Debate- My stand

Faulkner is the better writer. In Faulkner’s openers, he is able to draw the reader in with his use of language as well as his use of detail. In Barn Burning, he wrote “The store in which the Justice of the Peace’s court was sitting smelled of cheese.” Why does it smell of cheese? Why is the court in a store? These are some questions one may ask when reading the story. Hemingway on the other hand, reveals too much of the story in the opening, yet fails to pull the reader in. In “Hills like White Elephants” he wrote “The hills across the valley of the Ebro were long and white. On this side there was no shade and no trees and the station was between two lines of rails in the sun.” Before the first paragraph is written, we know a lot about our setting, but there is no depth or interest to it. His “verbosity” if you will, doesn’t draw the reader in.
Faulkner's flow of writing unveils one part of the story at a time, while doing almost 2 stories at once. He begins his story Barn Burning at the court, soon changes the setting to a woman's house, and just as quickly changes back to the court. Little at a time, each story is unfolded. While it may at first look like its just a messy style of writing, it is really artfully woven, one thread important for the next. He reveals just enough to keep the reader interested, but doesn’t unveil the whole story In a rose for emily, the story is told in different parts, which leaves a little mystery. When Miss Emily goes to buy the rat poisoning, one is left in the dark as to what it is for, and is then compelled to keep reading. Hemmingway on the other hand, is very dull in his writing. In Hills Like White Elephants, though there is an element of mystery, he doesn't unfold it in a way that is as elegant or well thought out.