Ernest Hemingway, the emblem of the lost generation of modernism, often addresses masculinity and virility in the subjects of his novels, using characters who reflect parts of himself and the other men of this wasted generation to explore the psychosocial impacts of war and other struggles on men. The Sun Also Rises is no exception to the rule, with some scholars arguing that “the question of gender forms the basis of the story,” bringing into focus the importance of the male archetype (Elliot 77). There are countless references to masculinity that occupy a position in stark contrast to the insecurities of most male characters. Beyond the insights Hemingway provides the reader into the thoughts and fears of these men, the reader can also glimpse the author's attention to masculinity in his descriptive style and choice of subjects. Hemingway appears fascinated and perhaps troubled by masculinity and the male insecurities that so permeated his novel. Furthermore, it frames masculinity through culture, which helps establish how society is implicated in masculinity through gender performance. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay At the beginning of the novel, Hemingway uses Jake as a vehicle to introduce the unrealistic and unattainable standards that society has set for masculinity. “No one ever lives their life to the full except bullfighters” (18). As Robert Cohn tries to convince Jake to embark on a South American adventure and expresses concern that he feels his life is passing him by, Jake makes this pithy observation full of implications about masculinity. Only the bullfighting theme is imbued with a male macho metaphor. An event in which a man, dressed and idolized in an extravagant uniform, exerts his strength on a giant bull in a life-or-death battle represents social expectations that men are dominant, controlling, and violent individuals who are in top of the food chain, gastronomically, socially and sexually. This comment demonstrates Jake's negativity towards his own life, devoid of his ability to sexually dominate, and also suggests that if a man does not literally or otherwise grab a bull by the horns, he will not live a fulfilled life. Robert's response shows an interesting take on the opposite. “I'm not interested in bullfighters. This is an abnormal life” (10). Here, Robert is calling this reflection on male expectations distorted, suggesting that the idolatry of the bullfighter and what he represents culturally and socially is unhealthy. The introduction of Robert as a character offers the reader a glimpse into how gender-derived inferiority is at play in the novel. First, the discussion of boxing and how Cohn used it to counter the insecurities he felt is the first pairing of masculinity and violence in the novel. He was made to feel inferior as a Jewish student at Princeton and resorts to violence as a defense. Later, he is shown to be inferior to Frances, his fiancée. “I saw him return to the bar with the newspaper in his hand. I rather liked him and evidently she led him a good life” (7). This comment, from Jake's perspective, suggests that Robert is incapable of guiding Frances in life, that she is in control of the relationship. Robert seems to be aware of this inferiority as his realization that "he had not been everything to his first wife" is described in chapter 2 (8). The inability to conduct romantic relationships is an issue that is repeatedly addressed in thecourse of the novel, for many male characters. Jake is unable to convince Brett to commit to him due to his impotence, and Mike cannot stop Brett from exploring other sexual relationships. While this takes an implicit anti-feminist stance towards women's submissive role in relationships, it helps highlight how each of these men feels inadequate in their own masculinity. Jake, the narrator of our story, is a dysfunctional product of socially defined gender expectations. His self-awareness and homophobia are highlighted early in the novel. “Somehow they always made me angry. I know they're supposed to be fun, and you're supposed to be tolerant, but I wanted to use someone, anyone, anything to shatter that superior, simpering composure” (20). In this statement, the reader is exposed to Jake's homophobia and tendency to resort to violence while revealing society's attitude towards homosexuality. The idea that homosexuals should be seen as fun and put up with is disgusting and intolerant, but Jake can't even think so kindly towards them. The fact that he perceives them to behave in an affected and superior way seems to indicate a self-awareness and inferiority that Jake may feel, due to his helplessness. Scholar Ira Elliott illuminates this example: “Jake's attitude toward homosexuals: the way he degrades them and regards them as his rivals,” reveals, “the extent to which sexual categories and gender roles are cultural constructions” ( 78) He continues to explain that gender expressions – not to be confused with biological sex – of any kind are effectively performance art installations, with an individual mirroring constructed visions of what is masculine and what is feminine in their behavior. There is neither a cranial implant nor a gland that sends messages that define male or female, society establishes these parameters. Elliott argues that we conform to expressions of socialized gender and act and behave around those gender structures. He supports this thesis by examining the ways in which Jake gathers his information in encounters with homosexuals. Jake infers their sexual orientation based on the men's gestures and styles. These behaviors and traits, such as clothing or hairstyle, run counter to social definitions of gender and sexuality. Mr. Barnes assumes their sexual preference based strictly on their behavior and appearance, which seems to indicate that gender is a highly socialized cultural construct (Elliott 78). Operating within these interpretations, Jake's disgust likely stems from the idea that within this gender binary social structure there is no acceptable feminized male. Therefore, he perceives these men as performing as women, which would cause some cognitive dissonance on Jake's part and result in negative feelings towards them. James A. Puckett echoes the idea that gender performance is social and cultural and specifically references The Sun Also Rises. “Masculinity for Hemingway's characters is in constant negotiation and is necessarily based on the judgment of others, having no meaning outside of a social context” (126). He supports this claim by analyzing the character Francis Macaomber, who struggles with cowardice and fear and how he is judged by his audience – namely his wife – through the social lenses of appropriate and acceptable masculinity. When Jake talks about his recovery in an Italian hospital during the war he is reminded of the colonel who visited him. “I was all bandaged up. But they had told him. Then he did thatbeautiful speech: 'You, a foreigner, an Englishman' (any foreigner was an Englishman) 'have given more than your life'” (31). By stating that Jake's erectile dysfunction is worse than death, the Colonel speaks for a gendered community in which the ability to perform sexually has more social value than life or service. This is further evidence of the distorted priorities of gendered social expectations for men. It is important to note that the characters responsible for perpetuating these expectations are not only men, but also women. Brett reinforces these distorted values ​​by rejecting a commitment to Jake due to his helplessness. Helplessness is a crucial aspect of the interpretation of gender in The Sun Also Rises. It seems that if Hemingway had truly adopted society's hyper-masculinized expectations, he would not have rendered his protagonist, Jake, powerless. That quality would not be one he would want his readers to positively associate with the novel or with himself, by extension. He implores readers to question that deliberate choice and its significance for the plot. New Jersey City University English professor David Blackmore offers this suggestion: “I would argue that Jake's emasculation functions as a metaphor for the whole complex of his anxieties about masculinity and sexuality” (53). This argument seems perfectly reasonable and likely, given how often the phallic image encounters Jake's anxiety. Blackmore focuses more closely on the nature of Jake's impotence, pointing out that Hemingway cited Jake's condition in a 1951 letter, "Jake has lost his penis but not his testicles or spermatic cord – and therefore not the his sexual desire" (66). If Hemingway had opted for the reversal, it would significantly change the interpretation of Jake and his situation. Blackmore explains, “if desire rather than behavior defines sexual identity, Jake need not perform heterosexually to be heterosexual” (54). This idea of ​​desire overriding performance somehow conflicts with the idea that Hemingway is playing with gender as performance. However, the importance of desire in modernist literature makes Blackmore's case an interesting and important perspective that it would be unwise to dismiss. Perhaps what at first appears to be a conflict between ideas of sexual desire and gender identity seen in the character of Jake is actually another way in which Hemingway is combating the boundaries of gender performance introduced by binary definitions. gender of culture. By choosing to juxtapose Jake's disability with his heterosexual desire, the author discredits and dissolves the power of gender performance and the norms surrounding it. Modernist scholar Greg Forter has his own take on male social power and male sexuality. Hemingway's decision to divorce Jake and his physical manhood shows how difficult it was for men in modernism to identify as men. Forter continues: “the wound separates them from the source of their undoubted virility – a source that, in our cultural imagination, is also the root of male social power” (26). Once again, it is suggested that culture has dictated meaningless criteria for what constitutes masculinity and male power. However, Forter poses a fairly novel claim, stating that there is a duality in the impact of Jake's affliction. Not only does the veteran lose the phallic and dominant power of the masculine male, but he also loses the “gentlemanly, sentimental and implicitly feminine masculinity,” which leaves him in a psycho-sexual limbo (26). When gender is forced into a male-female system where it exists 2016.