老人与海的英文概括~! 急求!
发布网友
发布时间：2022-09-01 19:52
共2个回答
热心网友
时间：2023-09-12 23:49
Summary:
The Old Man and the Sea recounts an epic battle between an old, experienced fisherman and a giant marlin said to be the largest catch of his life.
It opens by explaining that the fisherman, named Santiago, has gone 84 days without catching a fish. He is apparently so unlucky that his young apprentice, Manolin, has been forbidden by his parents to sail with the old man and been ordered to fish with more successful fishermen. Still dedicated to the old man, however, the boy visits Santiago's shack each night, hauling back his fishing gear, feeding him, and discussing American baseball—most notably Santiago's idol, Joe DiMaggio. Santiago tells Manolin that on the next day, he will venture far out into the Gulf to fish, confident that his unlucky streak is near its end.
Thus on the eighty-fifth day, Santiago sets out alone, taking his skiff far into the Gulf. He sets his lines and, by noon of the first day, a big fish that he is sure is a marlin takes his t. Unable to pull in the great marlin, Santiago instead finds the fish pulling his skiff. Two days and two nights pass in this manner, ring which the old man bears the tension of the line with his body. Though he is wounded by the struggle and in pain, Santiago expresses a compassionate appreciation for his adversary, often referring to him as a brother.
On the third day of the ordeal, the fish begins to circle the skiff, indicating his tiredness to the old man. Santiago, now completely worn out and almost in delirium, finds the strength to stab with a harpoon and kill the fish ring one of his great lunges out of the water.
Santiago straps the marlin to his skiff and heads home, thinking about the high price the fish will bring him at the market and how many people he will feed. The old man determines that because of the fish's great dignity, no one will be worthy of eating the marlin.
While Santiago continues his journey back to the shore, sharks are attracted to the trail of blood left by the marlin in the water. The first, a great mako shark, Santiago kills with his harpoon, losing that weapon in the process. He makes a new harpoon by strapping his knife to the end of an oar to help ward off the next line of sharks; in total, seven sharks are slain. But by night, the sharks have devoured the marlin's entire carcass, leaving only its skeleton. The old man castigates himself for sacrificing the marlin. Finally reaching the shore before dawn on the next day, he struggles on the way to his shack, carrying the heavy mast on his shoulder. Once home, he slumps onto his bed and enters a very deep sleep.
Ignorant of the old man's journey, a group of fishermen gathers the next day around the boat where the fish's skeleton is still attached. Tourists at the nearby café mistakenly take it for a shark. Manolin, worried ring the old man's endeavor, cries upon finding him safe asleep. The boy brings him newspapers and coffee. When the old man wakes, they promise to fish together once again. Upon his return to sleep, Santiago dreams of lions on the African beach.
Reaction and critical analyses:
The Old Man and the Sea served to reinvigorate Hemingway's literary reputation and prompted a reexamination of his entire body of work. The novella was initially received with much popularity; it restored many readers' confidence in Hemingway's capability as an author. Its publisher, Scribner's, on an early st jacket, called the novella a "new classic," and many critics favorably compared it with such works as William Faulkner's "The Bear" and Herman Melville's Moby-Dick.
Following such extravagant acclaim, however, a school of critics emerged that interpreted the novella as a disappointing minor work. Notable in this shift from unqualified support is the critic Philip Young. In 1952, just following the novella's publication, Young provided an admiring review, suggesting that it was the book "in which [Hemingway] said the finest single thing he ever had to say as well as he could ever hope to say it." Then, in 1966, he jeeringly noted that the "failed novel" too often "went way out." These self-contradictory views show that critical reaction ranged from adoration of the book's mythical, pseudo-religious intonations to flippant dismissal as pure fakery. The latter is founded in the notion that Hemingway, once a devoted student of realism, failed in his depiction of Santiago as a supernatural, clairvoyant impossibility.
[edit]
Critical views
One of the most celebrated favorable critical readings of the novella—and one which has defined analytical considerations since—came in 1957 with Joseph Waldmeir's essay entitled "Confiteor Hominem: Ernest Hemingway's Religion of Man." Perhaps the most memorable claim therein is his answer to the rhetorical question,
Just what is the book's message?
The answer assumes a third level on which The Old Man and the Sea must be read—as a sort of allegorical commentary on all his previous work, by means of which it may be established that the religious overtones of The Old Man and the Sea are not peculiar to that book among Hemingway's works, and that Hemingway has finally taken the decisive step in elevating what might be called his philosophy of Manhood to the level of a religion. (351)
Waldmeir was one of the most prominent critics to wholly consider the function of the novella's Christian imagery, made most evident through Santiago's blatant reference to the crucifixion following his sighting of the sharks that reads:
Ay, he said aloud. There is no translation for this word and perhaps it is just a noise such as a man might make, involuntarily, feeling the nail go through his hands and into the wood. (Hemingway 107)
Waldmeir analyzes this line, supplemented with other instances of similar symbolism, in such a way that allows him to claim that The Old Man and the Sea was a seminal work in raising what he calls Hemingway's "philosophy of Manhood" to a religious level. Regardless of whether one agrees with this logic, his hallmark criticism, curiously sycophantic in tone, stands as one of the most rable, positive treatments of the novella.
On the other hand, one of the most outspoken critics who has emerged in the camp of dissenting opinion of the work is Robert P. Weeks. His notorious 1962 piece, "Fakery in The Old Man and the Sea," presents a series of points that he claims show how the novella is a weak and unexpected divergence from the typical, realistic Hemingway. In juxtaposing this novella against Hemingway's previous works, he explains that
The difference, however, in the effectiveness with which Hemingway employs this characteristic device in his best work and in The Old Man and the Sea is illuminating. The work of fiction in which Hemingway devoted the most attention to natural objects, The Old Man and the Sea, is pieced out with an extraordinary quantity of fakery, extraordinary because one would expect to find no inexactness, no romanticizing of natural objects in a writer who loathed W.H. Hudson, could not read Thoreau, deplored Melville's rhetoric in Moby Dick, and who was himself criticized by other writers, notably Faulkner, for his devotion to the facts and his unwillingness to "invent." (188)
While his dismissal is mostly limited to the story at hand (he refers to previous Hemingway works as "earlier glories"), the evident range of critical interpretations is a curiosity for a work so widely renowned as a masterpiece.
热心网友
时间：2023-09-12 23:49
参考资料：http://www.golden-book.com/Proct/ProctInfo.asp?id=360564&sid=b5eed715a130
