Fitzgerald and Eugenides utilise the characterisation of Jordan and Cecilia in order to represent the confining nature of societal conformity, and the social paradox it creates. Both female antagonists suffer a sense of identity loss, as the pressure to compromise their own beliefs and to settle down is an expected concession. Fitzgerald narrates this through the character of Jordan, a golfing champion who became infamous for cheating to win her first tournament. Upon the initial introduction of Jordan, Nick notices her ‘jauntily’ raised chin, noting that it was as if she were carrying something ‘likely to fall.’ Fitzgerald’s use of a simile is suggestive of the expectations Jordan has to meet, as whilst she is building a successful career, it is apparent that those around her do not approve, with Tom Buchanan stating that she shouldn’t be allowed to ‘run around the country.’ Fitzgerald’s deliberate use of the verb ‘run’ suggests that it is out of character for a woman to be so independent, almost portraying her job to be a fleeting hobby. Moreover, there is a sense of pressure for her to start a family, as Daisy states that she hopes the ‘home influence’ of being around the Buchanan family will do her good. Nick goes on to describe her posture to be ‘like a young cadet,’ Fitzgerald’s use of a simile further suggests that she is imitating a masculine stance, perhaps as a last resort to be a more imposing force in the room. However, the use of the word ‘young’ appears synonymous with untrained, as it seems she is not taken seriously. This reflects the idea that Jordan in a constant state of conflict, as whilst she pushes her career and appearance into the realm of the new age, she has the constant nag of the previous decade’s traditional stance pulling her back. Jordan is a representation of her era in many ways, particularly the roaring automobile industry, as her genderless name references two car companies of the time. The automobile business revolutionised all industries and the means of mass production. Through this, Fitzgerald’s symbolic name choice implies that Jordan is a symbol of the transgression to modernity, embodying the confused response to technological advances. Bruccoli believed that “… the sporty Jordan and the conservative Baker electric” which might be taken as the modern, emancipated woman who is determined to enjoy the freedom and preserve the advantages of the ‘lady’. (1974: 122)
Jordan’s conflict is apparent through her androgynous appearance, as she is ‘small breasted’ and short haired. Fitzgerald’s character portrayal is a nod towards the rise of the 1920s flapper girls, an established group of women who symbolized an era of faux liberation and affluence, through consuming prohibited alcohol, dancing to jazz and remaining carefree. Jordan is a representation of this group, whilst she pushes the boundaries of what was acceptable, but doesn’t go far enough to shatter these expectations. Fitzgerald himself went on to describe flappers as ‘lovely, expensive and about nineteen.’ This potentially connotes the idea that Jordan will soon give in to what is expected of her, and that how she acts currently is nothing more than that of a phase. This could have the hidden meaning of Jordan being nothing more than a stock-image of a flapper, one of many vacant characters that had engulfed New York. This idea of her being a static character supports into the idea that her rebellion against tradition is in vain, and that she will soon play into her expected role. This is evident in her relationship with Nick, as it is unclear as to whether he is repulsed or attracted to her careless attitude to life. Nick recalls calling her a ‘rotten driver,’ her response being that it takes ‘two’ to make an ‘accident.’ Fitzgerald’s use of foreshadowing suggest the idea that Nick will end the rebellion of Jordan, as his ultimate rejection pushes her towards the attitude of a conventional 1920s woman. Stating she doesn’t give a ‘damn’ about Nick, she announces her engagement. Her choice to quickly marry implies that she has chosen to conform and start the next stage of her life. This could be referenced back to the death of Myrtle, as whilst Jordan spectated, Myrtles ‘wide eyes settle not on tom, but on Jordan.’ As Myrtle was a woman who was also in a stage of revolt, this may have been suggested to be a warning of the consequences of choosing to go against normality. It appears that Jordan heads this warning, and retreats back to the safety and familiarity of social conformity, ending her paradox. In a similar style, Eugenides explores societal restriction through the character of Cecilia. However, whilst both authors explore the confines of conforming through marriage, Eugenides highlights how these pressures stem from adolescence. The novel begins as the boys piece together their memories of her the day before her first suicide attempt, and recall her choice to ‘clear’ her initials into a ‘foamy layer’ of fish flies. Fitzgerald use of symbolism suggests a fear of the future, as Cecilia notes that the only have twenty-four hours to live, as ‘they hatch, they reproduce’ and then ‘they croak.’ This may represent her own resentment of human natures cyclicality, as it seems her fixation on the fish flies is born of understanding. This may further suggest her comfortableness with death, as she has no qualms in touching the dead bugs, further foreshadowing her own as she paints her initials 24 hours before her suicide. Moreover, during this exchange, Cecilia is in her usual attire, a ‘shorn’ 1920s wedding dress that she ‘didn't fill out.’ Eugenides deliberate character description represents the paradoxical limbo that Cecilia is in, as she struggles to balance the childhood innocence expected of her alongside her developing sexuality. Whilst a wedding dress is often associated with religion and sexual purity, it foreshadows consummation, in which this purity is lost. Cecilia choice to destroy the dress implies that she is trying to fulfil the incongruous expectations, showcasing her burgeoning sexuality but also her virtue. The idea that she doesn’t fit the dress further suggests that she is playing a role she is not ready for, as many believed she was not old enough to understand death either. The vintage nature of the dress ties into the Great Gatsby, as a reminder that these expectations stem back throughout modern history. This idea of religious conflict is continued through an advertising card Cecilia holds during her first attempt, stating the ‘Virgin Mary’ had visited our ‘crumbling world.’ Mother Mary is an embodiment of the paradox, as she is both a mother and a virgin. This suggests that Cecilia feels as though she must satisfy both sides of conflict, alike to Mary. It may have further implications of Cecilia’s’ dissatisfaction in a world that has strayed further from God, although it is ironic that this message is conveyed through adverts. It is only in Cecilia’s death that it appears she has somewhat satisfied the war of interests, as she is described to appear like a ‘deranged harlot’ due to her lipstick choice. As she wears her wedding dress and makeup, she symbolises the conjoining of sexuality and religion. Moreover, her choice to wear her dress during death is of a sacrificial nature, in which it could be suggested that her death acts as a rebellion against the paradox.
Both authors utilise the characterisation of Daisy and Lux to portray the oppressive weight of substantiating the male gaze. Whilst both characters are a symbol of desire, Daisy finds empowerment through this, whereas Lux only finds herself more trapped. A key feature of Daisy is her ‘glowing, singing’ voice, said to be an ‘arrangement of notes’ that ‘compelled’ men forward. Fitzgerald’s use of metaphor suggests that Daisy is of a sublime nature, as her voice is conveyed to be almost hypnotic. Her dream-like qualities give the impression that she is of a fragile nature, and needs to be protected. Her temptation is suggested to be through the power of her voice, which is later described to be ‘full of money.’ Through the use of metaphor, Fitzgerald conveys that Daisy’s dynamism is tied to both her beauty and her extreme wealth. This creates an air of confusion, as alike to her voice she is almost intangible. This is reinforced as the dusk fell on her with ‘romantic affection’ before ‘deserting’ with ‘lingering regret.’ Fitzgerald’s use of personification suggests that Daisy is to remain a fantasy, evident in her relationship with Gatsby through his romantic memories of her past. Beauty and wealth act as a corruptive mixture that taints Daisy’s’ youthful purity. Whilst she enjoys being a product of Gatsby’s idealistic visions of her, she further is reliant upon her role of being a trophy for her husband, Tom. This conflict is evident on the eve of her wedding, as upon receiving a letter from Gatsby, she hysterically destroys her gift from Tom, a $350,000 pearl necklace. Despite this, she goes on to marry him without ‘so much as a shiver.’ Through Fitzgerald’s use of symbolism, the true nature of Daisy’s materialism and social prejudice is revealed, as she chooses wealth and security over potential love. Moreover, Daisy may symbolise the pearl necklace herself, as she whilst she is glorified to be pure and beautiful by Gatsby, to Tom, she acts as an accessory to showcase his lavish lifestyle. Bulkem‘s assessment on the presentation of women supports this, stating that women are portrayed to be “consumers rather than a producer, economically dependent, and, ultimately, a commodity.” Daisy is a product of her environment, one in which women must look for a suitor to act as their protectors and providers. Whilst she is portrayed to be a superficial character, it could be suggested that she is instead a realist, as she tells Nick that she hopes her daughter will be a ‘beautiful little fool.’ Fitzgerald’s use of deliberate adjectives suggests that Daisy is aware of the limited power that women had, to remain pretty and ignorant in the eyes of men as a way of survival. This is apparent of her choice to ignore Tom’s obvious affair, as to object would be a direct threat to her cushion of wealth.
Eugenides explores the extreme sexualisation of Lux, and the ways in which she is forced to use her femininity as a form of currency. Throughout the novel, Fitzgerald conveys the effects of repressed sexuality, as Lux’s sharp break from religion create the impression of her being a ‘carnal angel.’ Eugenides foreshadowing of this event is evident as her room contains a ‘crucifix draped with a brassiere.’ This conveys the idea that whilst Lux is constrained by the same social paradox as Cecilia, she revolting from the idea that a woman should be virtuous. This confident attitude is part of the reasoning behind the neighbourhood boy’s insatiable obsession with the sisters, as Lux is portrayed to be an untouchable ‘ice goddess.’ Eugenides use of metaphor highlights the standard that Lux is held to, as she is believed to be a ‘force of nature created by the seasons.’ Through this, we are able to understand that the boys regarded Lux to be beyond God, not a young girl with thoughts, feelings, and insecurities of her own. The complications that arise from these pressures become evident in her relationship with Trip Fontaine, as it is unclear as to whether he is a ‘vehicle’ in her quest for sexual liberation, or a symbol of her starvation of genuine human affection. In their first stolen kiss, Lux is described to be a ‘creature with a hundred mouths,’ said to suck the ‘marrow’ from Trips bones. Eugenides use of metaphor showcase the narrators exaggerated viewpoint of Lux, as the use of the word ‘creature’ suggests that they view her to be more of a sexual being, than an adolescent girl. The idea of her stealing the ‘marrow’ conveys the idea that she is treating sex as a form of escapism, as she tries to create a life away from the confines of her home. As her relationship with Trip progresses, she is given the freedom to go to homecoming with him. After winning homecoming Queen, she loses her virginity to Trip on the soccer field, with the white of the ‘goal line’ she lay on marked upon the back of her coat. Eugenides deliberate character description suggests that the obsession with Lux was a product of her intangibility, as her burgeoning sexuality developed behind the walls of her house. Now that she has become somewhat available to Trip, this sexual purity is suggested to be tarnished, ending the competition to win Lux. It is this incident that acts as the trigger to Lux’s promiscuity, as she is seen with an array of lovers on her rooftop, moving with the ‘weariness of a checkout girl.’ Eugenides use of a simile conveys the idea that Lux is trapped by her lack of understanding regarding her sexuality, as she appears to view it to be a job of some sort. Those who have been with Lux mention her deteriorating appearance, as she ‘didn’t seem to like it much.’ This could suggest that the boy’s no longer glorified Lux, as she is no longer untouchable. Instead they begin to recognise her self-destructive behaviour, as
Eugenides explores the extreme sexualisation of Lux, and the ways in which she is forced to use her femininity as a form of currency. From the onset of the novel, Lux represents the changing nature of the male gaze, as her loss of sexual purity destroys the angelic perception of her. Lux is glorified to an extent that surpasses the expectations a teenage girl can meet; Whilst she remains an untouched fantasy, the first to approach Lux is Trip Fontaine. Trip recalls their initial introduction, as her blue eyes held him ‘suspended’ in a class room as quiet as the ‘ocean floor,’ as ‘heavenly light’ distorted her other facial features. Eugenides use of (imagery) conveys a celestial scene, in which Lux acts as an ethereal figure that has captured the attention of Trip. He notes that the moment felt ‘eternal,’ reinforcing the idea that Lux is beyond god due to this bewitching power. This may highlight the idea that there is depth to Lux, hidden in her femininity, as she remains a mystery to the boys. Trip remains enchanted by Lux, as her ‘baggy apperal’ used to disguise her developing figure only seems to draw more attention to her enigmatic aura. Their relationship develops, and Lux is allowed to accompany him to a dance in which they become homecoming king and queen. It is at this dance that Lux loses her virginity to Trip, marking the moment with the ‘goal line’ she lay on smudged upon her back. Eugenides use of deliberate (imagery) connotes the idea that Trip has unravelled Lux’s mystery, as upon his apparent conquering of her, he suddenly loses interest in her. It further conveys the idea of this being a high school game in which he has scored, as Lux returns home alone to her angry mother, still wearing her crown. Pipher, a clinical psychologist has expressed the viewpoint that ‘girls who subscribe to societies expectations are the ultimate people pleasers…Often they are the cheerleaders and homecoming queens.’ As Lux cried during the loss of her virginity, this could imply that she was not doing it for herself, but instead to try to meet what was expected of her.