How we cite our quotes: (Part.Paragraph)
Quote #1
Even the surface had been burned off the ground. (I.1)
Usually, the surface is the first thing to burn, right? Now, Nick is talking about the town of Seney here, so “surface” might refer to roads, or sidewalks—essentially, everything to the very foundation has been destroyed. But surface usually refers to appearances too. So we can read this line two ways as a result of the word “even”: either everything to the very foundations has been burned, or even the surface appearance has changed because everything is so burned. Or we can have our cake and eat it too and just think about how utterly burned everything is.
Quote #2
As he watched them they changed their positions by quick angles, only to hold steady in the fast water again. (I.2)
Here we’re not talking about a change like a transformation, as in how the landscape as been transformed by the fire; we’re talking about a change in position. This kind of change is different: changes in movement aren’t permanent or scarring. The fish here can change, but in the end they always “hold steady in the fast water again.” So the fish are resilient. Maybe it reminds Nick of his own situation…
Quote #3
He felt he had left everything behind, the need for thinking, the need to write, other needs. It was all back of him. (I.7)
Can you say vacation? Sounds pretty relaxing to us. Here, we might think of Nick needing a change of pace. It sounds like there are a lot of obligations plaguing Nick back at home, and the only way he can get away from them is by literally leaving them behind. Change of scenery, anyone?
Quote #4
Seney was burned, the country was burned over and changed, but it did not matter. It could not all be burned. (I.8)
You’ll notice that Hemingway says “burned over and changed” here, as though the two are a bit synonymous. It sounds like change in this case is not a very happy thing. After all, this fire decimated an entire town and turned all the grasshoppers black. But Nick is being surprisingly optimistic. Is this situation hopeless? This passage tells us that it’s not.
Quote #5
They said good-bye and all felt bad. It broke up the trip. They never saw Hopkins again. That was a long time ago on the Black River. (I.36)
Ah, reminiscing about the past. If only we could pause time on the good bits of life. Change is appearing in the role of that inevitable thing called time. With time at the helm, can things ever not change? And we’re not even talking about aging here; in this passage, Nick is thinking about time in terms of before the war and after.
Quote #6
He washed the trout in the stream. When he held them back up in the water they looked like live fish. Their color was not gone yet. (II.63)
The imagery of the fish as still living seems pretty hopeful, but it’s also a bit puzzling. After all, Nick is the one who killed the fish. Think if, instead of this passage, the story went something like this: “The fish looked dead. So completely dead. Dang, thought Nick, those are the deadest fish I have ever seen.” Then we might be compelled to think mortality. Instead, the idea of the fish not really being “dead” (as though their spirits are somehow still there) makes us feel that life is still a possibility—maybe not for the fish, but for Nick.
Quote #7
There were plenty of days coming when he could fish the swamp. (II.64)
Whoa, Nelly. Things don’t have to fix themselves all at once. Nick could be really ambitious and try to do something drastically against everything he’s been doing so far in terms of keeping things under control, but we have an inkling that it would be a recipe for disaster. Maybe there was a time when Nick would dive head-first into the swamp with no problem, but he is a different person now, and he can’t just go back to things being all hunky-dory. If that change does occur, it’s going to take time. That seems to be the gist of this passage.