Great Gatsby character analysis: Did Jay Gatsby really love Daisy?

First off let me say this: I really liked the Great Gatsby movie. Unlike a lot of critics, I thought the movie really portrayed a lot of the themes Fitzgerald intended to write about, and did so relatively accurately. Not to mention I thought the characters were cast masterfully (Is there really any actor that is a better fit for Jay Gatsby than Leonardo Dicaprio?). In case you were wondering, that was a rhetorical question; the answer is no, obviously.

However, that does not mean that the movie did a perfect job translating Fitzgerald’s masterpiece into the big screen. One of the most interesting differences between the novel and the movie that I would like to discuss is the depiction of Gatsby’s love for Daisy.

In the movie, Gatsby is portrayed as a man that is just utterly and obsessively truly in love with Daisy, to the point where there is no room for discussion on whether or not his feelings are genuine. In the novel, however, there are a lot moments that invite the reader to question whether Gatsby’s love for Daisy is true; that is, does Gatsby love Daisy for her, or for what she represents.

To accurately dig through the argument regarding the legitimacy of Gatsby’s love, we must first (briefly) conduct a proper characterization for Gatsby, including his personality, what he stands for, and what his ultimate goals are in life.

As readers we learn that Gatsby is ultimately concerned with status. Fitzgerald sheds light on this quality of Gatsby many times throughout the novel. Nick tells us that from an early age Gatsby envisioned himself as a son of God, and never really accepted his poverty stricken parents. There is also the scene when Gatsby explains his true background to Nick, justifying all of his lies by saying “I didn’t want you to think I was some nobody”. From these two scenes that we can deduce that Gatsby views himself as somewhat of a Godly figure, and is extremely concerned with building a respectable reputation. We also know that Gatsby doesn’t necessarily care if the persona he puts is completely true or not, as long as others admire it.

However, the scene that I believe is most crucial to our ability to question the legitimacy of Gatsby’s love is when he first reunites with Daisy over tea at Nick’s house. After realizing that Daisy is happy to see him, and will actually consider a second chance, Gatsby immediately suggests a tour of his mansion. Understanding Gatsby and Daisy’s past relationship – one that ultimately whittled because of Gatsby’s insecurities – we can see the motivation Gatsby has to show Daisy his mansion. After all, Gatsby believes that by flexing his financial muscle, people will admire him, and in this case, he hopes that his gargantuan house will be enough to capture the interest of Daisy. During this tour he shows Daisy his golden hairbrush, his gorgeously decorated bedrooms, his extensive shirt collection – all in attempt to impress her. It is imperative for readers to realize the method that Gatsby is using to get Daisy to fall in love him here: things. Instead of talking with Daisy and using his personality to charm her, Gatsby immediately uses his status and material wealth to get her back. What we must do – as educated readers – is really begin to assemble the framework for Gatsby’s core values. Given Gatsby’s behavior throughout the novel, we can logically make the assumption that Gatsby is obsessed with “things”, and cares very deeply about material wealth. Ultimately, Gatsby tries to use his things and his wealth as the foundation for his rekindled love with Daisy.

Essentially, Gatsby believes his rekindled relationship with Daisy will stem from the seeds of wealth.

Now that we have established some of Gatsby’s core values and concerns, and how he uses them to build a relationship with Daisy, we can begin to analyze Gatsby’s actual opinion of Daisy. Yes, we know that he is madly obsessed with her, but we must dive deeper to figure out why. Once we figure out the motivation for his love, we can accurately make up our minds regarding the legitimacy of his love.

I think it would be most useful to start this part off with a direct quote from the novel:

“His heart beat faster and faster as Daisy’s white face came up to his own. He knew that when he kissed this girl, and forever wed his unutterable visions to her perishable breath, his mind would never romp again like the mind of God. So he waited, listening for a moment longer to the tuning-fork that had been stuck upon a star. Then he kissed her. As his lips touched she blossomed for him like a flower and the incarnation was complete.”

There is a lot to digest in this quote. However, what I would like to highlight is the connection that is once again drawn between Gatsby and God. Essentially, by kissing Daisy, Gatsby – according to Fitzgerald – would lose his God-like status. By itself, this quote isn’t very telling of why Gatsby loves Daisy, but it does show how before Daisy, Gatsby’s primary motivation in life was to “romp like the mind of God”. Paired with the next quote however, we can begin to draw links between everything and begin to understand why Gatsby loves Daisy:

“‘[Daisy’s] got an indiscreet voice’, I remarked. ‘It’s full of – ‘ I hesitated. ‘Her voice is full of money,’ [Gatsby] said suddenly. That was it. I’d never understood before. It was full of money – that was the inexhaustible charm that rose and fell in it, the jingle of it, the cymbals’ song of it…high in a white palace the king’s daughter, the golden girl”

Here everything comes full circle. Before I make the connection, let’s recap what we have concluded so far:

• Gatsby’s primary motivation is status
• Gatsby’s obsessed with wealth and “things”
• Gatsby uses his status, wealth, and “things” as the basis for his new relationship with Daisy.

Now, through analyzing this quote, we can finally begin to answer why he loves Daisy, and whether his love for Daisy is legitimate or not. 

The most glaring and telling part of this quote is when Gatsby says that Daisy’s voice is “full of money”. Again, he doesn’t mention anything about Daisy’s personality, her values, or her core values; Gatsby simply compares her voice to money. As educated readers we know understand Fitzgerald’s style of writing; his prose is beautiful and intricate, leaving no idea underdeveloped or haphazardly describe. Meaning, if necessary, Fitzgerald would not shy away from describing the wonders of Daisy’s personality. Like Fitzgerald does for virtually every other scene, he would certainly go into immense depth about Gatsby’s romantic love for Daisy if necessary. However, he doesn’t. And that’s intentional. Fitzgerald’s shallow description of Gatsby’s love for Daisy directly correlates with Gatsby’s shallow feelings for Daisy. Daisy, however, and what she personifies (money) merely fits right into one of Gatsby’s core values: wealth.

We can further add to this realization by examining Fitzgerald’s description of Daisy being a golden girl. As readers WE ALREADY KNOW of Gatsby’s golden hairbrush and other miscellaneous appliances. In my opinion, a clear connection can be drawn here between the assets that Gatsby owns and Daisy. Colors are used extensively and with purpose by Fitzgerald throughout the book: Gatsby’s yellow car, his pink suit, etc. Using these facts, we can argue that to Gatsby, Daisy is nothing more than another asset in his collection of luxurious; not a girl that he truly admires.

The final quote I would like to analyze is what I believe is the most important quote in the entire novel after Fitzgerald’s perfectly constructed last line:

“Daisy was the first “nice” girl Gatsby had ever known”

Read that quote again. It’s riveting. It’s an earthquake that shakes the entire landscape of the novel. The most important element of the quote is the quotation marks around the word “nice”. Did Gatsby think Daisy was nice in the sense that her personality was enjoyable to be around?

No.

Gatsby thought Daisy was nice because she was golden…she was money. Nice does not describe the content of Daisy’s character, but the materialistic value she represents. And after constructing a list of Gatsby’s core values, we can see how Daisy fits into Gatsby’s obsession for needing the most luxurious things in life.  Daisy was a nice “thing” for Gatsby to show off; she was the humanized version of a Louis Vuitton bag or Rolls Royce. And because of this, we can essentially argue that Gatsby’s feelings for Daisy were not a function of true love, but merely his need to add another golden, luxurious asset into his materialistic world.

 

Don’t worry about what others think of you: Great Gatsby Theme Analysis

Think back to middle school and try to recall how many assemblies you had about “being yourself”, “not giving into peer pressure”, and “not worrying about what others think”

Self Identity and the concept of being true to yourself are two major themes addressed by Fitzgerald in the Great Gatsby.

Part of the reason that the novel is so tragic and heartbreaking is that Gatsby had good intentions. Through all of his lying, parties, and stories about his past, Gatsby genuinely wanted everyone to like him.

Gatsby put on an alluring, larger than life persona to everyone he met, attempting to compensate for his younger years of “being a nobody”. To Gatsby, status was everything: wealth and lavish parties equated to love and friendship and approval by every important person in the world. For Nick, Gatsby’s “greatness” made New York his “golden, shimmering mirage”:

“Anything can happen now that we’ve slid over this bridge. Even Gatsby could happen, without any particular wonder” – Nick Carraway

Gatsby believed that with wealth, fame, parties, and a grand persona – no matter how hollow – anything was possible. To Gatsby, approval by others indicated success in life, and that was all that mattered.

The irony of it all is that as readers we know from the start that Gatsby is not all that he advertises himself to be, and that the relationships he builds with every character, excluding Nick, are extremely shallow.

Think of the one person you know who perhaps displays a similarly grand persona on Facebook, where like in Gatsby’s world, we can filter our lives to put on the image that our life is exciting at all times. Now ask yourself how much you really know about that person, and if that person was in need of a favor, would you do it for him/her?

The lesson we should take away from Gatsby is that a life spent trying to impress others and obtain other’s approval is a waste. People spent time at Gatsby’s  house because they viewed Gatsby as an indicator of success of their own lives. However, after Gatsby passed away, not one of the thousands of people who guested his parties showed up to his funeral. The only person to show up to his funeral was Nick.

Think about that.

Not one person who Gatsby tried to impress showed up to his funeral. All of the people who liked him for his wealth, status, and perhaps ambiguity fled at the first site of inconvenience. Gatsby was obsessed with creating an illusion so spectacular that everyone would like him. But in the end, no one was there for him, except Nick. Unfortunately, there are plenty of people in real life like that; people who spend time with you and pay attention to you because like Gatsby, you provide some sort of value to their lives. But when you need something, they are the first to run for the woods.

The only person who was there for Gatsby in the end was Nick. And as we find out mid way through the book, Nick was the only character that knew the truth about Gatsby.

Nick didn’t care about Gatsby’s wealth, his parties, or his image. Nick cared about Gatsby for Gatsby. Unlike Gatsby’s relationship with all the others who went more MIA quicker than my suite mate (If you’re reading this, sorry Charron), Gatsby’s relationship with Nick was actually genuine and symbiotic. Both characters helped each other. It was not simply Gatsby guesting Nick at his parties or funding him financially.

The overarching theme here is be yourself. It sounds cheesy, but trust me: if Gatsby and all of his greatness couldn’t build genuine friendships with people, whatever image you try to put on certainly won’t work. The truth about life is that the people who are worth impressing and building relationships with are the ones you don’t need to try to impress in the first place.

You do not need to be deemed worthy by others. No one gives a shit how much money you have , what fraternity you’re in, what sick internship you have, or what your GPA is.

Don’t spend time worrying about what others think about you, because in the end, those who like you because of how impressive you are, aren’t going to be there when you need them the most. Spend time being true to yourself and true to others. Those are the people that you are going to be closest with. Those are the people that after a really shitty day you can turn to, and they won’t be “too busy” to deal with you.

There are 7 billion people in the world. Think about that for a minute. Seven. Billion. People. Unless you are literally Hitler, a few people are bound to like the true you.

Life is better spent with people. So unlike Gatsby, instead of trying to impress everyone, build close relationships with a few people who you know are going to be there for you in the end. Not for any other reason than because in the end, you’ll be happier.

Don’t chase a Daisy who only likes you for the value you provide for them. Otherwise, you’ll end up shot dead in a swimming pool by a mechanic with some unreal hair flow.

Ain’t nobody got time for that

Nick Carraway: An analysis of the Great Gatsby’s most frustrating character

Nick Carraway is perhaps the most complex narrator in the history of literature. Throughout the novel’s lifespan, many theories have been proposed regarding the characterization of Mr. Carraway – the most notable one being that he is actually gay, and develops an attraction towards Mr. Gatsby.

Throughout this blog post I would like to offer my own perspective on the significance – or insignificance – of Nick, and dive into the themes that I believe are most associated with him and his actions.

The first idea I would like to discuss is Nick’s reliability as a narrator. At the very beginning of the novel, we are told by Nick that he is a man who reserves all judgement of people, and as a result, falls victim to the manipulation of others.

“In my younger and more vulnerable years my father gave me some advice that I’ve been turning over in my mind ever since.

“Whenever you feel like criticizing any one,” he told me, “just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had.”

He didn’t say any more, but we’ve always been unusually communicative in a reserved way, and I understood that he meant a great deal more than that. In consequence, I’m inclined to reserve all judgments, a habit that has opened up many curious natures to me and also made me the victim of not a few veteran bores”

Nick’s intention with this quote is to tell the reader right off the bat that he is a reliable narrator. As we know, the Great Gatsby is a novel filled with ambiguity and questionable character. Nick – telling this story in hindsight – is trying to comfort us by assuring us that in the midst of all the corruption and lying that is about to take place, we can always take refuge in his perspective, accepting all of his thoughts as absolute truths.

However, while it would be easy to read the book with this perspective, we learn as the novel progresses that Nick is not as reliable as he would like us to believe. As I wrote in one of my previous blog posts, Nick is the overseer, and in some cases the catalyst, for many immoral actions between other characters. Nick is the one who invites Daisy, a married woman, over for tea, knowing that it is an attempt for Gatsby to rekindle his lost love. Nick parties it up with Tom and Myrtle in a hotel room one afternoon, despite the fact that he knows Tom is married to Daisy. Nick hides the fact that Daisy was really the one who killed Myrtle. Essentially, Nick is involved in the same corruption that consumes most of the other characters, and as a result, can not be considered the stand up gentleman that he advertised himself to be at the beginning of the novel.

A theory that intertwines with Nick’s reliability as a narrator is the idea that Nick is actually gay, and experiences feelings of affection for Mr. Gatsby. While it is impossible to definitively prove Nick’s sexual orientation, the theory does warrant consideration. Doing so allows us to dive deeper into our understanding of both the novel as a whole and Nick Carraway as a narrator. Whether Nick is in love with Gatsby or not, it is evident that he does have some bias towards Gatsby. We learn throughout the novel that Nick cares for Gatsby more so than any other character. In chapter eight, Nick charmingly says to Gatsby:

“They’re a rotten crowd! You’re worth the whole damn bunch put together.”

Nick also invites Daisy over for tea, and declines all of Gatsby’s favors in return, claiming that the gesture was merely a “favor”.  Furthermore, he is also the only person to show up to Gatsby’s funeral, which shows that he considered Gatsby a true friend, and not just a man who threw outrageously grand parties.

Since it is evident that Nick has some sort of undeniable bias towards Gatsby, we can further argue that his perspective on the entire story is a bit inaccurate. Digging deeper, if we ultimately deem Nick unreliable as a narrator, we can begin to question the novel’s characterization of Jay Gatsby, and whether the themes Mr. Gatsby supposedly represents are valid. One of the novel’s key ideas is that Gatsby is a metaphor for infinite hope. However, the novel is strictly through the eyes of Nick Carraway. Ultimately, if we begin to question Nick’s ethos, we can also begin to question whether he has an overly romanticized version of Jay Gatsby.

Personally, I do believe that Nick is unreliable as a narrator, and as a result, I often question Gatsby’s “greatness”. Is Gatsby great? Well, according to Nick he is. However, if we were to look at the novel from an outsider’s perspective, or if we were to have a different narrator, our characterization of Gatsby and what he represents may be different. And ultimately, that is what makes Nick so frustrating: the story is entirely through his eyes, and how we characterize him shapes the entire rest of the novel.

Another idea that I would like to discuss regarding Nick is his utter insignificance, which I believe is one of Fitzgerald’s most masterfully implemented themes. Put simply, no one wants to be Nick. Whether he is moral or not, he is just not interesting or significant enough. Personally, I believe that if you were to ask every person who they would rather be in the Great Gatsby – between Gatsby, Tom, and Nick – approximately 99.99999… percent would choose Gatsby or Tom. Despite the fact that they clearly are more immoral than Nick, they actually live. Nick, on the other hand is constantly caught in a state of Tantalasia (a term coined by Colson Whitehead in his novel Apex Hides the Hurt), or a place where one is stuck. Nick never seems sure of what he wants to do, and as a result, just appears as a wimp. Basically, Nick is not an Alpha Male.

Nick’s insignificance is supported by Fitzgerald with one of my favorite quotes from the entire novel, when Nick hilariously says after the fight between Gatsby and Tom breaks out:

“I just remembered that today’s my birthday. I was thirty”

This quote is so expertly implemented, and absolutely telling of how important Nick really is. For most people, one’s thirtieth birthday is a significant milestone is his her life. However, because Nick is so relentlessly consumed with everyone else’s lives, he actually forgets that it is birthday. From this quote we can infer that Nick’s sole purpose in the novel is to serve as a window into other people’s lives and all of the immorality and corruption they bring. Nick, rather than being a character we should study, is simply a tool for the reader to study other characters.

Of course, because of how complex the book is we can’t just say that Nick is insignificant and therefore deserves no analysis. If that was the case, this blog post would not exist and there would be little reason to theorize about most of the other characters.

Nick does have one defining moment in the book that I would like to touch upon. After Gatsby’s death, during the funeral stage, Nick realizes the true grotesqueness of Daisy’s and Tom’s character:

“They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made” (188).

The quote epitomizes Daisy and Tom perfectly. However, it is important to note that this quote shows that Nick is judgmental – contrary to what he said at the beginning of the novel – and does hold a certain bias towards Gatsby. That leads us again into the idea of Nick being unreliable narrator, and thus begins the frustrating cycle all over again.

At the end of the day, Nick will forever be both one of my favorite and least favorite narrators, which I guess is just another reason why I found the Great Gatsby so…great.

Related articles

• The Great Gatsby (kevinkleinleyva.wordpress.com)
• Time to Talk about Books: The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald (thepunktheory.wordpress.com)
• Can Nick Carraway be trusted? (poeticfallacyofthought.wordpress.com)

Why the School of Management (SMG) is the Jay Gatsby of Boston University

This will sort of be an offbeat post, but just hang with me if you will.

As a proud SMG student at Boston University (Woof), I’d like to say the school as a whole – very much like Jay Gatsby – is a bit misunderstood; and  unfortunately, like Gatsby, a lot of that reputation is self caused. Basically, if Jay Gatsby were to hop out of F. Scott FItzgerald’s text and take the shape and identity of any school at good ole Boston University, it would be the 100 year old SMG.

And as a precursor: I love SMG. It’s a fantastic school with really great people, and I feel absolutely privileged to be a part of it.

I guess I’ll start the comparison off a bit abruptly:

Both Gatsby and SMG students are sometimes full of shit: If you were to ask about Gatsby’s past, he’d probably say something like this (direct quote, told by Nick Carraway):

“I’ll tell you God’s truth. I am the son of some wealthy people in the Middle West – all dead now. I was brought up in America but educated at Oxford, because all my ancestors have been educated there for many years. It is a family tradition. After that I lived like a young rajah in all the capitals of Europe – Paris, Venice, Rome – collecting Jewels, chiefly rubies, hunting big game, painting a little, things for myself only.”

However, we know by the end of the book that Gatsby grew up dirt poor, he came into no money after his mentor Dan Cody passed away, and he only attended Oxford for a few months. The point to take from this is, that while Gatsby isn’t completely lying, he’s pretty much exaggerating the truth.

Now if you were to ask a student in SMG about him or herself, he or she would probably say:

“I’m concentrating in finance, accounting, and marketing to get some soft skills. I want to be the CEO of a Hedge Fund – even though I don’t really know what that is – and perhaps break into Wall Street one day. My parents drive a BMW, 3 series, and a(n) (Audi, Porsche, or Mercedes). I really don’t understand why we get a bad rep, or why everyone thinks were rich. Yeah, I’d like to make six or nine figures one day, but I’d consider myself pretty middle class right now. Btw, I have a really solid internship lined up at PWC this summer”

Coming from an SMG student, this is what all that bull shit really means: I’m thinking of concentrating in finance or accounting, because I hear that’s what makes the most the money. Like how every pre-med major wants to become a brain surgeon, or a law student a federal criminal lawyer, I want to become a Hedge Fund big shot because it sounds really cool. I’m also “genuinely” interested in it. My parents drive a BMW that they bought used 4 years ago, and we lease a Porsche. We’re completely upper middle class or upper class but I want to play it humble. I also have an unpaid internship at Jeff and Janet’s Finance Firm this summer.

Gatsby loves excess. SMG loves excess: For those have either seen the movie or read the book, you know how overly absurd Gatsby’s house is.

“We went up-stairs, through period bedrooms swathed in rose and lavender silk and vivid with new flowers, through dressing-rooms and poolrooms, and bathrooms with sunken baths—intruding into one chamber where a disheveled man in pajamas was doing liver exercises on the floor. His bedroom was the simplest room of all—except where the dresser was garnished with a toilet set of pure dull gold.”

Gatsby’s house, needless to say, is pretty eccentric. One of the essays I wrote last year for writing 150 was about how Gatsby lived a life that disregarded the utility of objects, and focused purely on creating a spectacle. Gatsby, essentially, engages in what several sociologists would consider conspicuous consumption, or the act of purchasing things purely for showcasing your wealth.

The School of Management is pretty similar. For those have never been in SMG, just know that we have a stock ticker in the middle of the lobby. As if it was not 2013, and everyone didn’t possess the ability to pull out a smart phone and check whatever stocks they may have invested in. But nope, SMG needs a stock ticker, so the future hedge fund leaders of the world can check how their Walmart stock is doing before class. But it does not stop there. We have some of the weirdest, most try-hard furniture in the entire league at SMG. If Vineyard Vines and Goldman Sachs were to create a furniture line, it would be the wonderful couches and chairs we see in the SMG lobby. It’s not just weird – its absolutely funky, and personally, I don’t think anyone gets it. In addition to this, we have a Starbucks, a Breadwinners, an ATM, a lot of cultural flags that I don’t think anyone knows anything about, and an ID locked study lounge/hangout space for grad students. Furthermore, on any given lecture day, you’re sure to see someone wander in about 10 minutes before class, plop a seat in the first row, and begin to read a hard copy of either the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times. Now I’m not the most advanced reader in the world, but I don’t really see how anyone can get all the news a newspaper has to offer from 6 – 8 minutes of reading. I don’t know, maybe I’m illiterate. Also, again, it’s 2013; you’re telling me that the news isn’t available to view…I don’t know…online. For a group of people who want to be so cutting edge in the world, we’re apparently rather primitive when it comes to our reading options. Anyway, put the newspaper you’re pretending to read away, and hit up Google.

Basically, some of these things are pretty unnecessary. It looks pretty, but it just doesn’t really serve an purpose. The Starbucks and Breadwinners are really useful though.

Nice Cars. Vroom Vroom Vroom: Gatsby drives a yellow Rolls Royce, and it’s absolutely dope. I’m sure one SMG student owns a Rolls Royce, and I bet it’s absolute dope too. One thing I have to say that is really impressive about SMG is the taste in cars that it’s students have. I don’t want to expand too much, and sound braggadocios, but SMG is pretty on point when it comes to cars. My SM121 teacher had the neatest story about cars, which I’ll write below:

“One time I wanted a parking spot, but someone in a Ferrari took it. They got out of the car and said, ‘Hey Professor Dixon!’ Turns out it was one of my students”

All I’m sayin’, Ferraris are pretty cool.

There’s some false advertising for both parties. Before we learn the truth about Gatsby, we’re introduced to a lot of rumors about the playboy millionaire. Some call him a murderer, some a king, some a gambler, and some a wall street genius. Tom, when trying to pinpoint what Gatsby exactly does, engages in some lying, accusing him of some accusations that as an educated reader, we can assume are a bit hyperbolic. Finally, Gatsby himself also falsely advertises himself when he makes his first introduction to Nick. Ultimately, we find out that Gatsby is just once poor, now rich ex-veteran who made his money selling booze and other miscellaneous illegal activity with Meyer Wolfsheim.

I feel like SMG suffers from the same kind of false advertising, especially by the professors. Many will tell you that SMG is the hardest school to get into at Boston University, and has the highest average high school GPA out of all the other schools. Both are incorrect. The highest entering class GPA belongs to the school of Engineering, and the most selective school is not defined by BU, given that they try to proportion out the acceptance rate. The only reason that these two things may appear to be true is because SMG has one of the fewest amount of students relative to other mainstream schools at BU.

SMG is also promoted as a cross functional platform, focusing on all aspects of business virtually equally. Unfortunately, if you break down the curriculum you would see that approximately 60% of the mandatory curriculum pertains to finance and accounting, and that number goes up if one chooses to concentrate in either finance or accounting. The school has 7 (I believe) concentrations, meaning an equal allocation would be somewhere around 14% of the time spent on each. Anyone in SMG can tell you that that isn’t really how it goes.

One of a literature’s greatest arguments revolves around discussing how “Great” Gatsby truly is. Gatsby is certainly a spectacle larger than life; this evident through his parties, his clothes, his mannerisms, and his wealth. However, it’s really hard to differentiate between what is really true about Gatsby, and what is just a function of Gatsby’s imagination. SMG is pretty similar in that regard. It’s an absolutely fantastic school, but a lot of the qualities that are associated with it – both good and bad – are merely rumors. Not everyone in SMG is a douche bag (or nice), not everyone in SMG is wealthy, and SMG as a whole certainly isn’t the best school intellectually at BU…I don’t think that’s a title any school at BU deserves.

Anyway, those are some loose comparisons. I could go on, but I have an exam to study for, and a Hedge Fund to open up. I’ll most likely continue this list at another time.

 

Related articles

• The Significance of Today: Explained through the Great Gatsby (terrierwoof.com)
• Jay Gatsby: Modernist Literature’s Anti-hero (theadventoftheantihero.wordpress.com)
• Introduction To “The Great Gatsby” (ethansnovelblog.wordpress.com)

The Significance of Today: Explained through the Great Gatsby

One of the deepest themes that Fitzgerald beautifully touches on in the Great Gatsby is the concept of embracing today and realizing the permanence of the past.

Everyone who has ever read the book knows of Gatsby’s famous line: “Can’t repeat the past? Why of course you can!”

And everyone also knows what happens to Gatsby in the end: he dies, and fails to rekindle his past love with Daisy.

As a college student who has reached somewhat of a crossroad in his life, I can relate to this theme. The future, although unknown, looks to be an exciting time  for both me and my peers. Most of my friends are going to be getting degrees from excellent universities and pursuing careers and lives that lead to fortune, fame, new loves, maturity, and for some, comfort.

Gatsby – despite his incredible wealth and fame – was this way too, relentlessly charging into the future at full speed, ignoring the certainty of life around him. No matter how grand his parties were, no matter how many people showed up, Gatsby was never satisfied. Instead, he was haunted by the irresistible future  that stood before him like a doorway into an infinite, inconceivable happiness. Unfortunately though, as we know, he never quite reached that future; the green light eluded him, never quite getting close enough within his grasp to deliver the wonders he convinced himself it would bring.

Of course, there are other parts of the novel that also represents Gatsby’s obsession with the future. We are told somewhere around chapter five the truth about Gatsby and his poverty stricken past. We learn that a young Gatsby was ashamed of his poverty stricken childhood, and sculpted a future so grand and amazing that only the feet of God would be worthy enough to waltz in it. Gatsby ultimately runs away in pursuit of this vision, abandoning his past and present like unworthy objects.

There is also the point in Gatsby’s life when he falls in love with Daisy, but feeling too inadequate financially, puts their life on hold, and sets off for war. After the war, instead of returning home and starting a life with Daisy, Gatsby instead – still feeling too poor – delays his return to find a way to make money. Finally, after achieving wealth, Gatsby returns and attempts to start a life with Daisy. Unfortunately for him, however, Daisy is with Tom. And so we go back to my original example of his obsession for the future.

“Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter—tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther. . . . And then one fine morning—
So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”

As a college student, I have a green light: I ultimately want to start my own advertising agency, and perhaps publish a book of poetry. My friends, acquaintances,  and fellow students also have a green light. Some of my friends want to become doctors, some chemists, some financial analysts…the list goes.

I remember envisioning this moment of time while I was still in high school. Like most young adults, I envisioned something grand: stars dripping of champagne, golden leaves, and a comforting wind sweeping all my greatest aspirations into reality. But instead, its just me sitting on my bed as my roommate struggles immensely to rearrange the room so he can access the other half of his closet, bashing shit and losing stuff along the way. ***Edit: He just finished and roared with accomplishment, “Im a genius!”

We talk about our futures all the time, the mystic phantom that forever eludes us, teasing us with promise and circumstance beyond our wildest imaginations. Yes, we could, and for a lot of us, will ultimately catch it; that’s the result of hard work and hours spent slaving away at your trade, no matter what it may be. Unfortunately though, for some people, the future will be an empty chamber of missed opportunities, untapped dreams, wasted life; and it is only in the future that we can look back at today and realize what a great opportunity we had to  truly live, breathing in the aroma of life with all the gusto of a child not yet touched by the brute realities of the world. Like the green light, the future is certainly bright. But don’t let its pomp and magic blind you of the present, for the present is an equally as beautiful place, filled with people we’ve known all our lives. It’s where we go to Red Sox playoff games, get into political debates with roommates, get Starbucks with friends before class.

It’s guaranteed.

So tomorrow, instead of reaching further and running faster into the unknown, maybe we should just slow down, arms at our sides, embracing the moment…

…the once future, the now present, and the soon to be past. Be significant today.

Ranking the Morality of The Great Gatsby’s Characters

It was tough to figure out what topic to start with for this blog. After all, there’s just so much stuff in the Great Gatsby. It’s essentially impossible to find a perfect spot to dive into the novel for analysis.

So I figured I’d start out with the theme that I find most interesting: morality.

Simply put, every character in the Great Gatsby is immoral. There is not one character – even Nick, who is a self proclaimed judgement free narrator – who doesn’t engage in some kind of bad behavior. However, despite this fact, I think it is possible to place the (main) characters on a morality spectrum, which is what I would like to do.

The list will begin with the character I find most “bad”, for lack of a better word, and finish with who I believe is most “good”. Again, this is just my opinion, so feel free to disagree.

1. Tom Buchanan – I really struggled putting Tom, the novel’s main antagonist, at number one, because there are certain points throughout the novel where I empathize with him more so than any other character – specifically during the climax of the novel when he finally confronts Gatsby and shows some genuine feeling of care for Daisy. Unfortunately, Tom is also the doer of some of the most immoral, and senseless actions in the entire novel. Tom, most notably, takes advantage of, and encourages a depressed, crazed, Mr. Wilson to kill Gatsby, and then runs away from the entire situation between Daisy, himself, Myrtle, and Gatsby as if he was never a part of it in the first place. Furthermore, Tom is a merciless cheater on Daisy, and engages in such activity in a way that I believe is very different from most other characters. Not that cheating is ever justified, Tom does it not because he passionately loves someone other than Daisy, but simply because he can. Arguments can be made that Daisy cheated on Tom out of passion for Gatsby. Tom, however, seems intent on just doing whatever he pleases for no good reason at all. The reader is never given a sense that Tom actually loves Myrtle, and as Jordan implies early on in the book, Myrtle is not Tom’s only mistress. On a spectrum of adultery, Tom’s cheating is unequivocally near the top. Ultimately, while Tom doesn’t do anything immoral that is that different from any other character, his intentions are much more malicious. Tom doesn’t seem to have any rhyme or reason for his actions. He simply does, because he can.

2. Jay Gatsby – Before I even begin to dive into this haphazardly put together characterization of good old Jay, it must be said that Jay Gatsby is my favorite character in all of literature (and perhaps out of any movie or television show character). Gatsby is so interesting, enigmatic, and painfully likable that it kills me to put him this high on a list ranking how “bad” characters are. However, looking at the book objectively, it’s pretty evident that Gatsby certainly isn’t a stranger to immoral – and even illegal – activity. From a completely moral perspective, Gatsby knowingly goes after a married Daisy Buchanan, and essentially feels no remorse about breaking up a marriage. No matter how passion fueled his love is (which I do question sometimes, but Ill touch on that in a different post), adultery is still adultery. What differentiates his cheating with Daisy from Tom’s cheating is that most of the book allows us to infer that Gatsby truly loved Daisy, while Tom did not truly love Myrtle. Basically, Gatsby’s adultery (even though he’s not married, Daisy is) is a function of passion and love, while Tom’s adultery is a function of just bad character.

In addition, Gatsby is a self admitted liar and manipulator of people. We know that he put on a fake persona to attract Daisy and gain some ethos. We know that his business ventures weren’t just “confidential”. And honestly, lying isn’t too cool. Regardless if his lying did damage to anyone, the simple act of his lying shows that he has the capacity to manipulate people.

However, what I take into account most when it comes to the characterization of Gatsby’s morality is his illegal activity as a gangster and bootlegger. It’s no secret that Gatsby was involved in a lot of illegal activity; given the amount of money he had while knowing his poverty stricken past, the reader can only imagine the corruption Gatsby was involved in. And unfortunately, I think a lot of people who really like Gatsby as a person, and consider him more or less “moral”, fail to take into consideration this aspect of Gatsby’s life.

Last year I read a very interesting essay on the characterization of Gatsby, and a quote that stood out most to me was:

“Even though he’s a handsome, well-dressed gangster, he’s still a gangster”

That quote made me realize a lot about Gatsby. I believe that people, including myself, are attracted to Gatsby’s character because he’s advertised by Fitzgerald as an attractive, well dressed gentleman. Unfortunately, aesthetics speak very little of someone’s character, and I believe it is imperative for the analysis of such a gargantuan character to strip away this illusion that his clothes and charm provide, and judge Gatsby purely based off of his actions. After all, he was in the bootlegging and gangster game with Wolfsheim nearly every step of the way (so Wolfsheim proclaims), and Wolfsheim seems to take the cake for least liked characters. So, despite his good looks and mannerism, as readers we must take into account his immense involvement in what appears to be some really illegal activity, which is why he gets the number 2 spot on my list.

3. Daisy Buchanan – I think Daisy get’s a bad reputation by a lot of readers (mainly for people’s love for Jay). While Daisy is without doubt responsible for a lot of things: Myrtle’s death (accidental, but she’s still responsible), Gatsby’s death, being a gold digger, and a lot of the conflict throughout the book, it’s hard to say that all of these things were entirely her fault. An argument could be made that Tom had a bigger part in Gatsby’s death than did Daisy. It’s also easy to see how Gatsby helps Daisy escape consequences for killing Myrtle, making them jointly responsible for the hit and run.

Opponents of Daisy also bring up how she basically manipulated Gatsby and then fled away with Tom in the end. However, it is important for readers to take into consideration context and the time period the novel takes place in. The 1920s was a time for immense experimentation and morals within society diminished rapidly, and Daisy’s actions were not that far out of the realm of what was expected for wealthy women at the time. Furthermore, with regard to her cheating: the concept of “family life” diminished just as rapidly in the 1920s, and only peaked again during the late 1940s and 1950s after World War II. While I certainly was not alive during the 1920s, I do believe that her adultery was not any more outlandish than most others, like Jay and Tom.

Ultimately, while Daisy is by no means a good person, I do find it easier to empathize with her, and justify her behavior compared to Tom and Gatsby. She is not necessarily malicious in her intent like Tom, and hasn’t done anything that illegal like Jay has.

4. Nick Carraway – Nick is one of the most dull, yet frustratingly complex narrators and characters in the history of literature. From a morality standpoint, it’s pretty difficult to judge Nick. While I think anyone who has read the novel would say with confidence that he is at least more moral than Tom, Gatsby, and Daisy, its hard to call him moral as a whole. Nick essentially serves as the catalyst for Gatsby and Daisy’s relationship, and while he doesn’t do anything particularly immoral, like cheating, bootlegging, or murder, he completely lets everyone else do it.

Nick is at the hotel when Tom is cheating on Daisy. Nick invites Daisy over tea with Gatsby knowing she is married with Tom. Nick keeps Gatsby’s secret regarding the car crash with Myrtle quiet. Put simply, Nick is the classic example of “doing nothing is still doing something”. While I wouldn’t go as far as saying that Nick encourages bad behavior by the rest of the characters, I would say he does absolutely nothing to stop the behavior, which is why I still would consider him immoral.

Additionally, we do see some very tasteful, and more importantly, genuine acts, from Nick throughout the novel. He is very nice to Daisy, and does do a favor for Jay without asking anything in return (which is special in this book). Furthermore, it is evident that he really does care about Gatsby, and would anything for Gatsby completely out of the nicety within his heart.

5. Jordan Baker – I love Jordan Baker. I think she’s one of Fitzgerald’s hidden gems character wise. Some readers don’t like her, and don’t find her significant because of how shallowly Fitzgerald builds her character; out of every character she is developed the least, and is involved in the least amount of scenes throughout the novel. I, on the other hand, like her so much because of those very reasons. However, that’s a different argument for a different time, when I will explain why I love her minimal development and what I think it represents.

Morality wise, I think (mostly) everyone would agree she’s pretty neutral. Yes, she does engage in some lying (nowhere near the magnitude of Gatsby), and is just as much a spectator to immoral actions as Nick; but as a whole, she ultimately contributes the least amount of “badness” to the novel. There isn’t much to say about her besides this. She’s pretty much the girl version of Nick, just not as significant. So she gets the “most moral” spot by default.

Ultimately, it is important to remember that every character in the novel is pretty immoral. I’m not saying Tom is the singular immoral character, and that Jordan is completely moral. I’m simply attempting to put the characters on a morality spectrum.

Thanks for reading!

The Purpose of this Blog

Hi readers.

Some time within the last three months I realized that I have a rather colossal obsession with the Great Gatsby; I find myself thinking about the novel more times than one should during the course of the day, and just as often find myself applying lessons from the classic to my every day life.

I understand that I’m merely a rather insignificant analyst of the book amid an overpopulated sea of extremely credible Gatsby lovers. However, I’m a little perplexed, and completely proud of my unrelenting passion for the Great Gatsby, as its one of the few things in academia that I am truly passionate about. Throughout high school and my freshman year in college, I met countless amounts of people who have a passion for some intellectual field, whether it be advanced mathematics, science, or history, and always envied their infinite interest for a subject that genuinely made them happy to learn about.

Unfortunately, the Great Gatsby – no matter how deep – is a finite piece of work. It’s not like math, or science, in the sense that more can always be learned.

The book ends.

There is only so much of it to read, comprehend, and analyze. Eventually, no matter how far into the future that day is, there will not be another part of the novel to analyze.

The purpose of whatever this chamber of personal thoughts should be a called (a blog, I guess), is simply to interpret the Great Gatsby the way I read the novel. I am not looking to create a scholarly collection of essays on Fitzgerald’s greatest work, nor will I be that formal in my analysis of the text. And if you disagree with my analyses, that’s completely okay.

Furthermore, I will primarily be interpreting the book and its meaning using only facts given by Fitzgerald, and sometimes (although not much) with the aid of facts from Fitzgerald’s personal life. I will not be debating facts of the novel, or trying to find reasons for why certain characters are given certain qualities or titles. An example of this includes why James Gatz changed his name specifically to Jay Gatsby. Why he changed his name in the first place may be something I write about, but I really do not care why the name “Jay Gatsby” was chosen. I’m not discrediting this type of research on the novel; it’s simply just something I don’t view as important for my interpretation of the novel. Whether Gatsby is a derivative of a German or Jewish name (something people have argued) does not provide any deeper understanding of the book for me.

Ultimately, this blog will simply discuss the metaphors, meaning, and significance of certain elements from the Great Gatsby until I either A)run out of book to interpret or B)forget about this blog.

And for anyone who has never read the Great Gatsby, I (obviously) really suggest reading it. Of course this is just my opinion, but I genuinely believe it’s the greatest novel ever written. It’s so simple, yet so complex, and absolutely beautifully written. Fitzgerald teaches us lessons of life for everyone at every stage in life, touching on themes like hope, money, love, passion, and most importantly: happiness.

Simply, the book is Great.