A Summarization of Literary and analysis of The Great Gatsby
The Great Gatsby demonstrates the divide in social class and the hierarchy even within the wealthiest section of the population. The Great Gatsby, a novel written by F. Scott Fitzgerald is set in the 1920s, is predominantly based on the American Dream, and the consistent downfalls of those who attempt its goals. The American Dream is defined by the most as hope, love, and prosperity, however not all of these aspects were achieved within the novel, instead, some of them were instead deteriorated. This shows the contrast between the American Dream against the desperation for materialistic wealth. Furthermore, the novel also clearly gives the readers an insight into the gender roles of post-WWI America. Throughout the text there are many conflicts between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, highlighting the different class’ attitudes towards the possession of wealth. Fitzgerald portrays hierarchy in the relationships between the characters. The novel seems to generate Marxist and feminist views in the form of “socio-economic”. Marxism defines this as social and economic power, such as and the power and status that comes with the wealth of an individual (Tyson, 2015); “consumerism”, which means that a person's worth is determined by his or her possessions (Tyson, 2015). “commodification”, which is when a person starts to see other people as commodities that can be bought and social interactions as nothing more than opportunities to flaunt one’s socio-economic status (Tyson, 2015). Charles Kuralt, an American journalist, stated that 'the love of family and the admiration of friends is much more important than wealth and privileged', however, Fitzgerald novel each present wealth in different ways.
The ‘Great Gatsby is a very famous novel and has been critically analyzed by various critics. One example I will be exploring is the critic analysis ‘Rattling Society’s Cage in The Great Gatsby’ by Björn Brox, In this essay Brox instead of following usual proceedings and analyzing Jay Gatsby, he decides to analyze the Marxism intentions of the other character like Daisy, Tom, Myrtle, George, and Nick. By examining each individual character in a Marxist light Brox uncovers the identity of each character, and what their true motives are in the novel. Daisy discussed as a shallow person which ultimately give the impression of her withdrawn persona. Brox talks about this characteristic as he believes it’s a result of her financially fortunate upbringing. Coming from a very wealthy family, Daisy hasn’t had to work for her money, therefore she does not play the stereotypical wealthy women as she does not share the motivation of say Gatsby who has acquired wealth through his motivation and extrovert personality. Furthermore, Daisy is said to have been looking to acquire a higher status through her child. At this time period, when having intelligent children shows signs of strong parents, Daisy realizes she can gain socio-economic stature if she could invest more time into her child. Brox states the relationship between Daisy and her daughter demonstrates more commodity rather than love and exemplifies this in the novel where instead of introducing her daughter to her friends she shows her off.
In another article by Scott Donaldson Possessions in the Great Gatsby (Donaldson, 2001), the character of Tom is analysis. He claims that tom is only focused on the monetary value of things in life, and examples of this can be shown throughout the whole novel. He explains that in every aspect of Toms life from love to family to lifestyle, his only focus is advancing up the socio-economic hierarchy, this is most apparent with his relationship with Daisy. Scott explains how he saw Daisy for all her power and wealth and therefore saw it as a gate to him becoming a more powerful man, this is also supported when he buys her the $350,000 neckless before their marriage, suggesting that the marriage to him wouldn’t be sufficient therefore materialistic motivation was necessary. This is showing the real signs of a Marxist, and how they see the world in a self-evolved light. Donaldson discusses the terms of sign value exchange in regard to Tom, sign value is an aspect of Marxism, where things can be exchanged in order to acquire socio-economic stature. He uses a time in the novel where Tom talks about his home to portray this point. Tom when discussing his home claims how it was the oil man’s home, at first sight, this may seem like small talk, yet Scott describes this as Tom believing that by him buying that house he also buys the status.
Gatsby is discussed for his Marxist ways by Marius Bewley’s ‘Scott Fitzgerald’s Criticism of America’ (Bewley, 2007). Bewley discussed the concept of Gatsby’s lifestyle, and why he throws the parties he does. By having the parties Gatsby has the chance to become the icon for all other materialistic heads who attend, and he uses his possessions to gain authority and superiority over people. He also speaks about the irony of his situation, even with all the money and luxury’s he still unable to secure the one thing he desires most; Daisy.
Critics also relate Gatsby to feminism within the Novel, ‘The Resisting Reader: A Feminist Approach to American Fiction’ by Judith Fetterley (Fetterley, 1978). Fetterley Discusses the objectifying of Daisy in the novel. She speaks about how Gatsby sees Daisy as an imaginative investment, using the quote where he calls her the first ‘nice’ girl he’s ever met, claiming the quotation around the word nice implies it’s aimed at what she represents rather than her personality. She also claims that Gatsby speaks about Daisy’s home. He speaks “what gave it its breath of fresh air was that Daisy lived there” Fetterley claims that the way he describes her as part of the house, shows him seeing daisy for her wealth, house and status, therefore giving the true reason why he really likes her.
In The Great Gatsby, the most prominent theme beyond love itself is the ideology of poverty in the work. The existence of poverty within both novels is present. The image of the ‘barren wasteland’ of ashes provides a stark contrast to the lavish parties thrown by Gatsby himself. The Valley of Ashes is described as a ‘fantastic farm where ashes grow like wheat into ridges and hills and grotesque gardens’. Between West Egg and New York City consists of a long stretch of desolate land created by the dumping of industrial ashes. It represents the moral and social decay that results from the uninhibited pursuit of wealth, as the rich indulge themselves with regard for nothing but their own pleasure. ‘The valley of ashes’ also symbolizes the plight of the poor. Within The Great Gatsby Nick enforces the reader that East Egg is the wealthier, more elite of the two areas, ’I lived at West Egg, the—well, the less fashionable of the two, though this is a most superficial tag to express the bizarre and not a little sinister contrast between them’. Despite all of the money Gatsby lives in West Egg, suggesting he was not able to complete his transformation into a member of the social elite, the distance that separates him from Daisy.
The American Dream involves people attempting to gain wealth and status. Therefore, through the desire to obtain this dream, became the significance of cars. Automobiles were seen as a ‘symbol' of wealth and a sense of new found freedom. In both novels both Gatsby and Perowne own luxurious sets of cars. One of Gatsby’s is the Rolls-Royce. ‘It was a rich cream color, bright and there in its monstrous length with triumphant hat-boxes and supper-boxes and tool-boxes, and terraced with a labyrinth of windshields that mirrored a dozen suns.’ The reason his car is yellow is to potentially attract Daisy attention and to display his achievement of his wealthy status.
Jay Gatsby is a self-made man who started out with no money, only a plan for achieving his dream. He is so blinded by his luxurious possessions that he does not see that money cannot buy love or happiness. Fitzgerald demonstrates how a dream can become corrupted by one’s focus on acquiring wealth, power, and materials. Gatsby gets his fortune illegally, through bootlegging and other practices. He only acquired money and property, wealth, and a high status in the East, to capture the attention of Daisy, because she comes from an affluent background. In the novel, Fitzgerald portrays the new social and sexual freedom enjoyed by women through the lives of Daisy, Jordan Baker, and Myrtle Wilson, as well as the plentiful of young women who attend Gatsby’s parties. All the women present in The Great Gatsby are all vapid, meaning they only want the best for them, for example, material items such as ‘money’, power and looks. Each of the women represents a distinct personality and different segment of society during this period of time in America. Even though all the female characters are a product of this rebellion in history, they all have a variety of characteristics that help to create the women they portray in the story.
This source Feminist Criticism of The Great Gatsby English Literature discusses the abuse that women received in the early twentieth-century from men but closely looking at Marxist, liberal and radical views on feminism. The writer discusses the irony that men exploit to undermine and exploit women to idolize them. The writer explains how Gatsby is so dominating towards Daisy so he will never be without her, which is a real sense in today’s society would not be seen as a social norm and would raise many problems and arguments, however, in these times that was seen perfectly ok. Tom uses public violence to keep his wife in order and no one says anything, in today’s society man publicly abusing women, would cause riots. The entire novel is very male dominate and mostly because of the Narrator, is biased towards women and the relationships they have.
Within this writing The Freudian Gatsby – A Literary Analysis, it compares the id, ego, and superego to characters that they fit perfectly. The characters that are used are Tom Buchanan, Jay Gatsby, and Nick Carraway. Tom Buchanan is related to the id because he is a corrupt and a wealthy man. He is spoiled and adapts to the idea of “what is mine is mine what is yours is yours.” He does not care about anyone but himself which is shown when he punches his wife and shows no remorse when he breaks her nose. Nick Carraway is described to be the ego to Toms id, Tom enjoys his life while Nick is just there watching what Tom does and try to keep him out of bother. Nick is the ego to Gatsby’s superego as he gets Nick to do things for him which are only beneficial to Gatsby and not Nick. Gatsby is also described to be like the superego because he strives to have Daisy so only does things that will make him successful.
This critical article “The Green Light”: A Formalist Reading of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby written by Meghan Karr applies a Formalist reading to The Great Gatsby. This critical essay is focused on the symbolism of the ‘green light’. Karr argues that this metaphor serves as a ‘paradox of desires’ which too an extent gives a false sense of ‘hope’ to the characters portrayed in the narrative. The continuous use of the image of the ‘light’ is present to display an inability to reach prosperity. Furthermore, Karr develops this image within her critical article and argues how the image represents a notion of jealousy. In addition, Karr links both a Formalistic reading of the text and associates it with the American Dream. Ultimately, Karr argues that the reoccurring image of the light is a significant aspect of the structure of the text. She develops this point and argues how when the reader is exposed to this metaphor, the reader gains a greater understanding of the relationships and meaning of the text.
In conclusion, the influence of money and possessing resources is a major factor in the text. The desperation to sustain a materialistic lifestyle is crucial for the protagonist as his wealth symbolizes his power. From his power supposedly brings his happiness. However, this element potentially may not be valid because with a large sum of money he still hasn’t secured Daisy, and no matter if he did secure Daisy, no doubt there would be something or someone else that he would desire after that, as he has a Marxist personality and therefore always want to progress. I think the most interesting thing about the novel is the fact that none of the wealthy people are truly happy and from reading the article ‘Poor and distressed, but happy: situational and cultural moderators of the relationship between wealth and happiness’ (Borrero, 2013) believe this is because the amount of money and possessions they can own is continuous and does not have a limit, therefore they will never be fully happy as they don’t know when to stop.