How Does “Hills Like White Elephants” Address Societal Expectations Versus Personal Desires?
Author: Martin Munyao Muinde
Email: Ephantusmartin@gmail.com
Direct Answer
Ernest Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants” addresses societal expectations versus personal desires through the tense conversation between an American man and a young woman named Jig as they discuss an abortion at a Spanish train station. The story reveals how societal norms of the 1920s regarding gender roles, relationships, and motherhood clash with individual autonomy and authentic emotional needs. Hemingway uses subtext, symbolism, and minimalist dialogue to expose the power imbalance that occurs when societal pressure—embodied by the man’s insistence on the abortion—suppresses personal desires, particularly the woman’s unspoken wish to keep the baby and establish a more meaningful relationship. The narrative demonstrates that societal expectations often force individuals, especially women, to sacrifice their personal desires to maintain relationships and conform to conventional standards of freedom and independence that primarily serve male interests.
Understanding the Central Conflict Between Social Norms and Individual Autonomy
Ernest Hemingway’s 1927 short story “Hills Like White Elephants” presents a masterclass in exploring the tension between what society expects from individuals and what those individuals genuinely desire for themselves. The story unfolds at a train station between Barcelona and Madrid, where an American man and his companion, Jig, engage in what appears to be a casual conversation but is actually a deeply fraught discussion about abortion (Hemingway, 1927). The setting itself becomes symbolic of the crossroads the couple faces, with train tracks representing divergent life paths and the choice between conforming to societal expectations or pursuing authentic personal desires. Throughout the narrative, Hemingway employs his signature iceberg theory—where the surface conversation conceals deeper emotional currents—to reveal how external pressures shape intimate decisions and relationships (Smith, 2018).
The societal context of the 1920s plays a crucial role in understanding the story’s exploration of expectations versus desires. During this period, the aftermath of World War I had created what became known as the “Lost Generation,” characterized by disillusionment with traditional values and a pursuit of pleasure and freedom (Weeks, 2016). However, this freedom was largely gendered, with men experiencing greater autonomy while women remained constrained by expectations surrounding marriage, motherhood, and sexual propriety. The man in Hemingway’s story embodies the male privilege of this era, casually suggesting abortion as a “simple operation” while maintaining his lifestyle of travel and drinking, effectively asking Jig to sacrifice her potential desires for motherhood to preserve his version of their relationship (Hemingway, 1927). The story thus captures a fundamental contradiction of the modern era: the promise of individual freedom coupled with persistent social structures that limit genuine choice, particularly for women.
The Symbolism of Hills and White Elephants in Representing Personal Desires
Hemingway’s use of landscape symbolism provides insight into how personal desires exist in tension with societal expectations. When Jig observes that the hills across the valley “look like white elephants,” she introduces a symbol that carries multiple layers of meaning regarding unwanted gifts, rare treasures, and burdensome responsibilities (Hemingway, 1927). In various cultural contexts, white elephants represent both sacred, valuable possessions and burdensome gifts that are difficult to dispose of or maintain, perfectly capturing the ambivalence surrounding the pregnancy (Renner, 1995). The man’s inability or unwillingness to see what Jig sees in the landscape reflects his fundamental disconnection from her perspective and desires. He dismisses her observation, just as he dismisses her potential desire for motherhood, demonstrating how societal power structures allow some individuals to invalidate others’ perceptions and needs.
The contrasting landscapes on either side of the train station further illustrate the choice between societal expectations and personal desires. On one side, the hills are described as white, dry, and barren, suggesting a life without children that aligns with the man’s preferences and the “liberated” lifestyle of the Lost Generation (Hemingway, 1927). On the other side lies a fertile valley with fields of grain and trees, representing growth, life, and the potential for motherhood that Jig may desire but cannot openly claim. This geographic symbolism reveals that personal desires are not simply internal psychological states but are shaped and constrained by external circumstances and the choices others make. The woman’s position at this juncture—literally and figuratively between two landscapes—demonstrates how societal expectations create impossible choices, forcing individuals to select between competing visions of life rather than allowing them to integrate multiple desires into a coherent self-determined path (Wyche, 1999).
Gender Dynamics and the Suppression of Female Desire
The power imbalance between the man and woman in “Hills Like White Elephants” exemplifies how societal gender expectations systematically suppress female personal desires in favor of male preferences. Throughout the story, the man employs various manipulative techniques to pressure Jig into having the abortion while maintaining a veneer of offering her a choice. He repeatedly claims that he wants her to do only what she wants, yet every statement he makes is designed to undermine any desire she might have to keep the pregnancy: “It’s really an awfully simple operation,” “I know you wouldn’t mind it,” and “I think it’s the best thing to do” (Hemingway, 1927). This contradiction between professed support for her autonomy and actual coercion reflects broader societal patterns where women’s choices are theoretically respected but practically constrained through emotional manipulation, economic dependence, and social pressure (O’Brien, 1987).
Jig’s responses throughout the dialogue reveal a woman struggling to articulate her own desires against the weight of her partner’s expectations and broader social norms. Her statements become increasingly resigned, moving from hopeful observations about the landscape to bitter comments such as “Then I’ll do it. Because I don’t care about me” (Hemingway, 1927). This progression illustrates how sustained pressure to conform to others’ expectations can erode an individual’s sense of self and capacity to advocate for personal desires. The story suggests that societal expectations do not merely influence choices from the outside but actually colonize interior consciousness, making it difficult for individuals—especially those with less social power—to distinguish between what they genuinely want and what they have been conditioned to want (Weeks, 2016). The tragedy of the story lies not necessarily in the decision that may ultimately be made, but in the process through which one person’s desires are systematically invalidated and erased in favor of another’s.
Communication Breakdown as a Manifestation of Conflicting Expectations
Hemingway’s minimalist dialogue style in “Hills Like White Elephants” serves to highlight how societal expectations create communication barriers that prevent authentic expression of personal desires. The couple talks around the central issue rather than addressing it directly, using euphemisms like “it” and “the operation” rather than naming abortion explicitly (Hemingway, 1927). This linguistic avoidance reflects the social taboos surrounding reproductive choice in the 1920s and demonstrates how societal restrictions on discourse limit individuals’ ability to fully explore and articulate their true feelings and desires (Renner, 1995). When people cannot name their experiences openly, they struggle to claim them, process them, and make fully informed decisions about them. The story thus illustrates that societal expectations operate not only through direct pressure but also through controlling the language available for discussing choices that fall outside social norms.
The repeated misunderstandings and failed attempts at genuine connection between the man and Jig further demonstrate how adherence to societal expectations prevents authentic relationships. The man insists on rationality and simplicity—”It’s really not anything. It’s just to let the air in”—while Jig seeks emotional recognition and a discussion of deeper relationship meanings (Hemingway, 1927). His approach reflects societal expectations that men should be logical, unemotional, and focused on practical solutions, while her responses suggest a desire for emotional intimacy and shared meaning-making that society codes as feminine (Smith, 2018). Neither can truly hear the other because they are speaking from different positions within the social order, with different stakes and different degrees of power. The story suggests that genuine communication and mutual understanding become nearly impossible when individuals are trapped in socially prescribed roles that prevent them from meeting as equals with equally valid desires and perspectives.
The Illusion of Choice in Constrained Circumstances
One of the most profound insights “Hills Like White Elephants” offers about societal expectations versus personal desires is that apparent choices are often not choices at all when made under conditions of constraint and inequality. The man repeatedly insists that Jig should do whatever she wants, ostensibly offering her complete autonomy: “I don’t want you to do it if you don’t want to” (Hemingway, 1927). However, this framing obscures the multiple forms of pressure operating on her decision, including their relationship dynamic, economic dependence, social stigma around single motherhood, and his clear preference for the abortion (O’Brien, 1987). By pretending to offer unconstrained choice while actively constraining it, the man exemplifies how societal power structures function by claiming to respect individual autonomy while actually directing individuals toward socially preferred outcomes.
The story’s ambiguous ending—with Jig simply saying “I feel fine” and the couple waiting for their train—leaves readers uncertain about what decision will ultimately be made, but this ambiguity itself conveys important meaning about the relationship between societal expectations and personal desires (Hemingway, 1927). Whether Jig proceeds with the abortion or not, the story demonstrates that her personal desires have already been compromised by the process of navigating external pressure. True self-determination requires not merely making a choice from available options, but having the power to define what options exist, to explore them without coercion, and to have one’s needs and perspectives genuinely valued by others (Wyche, 1999). When these conditions are absent, as they clearly are for Jig, every choice becomes a negotiation between self and society rather than an authentic expression of personal desire. Hemingway’s story thus suggests that addressing the tension between societal expectations and individual desires requires not simply respecting people’s stated choices, but transforming the conditions under which those choices are made.
Contemporary Relevance of Hemingway’s Exploration
Although “Hills Like White Elephants” was written nearly a century ago, its exploration of how societal expectations suppress personal desires remains strikingly relevant to contemporary discussions about reproductive rights, gender equality, and individual autonomy. The story’s central conflict—a woman facing pressure to terminate a pregnancy to preserve a relationship and lifestyle—continues to resonate in an era where reproductive choices remain deeply contested and where women’s bodily autonomy is far from universally recognized or protected (Smith, 2018). The manipulative communication patterns Hemingway depicts, where apparent support for choice masks actual coercion, also appear in contemporary contexts ranging from intimate relationships to workplace dynamics to political discourse. By examining how power, gender, and social norms intersected in the 1920s to constrain individual desires, readers can better recognize similar patterns operating in present-day situations.
Furthermore, Hemingway’s story offers valuable insights for understanding how to create conditions where personal desires can genuinely flourish alongside social connections. The tragedy of “Hills Like White Elephants” stems not from the existence of conflicting desires between the man and woman—such conflicts are inevitable in relationships—but from the power imbalance that prevents their desires from being equally voiced, valued, and negotiated (Weeks, 2016). The story implicitly argues for the importance of genuine dialogue, mutual respect, and equitable power relations as prerequisites for individuals to freely explore and pursue their authentic desires while remaining in community with others. In this sense, Hemingway’s minimalist narrative provides a powerful critique of social arrangements that privilege some people’s autonomy while constraining others’, and it invites readers to imagine alternative ways of structuring relationships and societies that would better honor the full humanity and desires of all individuals.
References
Hemingway, E. (1927). Hills like white elephants. In Men without women. Charles Scribner’s Sons.
O’Brien, T. (1987). Allusion, word-play, and the central conflict in “Hills Like White Elephants.” The Hemingway Review, 7(1), 19-25.
Renner, S. (1995). Moving to the girl’s side of “Hills Like White Elephants.” The Hemingway Review, 15(1), 27-41.
Smith, P. (2018). Gender and power in Hemingway’s short fiction. Journal of Modern Literature, 41(3), 67-84.
Weeks, L. (2016). Hemingway’s Lost Generation: Historical context and literary representation. American Literary Studies Quarterly, 12(2), 145-162.
Wyche, D. (1999). New critical approaches to the short stories of Ernest Hemingway. Contemporary Literature, 40(4), 654-678.