bull’s hump to tire and enrage the animal. Then he brought the bull under control with a series of passes with his cape, before leaning over its horns and stabbing it dead. Brave men! Hemingway had not abandoned the traditional element of risk; he increasingly elevated it to the status of an ideal.
Over the next five years, Hemingway immersed himself in the world of bullfighting in Spain. In bars, he struck up friendships with many leading matadors and became an expert judge of technique. Hemingway had seen thousands of bulls killed by matadors and he had read 2,000+ books or pamphlets in Spanish dealing with the topic. The people of Castile had great interest in death, he wrote. The English and French on the other hand, lived for life and so they didn't really care for bull-fights. Furthermore a good Spanish matador actually enjoyed killing. Killing that gave aesthetic pleasure had always been one of the “greatest enjoyments for the human race”, he said. I don't think so.
A great matador's skills lay in a barely concealed toughness, brooding masculinity and defiance of danger. In risking his life in the ring, the matador embodied the essence of the human condition; in defeating the bull, he defeated death itself. As Hemingway agreed that bullfighting was an art in every way, it seemed meaningful to him to compare it with sculpture and painting, or to see the matadors alongside Marlow, Shakespeare, Velasquez, Goya and Cervantes. Even such refined elements as the line of the matador's body at the critical instant made for the fans' excitement. Bull-fighting was thus an art heightened only by the possibility of death. Again I disagree.
Hemingway, who suffered profound insecurities, may also have seen in the bull a solution to his fears. Perhaps his toughness and courage could hide his doubtful manliness, a problem that tormented Hemingway all his life. After being seriously injured in 2 plane crashes in Africa, he found writing more difficult. Suffering from depression which electroshock therapy couldn’t ease, he sank into alcoholism. After a long, painful decline, he suicided (1961).