How would the narrative of "Hills Like White Elephants" be different if told from the point of view of either of the two characters?

's
"" typlifies his famous style of writing, a style referred to as the "iceberg
effect" in which meaning lies deep beneath the surface of the narrative.  Through the use
of a tightly controlled dialogue, Hemingway subtly suggests that the American and Jig are
two lovers who have become alienated since they express their feelings covertly.  In
addition, with the narrative in the form of a dialogue that is so strategically controlled, the
reader is forced to become deeply involved in breaking through to the underlying meanings of the
conversations. At the same time, though, Hemingway yet maintains an ambiguity connotative of the
misunderstanding between Jig and the American.

If, then, the narrative were
told from the point of view of either of the characters, the intriguing ambiguity would be lost
as well as the reader's involvement in interpretation of Hemingway's nuances.  Also, if first
person point of view were used for Jig, for example, the perspective of her lover would, of
course, be subjective.  Likewise, if the narrative were told from the man's point of view, the
presentation of Jig would be clouded by his perspective. In this dialogue for, instance, the
reader must delve beneath the "iceberg" of conversation in order to find the
deeper meaning of the coversation and the different denotations of the word
everything:

"What did you
say?" (the American)

"I said we could have
everything."

"We can have everything."

"No, we can't."

Certainly, then,
the originality and interest of the story would be greatly mitigated if told from first person
point of view as much of the subtleties of the story would be lost, and the reader would not
need to examine the exterior facts and symbols for meaning.