ingway portrays the short story “Hills Like White Elephants” through the objective viewpoint. The reader is like a stander by who can clearly see all the action, but cannot decipher what the characters are thinking. Because of the viewpoint, the topic of conversation is left a mystery the entire story. Even at the conclusion the reader is still not absolutely sure of what the couple was speaking about. The point of view did make the story hard to understand. It caused some frustration to not know what this couple was debating about. If this story is only to be read and analyzed, the objective view works. However, if this story is for pure enjoyment an omniscient or first person view would be much more effective. One of these views would inform the reader that the couple is debating over an abortion. Personally, I find the objective view to hinder the story and make it extremely confusing. “Defender of the Faith” and “Hills Like White Elephants” are greatly affected by which point of view the author chose for each. Roth made an excellent choice by using the first person. His story is clear, interesting, and even a bit suspenseful. Hemingway’s choice of using the objective view is not favored by myself, though his story did work for a deeper, more intelligent reader. I feel it takes away from his story and makes everything a mystery. Not knowing what is going on made me uninterested. These examples show that the point of view is a very important aspect of a story. It affects the target audience, how the reader views a character, and even the unfolding of the plot....
