Gabrielle Doucette-Poirier
Amanda Tripp
American Classics December 12th 2014
Machismo
The societal construct of gender is a volatile subject that has been constantly redefined through social movements for equality and rights. The image of masculinity and its definitive fragility have become more rampant in North America through advertisements and mass media. “The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber” by Ernest Hemingway offers a critical analysis of the use of violence as a testament of one’s manhood and explores a common-ground that will always delineate man: woman. Along with the short story, these ideas will be further developed through “What's Love Got to Do with It? An Evolutionary Analysis of ‘The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber,’” and “Hemingway's ‘Francis Macomber’ in Pirandellian and Freudian Perspectives.” A lack of violence in Francis Macomber paints him as the weaker man in this short story. The bold, gruff exterior of Wilson is parallel to what America used to define as manly. These two characters find that their manliness, or lack thereof, can always be overlooked when they rejoice over a woman’s misfortune. The aforementioned ideas insist that the obsession with idealized gender-roles is unrealistic in the American ethos as it is never satisfactory and often a threat to others as they are insecure in their own positions. The character of Francis Macomber is the new American man: he is handsome, married to a beautiful woman, proficient in court games and fishing, and rich enough to hunt for sport. However, this American model is portrayed as fragile, weak, naïve, and most prominently a coward. Francis takes comfort in the safety of the jeep; he loathes the idea of shooting this creature from up close. “Macomber stood there feeling sick at his stomach, his hands that held the springfield still cocked, shaking” (Hemingway, 77). These actions show both fear and childish behaviour: he wishes to hide behind the adults and not have to perform the murder. According to Breuer,
He is the immature son who is tutored, rebuked, and not taken seriously. He is scared and feels abandoned when he lies in bed alone at night. He is called "laddybuck" by Wilson, described as "adolescent" and "boyish," and his wife talks to him in the sharp voice of an angrily disapproving mother…The infantile component of Macomber’s role becomes most apparent in his shame reaction. He feels shamed beyond all occasion and bounds of reason. (Breuer, 241)
These traits are situationally very unfortunate for Macomber to possess as he is hunting- an accomplished hunter should be quite the opposite. Macomber apologizes to Wilson for his failed attempt at the hunt, and he is described by Wilson in that “he has a pleasant smile if you did not notice how his eyes showed when he was hurt” (Hemingway, 70). This summarizes the new American man: unafraid to show vulnerability and open to accepting help from another man. Although commonplace, these characteristics portray Francis as the lesser of the two men in the story despite being in a position of having achieved the American dream. Wilson finds these traits repulsive and his character is contrasted to Macomber’s.
Robert Wilson is a tribute to what a masculine character used to be seen as through the proverbial American looking glass. He, too, is handsome, but he clashes with Macomber in an abundance of ways. As described by Breuer: “The surface layer shows an idealized paragon of masculine virtues embodying the famous ‘Hemingway code’ of courage, endurance, competence, reticence, and laconism” (Breuer, 239). Wilson is willing to kill anything, carries “a double size cot on safari…where the women did not feel they were getting their money’s worth unless they had shared that cot,” (Hemingway, 86) and is disgusted by “emotional trash” (Hemingway, 70). He can seduce any and all women that come to his camp and look their husbands in the eye the following morning. This is seen as an indicator of a virile man because he understands how to entice the opposite sex. One of the most shocking descriptions of Wilson is his readiness to take physical pain over financial instability, which is revealed when Francis asks him if he still whips his workers:
“They could raise a row if they chose to complain. But they don’t. They prefer it to the fines.”
“How strange!” said Macomber.
“Not strange, really…which would you rather do? Take a good birching or lose your pay?” (Hemingway, 70) The physical and mental strength of Wilson is a clear indicator of how highly he holds his definition of a man. There is only one factor that bonds Wilson and Francis together - Margot. Margot is the only woman in the short story and serves as a point of leverage for each of the men to gain power from. To start with, immediately after the experience with the lion Margot cries in the tent. “Margot looked at them both and they both saw that she was going to cry. Wilson had seen it coming for a long time and he dreaded it. Macomber was past dreading it…’Women upset,’ said Wilson to the tall man. ‘Amounts to nothing’” (Hemingway, 69). As previously stated, Wilson perceives this as emotional trash and thus creates a bond of manhood between him and Francis by singling Margot out for her display of emotion. Furthermore, Margot’s act of infidelity provokes Francis to lose his fear and hunt large game properly. As put by Sugiyama, “It is telling that Francis does not really begin to fight back until after Margot's flagrant infidelity. Up to this point, he "tolerates" her behavior, no matter how unpleasant or embarrassing it is for him, because he does not have the social skills necessary to acquire a younger, more beautiful wife.” (Sugiyama, 23) When Margot realizes that her only grasp on Macomber’s wealth is gone and that he is sure to leave her after the hunt with his new-found bravery, she finds that her only option is to kill him. However, Margot’s power is short-lived: Wilson has the final say, as a man, of the story. “Stop it. Stop it. Stop it,” the woman cried. Wilson looked at her with his flat blue eyes. “I’m through now,” he said. “I was a little angry. I’d begun to like your husband.” “Oh, please stop it,” she said. “Please, please stop it.” “That’s better,” Wilson said. “Please is much better. Now I’ll stop.”(Hemingway, 94)
At this point, it does not matter if Francis was actually braver at the end, if Wilson was actually starting to like him, or if Margot’s shot was accidental or not. What is important is that the men both live in a patriarchal mindset and that is debilitating of all parties. Ultimately, “The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber” perpetuates unrealistic gender-roles that encumber all characters. This is seen through Francis and his lack of strong, masculine traits, as well as through Wilson and his machismo. Lastly, the short story proves that no matter the image that is upheld by men about their responsibilities as men, it can and will always be validated as and proved more important than a woman’s image. Thus, the American ethos about gender and what is believed to be a guideline on how to navigate either gender proves to be impractical: lesser men are threatened by more aggressive males, and females are threatened by them both. In an ideal world all habits, actions, and physical appearances would be gender-neutral so as not to disrupt any imbalance. Alas, where would that leave humanity as a whole?

Works Cited

Breuer, Horst. “Hemingway's "Francis Macomber" in Pirandellian and Freudian Perspectives.”
Studies in American Fiction vol .31, num. 2 (2003): 233-248. Project Muse. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.
Hemingway, Ernest. “The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber.” 603-321-HR American Classics (Fall 2014): 67-94. Print.
Sugiyama, Michelle Scalise. "What's Love Got To Do With It? An Evolutionary Analysis of
"The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber." Hemingway Review 15.2 (1996): 15-32. Academic Search Premier. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.