JamesHoward
08-25-2006, 08:57 PM
Please excuse the sensational topic title! I have just finished my A level in english literature, receiving a B grade. Don't get me wrong, I'm really pleased with this, it's just my coursework did pretty badly. So what, you ask? Well I was told by my teacher it was of a high standard, definitely above the 68/120 it was given. Now, you guys know about this sort of thing, and if any of you nice, nice people would be so kind as to have a little read-through, it would be immensely appreciated. I would like an honest teacher's opinion on it (I have emailed my teacher, but have received no response), and whether I should ask for it re-marked etc. It might just of been rubbish (reading back on it I notice a lot of grammatical errors) and if so please tell me.It's a little bit long so I've had to put it in 2 posts. Thank you so much to anyone who makes the effort to read and comment.
James
__________________________________________________ ______________
As 5) the novel presents ‘a world of superficial materialism in a moral vacuum’ (Tony Tanner) How far does this view accurately capture Fitzgerald’s presentation of American society in the Great Gatsby?
The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald’s quintessential critique of American society (and humanity itself) tells the story of Jay Gatsby, a sensitive young man trying to win the heart of socialite Daisy Buchanan. Fitzgerald wrote critically of America, and despite being an avid participant in the ‘Roaring Twenties’ he reads as being highly cynical of both the era and the American Dream. I would be inclined to agree with Tony Tanner; ultimately the novel is didactic, and the point Fitzgerald is communicating is that, in American society, ethical structure has been substituted for ‘superficial materialism.’
Nick Carraway is the narrator of the story, and although his prose may present strong objective judgements it is important to remember throughout that the novel is told from a subjective viewpoint. However, it could be argued that this strengthens the credibility of Nick’s observations, and Fitzgerald uses his perspective to evoke a sense of humanity, and to evoke pathos. Tony Tanner suggested that Nick is the ‘true moral centre of the novel,’ and I would subscribe to this viewpoint. In the first chapter, Nick makes a number of significant comments: ‘Reserving judgement is a matter of infinite hope’ and ‘When I came back from the East last autumn I felt that I wanted the world to be in uniform and at a sort of moral attention forever; I wanted no more riotous excursions with privileged glimpses into the human heart.’ Here it could be said that Nick’s apparent disillusionment with the superficial society portrayed is symbolic of Fitzgerald’s own critical judgements not just of the ‘Jazz Age’, but also of humanity’s shortcomings, and the novel reads with a startling impact when these points are kept in mind.
Tom Buchanan, with his ‘cruel body’ and ‘arrogant eyes’, is the antagonist of the novel and I would argue that his lack of morality is, to an extent, a leading cause of the tragic events that take place. Myrtle Wilson is a victim of Tom Buchanan, and this is apparent throughout the novel. For example, in chapter 2, she shouts ‘Daisy! Daisy! Daisy!’, and in response, making a ‘short deft movement’, Tom breaks her nose. This event is vital to understanding both characters for a number of reasons: Firstly, Myrtle’s cries of ‘Daisy!’ represents her longing to break free from the constraints of her poor, destitute life with her husband George (‘Who said I was crazy about him?’). Secondly, it shows the fate reserved for anyone trying to escape the ‘moral vacuum’; Myrtle’s aspirations of emancipating herself from her situation, as soon as they are expressed, are instantaneously destroyed. Is Myrtle a victim of class divide? Or perhaps her downfall could be interpreted as a product of her own materialistic desires?
Tom Buchanan is hard to sympathise with: Buchanan fills his moral void with status, power and wealth, and is a reckless character, and the events of chapter 2 exemplify this. I would suggest that Tom’s violence represents his lack of moral accountability, and demonstrates his knee-jerk reaction to accusations of responsibility. However it could be argued that this is just Tom’s nature manifesting itself; perhaps his aggression is a symbol of his masculinity, an inherent need for domination akin to Stanley, the bestial male of Tennessee William’s ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’.
Tom remains oblivious to his moral responsibility until the end of the novel. After Gatsby is killed by George Wilson, Nick and Tom chance upon each other in the street, and the conversation they have serves to contrast the strong moral grounding of Nick with Tom’s attitude: ‘What did you say to Wilson that afternoon?’ Tom replies that he ‘told him the truth.’ Of course, we know Tom is being deceitful, however it is a line that comes next that really demonstrates what Fitzgerald is communicating to the reader: ‘He was crazy enough to kill me if I hadn’t told him who owned the car…That fellow had it coming to him (Gatsby). He threw dust into your eyes jus like he did in Daisy’s, but he was a tough one.’ This quote demonstrates not only the selfish, self-seeking attitude of Tom Buchanan, but is a reiteration of the fate held for anyone trying to break free from this superficial, materialistic society. Gatsby and Myrtle share something in common; they were both killed by their dreams.
Moral accountability-or lack of it- is a theme that runs continuously throughout the book, and one of the most powerful symbols Fitzgerald creates is the ‘Valley of Ashes.’ The ‘Valley of Ashes’ is reminiscent of T.S. Elliot’s ‘The Wasteland;’ both are sights in which happiness and inner peace are unrealisable, and Fitzgerald uses the place to communicate his view of societies ethical ‘desertedness’. The ‘Valley of Ashes’ is ‘a fantastic farm where ashes grow like wheat ridges and hills and grotesque gardens, where ashes take the forms of houses and chimneys and rising smoke and finally, with a transcendent effort, of men who move dimly and already crumbling through powdery air’, and it is open to a couple of interpretations: For example, it is apparent from the way Tom Buchanan (who represents the rich) treats George Wilson (the poor) that the upper class of the novel’s demographic views the area as a generic wasteland of people without status: ‘Terrible, isn’t it?’ says Tom. However, I would argue that the ‘Valley of Ashes’ is a metaphor, and the purpose it serves is that of highlighting the moral vacuum that Fitzgerald perceived. Although the ‘Valley of Ashes’ is a distinct juxtaposition with the West and East Eggs, it is however an industrial ‘dumping ground’, and is therefore a by-product of capitalism. Acknowledging this point, I think it is plausible to argue that Fitzgerald uses the ‘Valley of Ashes’ to additionally hint at an underlying, subtler form of ugliness hidden amongst the upper class society.
James
__________________________________________________ ______________
As 5) the novel presents ‘a world of superficial materialism in a moral vacuum’ (Tony Tanner) How far does this view accurately capture Fitzgerald’s presentation of American society in the Great Gatsby?
The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald’s quintessential critique of American society (and humanity itself) tells the story of Jay Gatsby, a sensitive young man trying to win the heart of socialite Daisy Buchanan. Fitzgerald wrote critically of America, and despite being an avid participant in the ‘Roaring Twenties’ he reads as being highly cynical of both the era and the American Dream. I would be inclined to agree with Tony Tanner; ultimately the novel is didactic, and the point Fitzgerald is communicating is that, in American society, ethical structure has been substituted for ‘superficial materialism.’
Nick Carraway is the narrator of the story, and although his prose may present strong objective judgements it is important to remember throughout that the novel is told from a subjective viewpoint. However, it could be argued that this strengthens the credibility of Nick’s observations, and Fitzgerald uses his perspective to evoke a sense of humanity, and to evoke pathos. Tony Tanner suggested that Nick is the ‘true moral centre of the novel,’ and I would subscribe to this viewpoint. In the first chapter, Nick makes a number of significant comments: ‘Reserving judgement is a matter of infinite hope’ and ‘When I came back from the East last autumn I felt that I wanted the world to be in uniform and at a sort of moral attention forever; I wanted no more riotous excursions with privileged glimpses into the human heart.’ Here it could be said that Nick’s apparent disillusionment with the superficial society portrayed is symbolic of Fitzgerald’s own critical judgements not just of the ‘Jazz Age’, but also of humanity’s shortcomings, and the novel reads with a startling impact when these points are kept in mind.
Tom Buchanan, with his ‘cruel body’ and ‘arrogant eyes’, is the antagonist of the novel and I would argue that his lack of morality is, to an extent, a leading cause of the tragic events that take place. Myrtle Wilson is a victim of Tom Buchanan, and this is apparent throughout the novel. For example, in chapter 2, she shouts ‘Daisy! Daisy! Daisy!’, and in response, making a ‘short deft movement’, Tom breaks her nose. This event is vital to understanding both characters for a number of reasons: Firstly, Myrtle’s cries of ‘Daisy!’ represents her longing to break free from the constraints of her poor, destitute life with her husband George (‘Who said I was crazy about him?’). Secondly, it shows the fate reserved for anyone trying to escape the ‘moral vacuum’; Myrtle’s aspirations of emancipating herself from her situation, as soon as they are expressed, are instantaneously destroyed. Is Myrtle a victim of class divide? Or perhaps her downfall could be interpreted as a product of her own materialistic desires?
Tom Buchanan is hard to sympathise with: Buchanan fills his moral void with status, power and wealth, and is a reckless character, and the events of chapter 2 exemplify this. I would suggest that Tom’s violence represents his lack of moral accountability, and demonstrates his knee-jerk reaction to accusations of responsibility. However it could be argued that this is just Tom’s nature manifesting itself; perhaps his aggression is a symbol of his masculinity, an inherent need for domination akin to Stanley, the bestial male of Tennessee William’s ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’.
Tom remains oblivious to his moral responsibility until the end of the novel. After Gatsby is killed by George Wilson, Nick and Tom chance upon each other in the street, and the conversation they have serves to contrast the strong moral grounding of Nick with Tom’s attitude: ‘What did you say to Wilson that afternoon?’ Tom replies that he ‘told him the truth.’ Of course, we know Tom is being deceitful, however it is a line that comes next that really demonstrates what Fitzgerald is communicating to the reader: ‘He was crazy enough to kill me if I hadn’t told him who owned the car…That fellow had it coming to him (Gatsby). He threw dust into your eyes jus like he did in Daisy’s, but he was a tough one.’ This quote demonstrates not only the selfish, self-seeking attitude of Tom Buchanan, but is a reiteration of the fate held for anyone trying to break free from this superficial, materialistic society. Gatsby and Myrtle share something in common; they were both killed by their dreams.
Moral accountability-or lack of it- is a theme that runs continuously throughout the book, and one of the most powerful symbols Fitzgerald creates is the ‘Valley of Ashes.’ The ‘Valley of Ashes’ is reminiscent of T.S. Elliot’s ‘The Wasteland;’ both are sights in which happiness and inner peace are unrealisable, and Fitzgerald uses the place to communicate his view of societies ethical ‘desertedness’. The ‘Valley of Ashes’ is ‘a fantastic farm where ashes grow like wheat ridges and hills and grotesque gardens, where ashes take the forms of houses and chimneys and rising smoke and finally, with a transcendent effort, of men who move dimly and already crumbling through powdery air’, and it is open to a couple of interpretations: For example, it is apparent from the way Tom Buchanan (who represents the rich) treats George Wilson (the poor) that the upper class of the novel’s demographic views the area as a generic wasteland of people without status: ‘Terrible, isn’t it?’ says Tom. However, I would argue that the ‘Valley of Ashes’ is a metaphor, and the purpose it serves is that of highlighting the moral vacuum that Fitzgerald perceived. Although the ‘Valley of Ashes’ is a distinct juxtaposition with the West and East Eggs, it is however an industrial ‘dumping ground’, and is therefore a by-product of capitalism. Acknowledging this point, I think it is plausible to argue that Fitzgerald uses the ‘Valley of Ashes’ to additionally hint at an underlying, subtler form of ugliness hidden amongst the upper class society.