The Iceberg Theory of Creative Writing

History of the Iceberg Theory

The great American writer Ernest Hemingway developed the 'theory of omission' or the 'Iceberg Theory', commonly known as the 'Iceberg Method' or 'Iceberg Technique'.

Hemingway first developed this way of writing as a young journalist in the late 1910s and early 1920s. Meyers writes of his journalism, 'He objectively reported only the immediate events in order to achieve a concentration and intensity of focus -- a spotlight rather than a stage.'

By 1923 he had begun developing the Omission Theory of writing with his short story 'Out of Season'. He explained, 'I omitted the real end of 'Out of Season', which was that the old man hanged himself. This was omitted on my new theory that you could omit anything... and the omitted part would strengthen the story.'

He went on to compare his theory about writing to an iceberg.
'If a writer of prose knows enough of what he is writing about he may omit things that he knows and the reader, if the writer is writing truly enough, will have a feeling of those things as strongly as though the writer had stated them. The dignity of movement of an ice-berg is due to only one-eighth of it being above water. A writer who omits things because he does not know them only makes hollow places in his writing.'

Note that this calculation is accurate. Around 12% of an iceberg is above water. Generally, I have seen this written as 10% (for writing purposes, one assumes, not scientific accuracy). I, myself, go with this 10/90 percentage ratio versus the 12.5/87.5 madness.

And in any case, it matters not since if your novel, for example, has 300 pages and this is to merely be 10% of the 'iceberg', you will not actually make or write the other 90% of the 'iceberg' because it would take you too long. So, in part, this is theoretical and serves as a guide and ideal more than reality. And, in actuality, in the extreme form, of high fantasy, say, and a novel with 700 pages -- say, Tolkien -- it's more the case that it's 10% of the 10%. Now you begin to understand why it takes a lifetime, and indeed, why it took Tolkien 63 years to write his mythos and expanded Middle-Earth, and was stopped on his journey only by death.   

You ought to have discerned something else from this, as Tolkien himself wrote, rather angrily, in his Letters. The Lord of the Rings is only a sliver of the body of mythos and history and stories. In a very real essence, The Lord of the Rings pales in comparison and The Hobbit more so. And this is why I fight with contempt against those ignorant and crazed fans that refuse to accept or care for anything beyond the novel... the novel which Tolkien himself warns you of holding too close.

Putting that aside, in short, it means that your novel (surface novel) makes up merely 10% of the 'iceberg'. The other 90% below the water represents the 'deeper novel'. Again, I shall dissect this later, for now, back over to Hemingway.

Hemingway believed that fiction could be based on reality and that truth often lived beneath the surface of a story. He believed the deeper meaning of a story shouldn't be evident on the surface, but ought to shine through implicitly. In turn, in large part, this forged Hemingway's clarity of style.

Baker notes that Hemingway learnt, 'How to get the most from the least, how to prune language and avoid waste motion, how to multiply intensities, and how to tell nothing but the truth in a way that allowed for telling more than the truth.' Baker also notes that the writing style of the 'Iceberg Theory' suggests that a story's narrative and nuanced complexities, complete with symbolism, operate under the surface of the story itself.

Hemingway writes, 'A few things I have found to be true. If you leave out important things or events that you know about, the story is strengthened. If you leave or skip something because you do not know it, the story will be worthless. The test of any story is how very good the stuff that you, not your editors, omit.'

'Big Two-Hearted River' Hemingway explains, 'Is about a boy... coming home from the war... So the war, all mention of the war, anything about the war, is omitted.'

A thing to note is that a story can communicate through subtext.

In his early novels, such as The Sun Also Rises, you may see this being employed along with what biographers have called a 'distance between himself and the character'.

[Meyers on Across the River and into the Trees]

An example of omission is that Renata, like other heroines in Hemingway's fiction, suffers a major 'shock' -- the murder of her father and the subsequent loss of her home -- to which Hemingway alludes only briefly.

Stoltzfus states: 'Hemingway walks the reader to the bridge that he must cross alone without the narrator's help.'

Also, note the 'show, don't tell' technique, attributed to Russian playwright, Chekhov. Chekhov may or may not have said, 'Don't tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass.'

Hemingway being a famous proponent of the 'show, don't tell' method. However, 'show, don't tell' in its extreme [verbose] form becomes anti-Hemingway -- anti-theory of omission.

As Aristotle taught Alexander the Great, happiness can be best achieved by finding a point between two extremes -- balance is all.

So too, is the case here. Balance is the point between two extremes, namely, the 'show, don't tell' method and the 'Iceberg Theory'. The two, in their extremes, never can join. Harmony is found only at the centre, the middle -- the point between the two extremes. Balance is found at this point, and without balance, all may be lost.

To give you a sense of how to actually go about achieving this, I shall give you a sentence.

Follow the theory of omission until you lose 'show, don't tell', then step back, reclaim it, and harmonise the two.

Here I may note that this [the Iceberg Theory] seems entirely true and I shall simply dissect it later for you to better understand the theory, and it will be regarding fantasy novel-writing (though it's the same regarding science fantasy or, as Hemingway has shown, any corner of creative writing).

Also, note that you may take this theory to its logical extreme or conclusion, as Hemingway often did or in protoform, as the English short story innovator, Kipling, or you may simply use it as a foundation or tool to rest alongside your other foundations and tools.

I may state to you, that I believe it is a general truth of drama or fiction that it ought to serve as one of your foundations and writing tools, yet its extreme form is not a necessity. I say a general truth of drama because it is, in some form, seen throughout dramatic history, thus predating Hemingway by thousands of years. And as the extreme form is concerned, in terms of fantasy, I do not believe in the extreme Iceberg Theory, but rather the mild (or balanced form) as is seen throughout history.

A grand example of both the Iceberg Theory and the 'show, don't tell' idea is 'The Lord of the Rings', Tolkien. Although, the extreme Iceberg Theory itself predates Hemingway, for it may be accepted that the Spartans and Japanese (see Haiku) were masters of omission.

The history is over! Let's dissect and expand the theory to ensure we plainly understand in the realm of fantasy novel-writing... yes, yes, there will be pictures with many a colour and many diagrams, charts, and numbers.