Great Gatsby Review

I.m Korean(and so not good at English, plz take it natural). <br>I've read this novel for 2 weeks in commuting train. <br>It was written in 1920's , you know, therefore it was hard for foreigner to interpret in his own language, it is too old-fashioned.<br><br>'Cause I has been reading the novels by Raymond Carver(my favorite author), I couldn't help comparing The Great Gatsby with Carver's ones.<br>As for me, the distinguish difference between two sides is the economic circumstances surronding the characters.<br>In the Great Gatsby, the persons are not worring about money, they just order the butlers, nurses and drivers what they want...<br>Their souls was corrupted by non-labor life. <br>If Gatsby didn't get much money, (perhaps) he would remain a dreamer who did not stand on abstract concept(blind love)...<br><br>ps: I am not a North Korean ^^

right now I am currently on the part of the book where Mrs. Wilson was run over. this book is some real bush. I can't stand it and i think that it is one of the worst books that I have ever read. Nick carraway to me seems to be one of those people that to come up with theories (that in actuality seem very stupid). He keeps coming up with theories on people that seem........ insensible. The only thing that I believe is good about this book is the drama between Gatsby and Daisy. Another thing that is good about this book is that it uses alot of vocabulary words that I don't know.

The Great Gatsby Analyzed<br>Pages 146-148<br>Nobody changes through the story. Except Nick of course, who unlike the others matures to a certain degree. At the start of the novel, Nick comments on how “Reserving judgments is a matter of infinite hope.” At the end of the novel, Nick has overcome this false image of himself as being “one of the few honest men I (he) knew” Nick gives up hope of Tom ever changing and judges him. We see this when he refuses the handshake. It is an entirely accurate judgment that is described, describing Tom and Daisy as being careless, reckless, destructive people.<br>Tom is a lying, deceitful, dishonest person. Nick knew that Tom had sent Wilson to kill Gatsby. Tom responds by saying “I told him the truth.” This is ironic because not only was Tom wrong when he told Wilson that Gatsby was driving the car, but also because it sums up the destruction of truth that Tom projects throughout the rest of the novel. Tom doesn’t know the meaning of truth. Or what is right. He sent someone to be killed, justifying it by saying “That fellow had it coming to him... he ran over Myrtle like you’d run over a dog and never bothered to stop his car.” The irony exists because that is exactly the mentality that Daisy (who was actually driving the car) and Tom have. “They smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or vast carelessness.” It is further enhanced by the fact that the reason Myrtle was killed was because she ran out thinking it was Tom driving the car. “It all happened in a minute,” Gatsby described the scene to Nick, “but it seemed to me that she wanted to speak to us, though we were somebody she knew.”<br> Jordan doesn’t change at all through the novel. When she makes the comment about her bad driving, and that it wouldn’t matter unless she met another bad driver, that displays quite clearly her lack of maturity and her inability to take responsibility for her actions. Even at the end of the novel, when her relationship with Nick falls apart she is unable to take any responsibility for its demise. “Well, I met another bad driver, didn’t I?” She offloads everything onto Nick. In a way she keeps that comment as a comeback for everything that happens to her in her life.<br>Gatsbys great dream was never fulfilled. Not only did Gatsby not change throughout the entire novel, but also he didn’t change throughout his entire life. Gatsby is still the lovesick child he was years ago. Gatsby is a very sad character that died in a very un-heroic, and ultimately pathetic way. In a roundabout way he was killed by Daisy. This is displayed when Gatsby is standing outside the Buchcanans house “watching over” Daisy. Tom and Daisy are described as conspiring in there together. Now one of two things happen, either Daisy told Tom that she was the one driving and they sold Gatsby out by allowing him to be shot by Wilson, or through her immaturity, she didn’t tell Tom and knowingly allowed Tom to send Wilson to kill Gatsby. Either way, Daisy was using Gatsby to avoid guilt. Of course that is what Gatsby wanted. “Of course I’ll say I was (driving).” The fact that Gatsby allowed himself to be used makes Gatsby even more pathetic. Gatsby changed himself from a poor kid in to rich classy guy, that makes him “Great”. The fact that he could hold up such a disguise for song long is “Great”. He is a gangster, and that is really “Great”. But the fact that he did it all because he held onto such a pathetic, outdated emotion is not “Great”. It is sad. Gatsby is only “great” in the sense of size and fame, not in the sense that he is wonderful.<br>

I am really enjoying the book so far it seems pretty interesting, i am only on chapter 4 though i just started it like last friday. I read one chapter a day and the chapters are pretty long like 20 pages at least. F. Scott. Fitzgerald is a nice writer. Oh i am reading the book for an english class. I heard the book was great.

The novel was hard to understand, It most likely represented the corruption of the american dream. Because reality can not keep up with ideals. and all Gatsby did was imitate the the lifestyle of the "old money" people. Even though he symbolized the american dream, It takes lifetime and effort to reach the oppertunity of the wealthy people. If you noticed at the end of the chapter, Daisy and tom escaped from the corruption of the american dream. Whereas Myrtle and Gatsby died from it. I also realized that Gatsby didnt believe the fact that the past was gone. So the reason why he failed was because of their difference in their social status.

Because no serious scholar I know of has dissented from the view that Gatsby is about the death of the American dream, I'd like to put forward an opposing notion: that Gatsby isn't about the American dream at all, and that the fact that this view of the novel has been passed down to a generation of students is more reflective of the ideological commitments of English professors than of anything that can be textually supported by the novel itself.<br><br>No version of the American Dream of which I'm aware involves standing at the top of a flight of stairs and looking down impassively as scores of people you don't know get drunk on your lawn. You could rejoin that Gatsby is a distortion of the American Dream, but shucks, everything can be viewed as a distortion of the thing that it isn't, so if that's Fitzgerald's thrust, it's a banal one.<br><br>But I don't believe that is Fitzgerald's thrust. I think Fitzgerald is more focused on the plight of romantics in the world (and about the seeming impermeability of class boundaries).<br>

text. Even the colours of the cars are representive of peoples changing attitudes. The brightness of Gatsby's car causes it to seem gawdy and excessive, as is much of what the commercial industry was turning out at the time. This same car killed Myrtle, displaying the corruption caused by it's excess. Furthermore, perhaps the commercial car killing Myrtle suggests that perhaps commercialism was killing off her stereotype in all women at that time?<br><br>These were just a few ideas that don't seem to have been suggested as yet. I believe that people will understand this point

i read this book just as the others on here have.it was a good book considering that i proabably would have never read it if it wasn't for my english requirement.if ur the kind of person who loves to read and has plenty of time on ur hands unlike me u should check it out! :) righhtt??? :D lols!

I don't feel that Gatsby is corrupted. The people who are gluttons, corrupt, vain, are the party goers. The people who live on Gatsby's hospitality and don't show up for his funeral. <br><br>I think Gatsby is a good man with good intentions. He was nice to everyone, even to Tom. He welcomed strangers into his home and was always very polite. That he wanted to steal Daisy from Tom is a non-issue. Daisy wanted to leave, Tom didn't treat her nice, and Gatsby had known her first. <br><br>If Gatsby was guilty of anything it was of being a tad obsessive, but some people just call that love.<br><br>Tom on the other hand was a prick. Daisy was a spoiled brat. Myrtle, even though she was poor, was a snob. And George, well, he was just a man.<br><br>Gatsby though, he only had the best intentions.

I heard the title of this novel in another book. That author regarded it as the best novel he had ever read. And I read its Chinese version first. I think it's nothing much. But after I read the English version, I feel I can't agree with him more. It's so great. It describs a love story in such a beautiful way that I have never seen. And it's not just about love. It reveals the true color of American Dream which I, as a Chinese, have misunderstood for a long time.<br>It's not a dream about success and wealth. Instead it's a dream of finding ourselves. Who are we?Where do we come from? What do we live for? Gatsby, for his all life, are pursuing the things he is longing for. Daisy is just the name of the dream. The green light is just the reminder of his dream. Gatsby is really great as the title indicates. He never gives up his dream even after Daisy betrays him and retreats to her husband. And he shoulder the responsibility of killing Mytle. This is the greatness of Gatsby as well as the novel. The American dream never ceases.

What I find interesting about the character of Jordan Baker is her intentions. She is described as "incurably dishonest". Given this, Roger Lewis believes that Jordan should know a liar when she hears one. If we accept this, Jordan hooks up Daisy with Gatsby knowing fully that he is not what he claims to be.<br> To this end, Jordan is a bit of a cipher. Her true intentions are unclear. Is she attempting to damage Daisy's social status in order to climb over her on the ladder, or is she lashing out at Tom for disapproving of her freedom? Perhaps, if you accept the thesis that Jordan is like a female version of Nick, perhaps (like Nick) she is looking for a show. Just as Gatsby essentially becomes a performer for Nick, perhaps Jordan is looking for Daisy to become a performer for her.

The Great Gatsby has a unique literary context when compared to not only other works of literature, but to other products of the popular media.<br> Lately, I've been pondering a comparison between The Great Gatsby and The Crow. Both movies seem to have many common themes. Like The Great Gatsby, The Crow is predominately interested in the differences between two different worlds: that of the haves and that of the havenots.<br> In Gatsby, it is a case of having or not having money, having or not having love, having or not having courage, or any number of other things. In The Crow, it is a case of having or not having love, having or not having power, having or not having compassion, and, also, many other things.<br> The Great Gatsby is concerned predominately with the upper class areas of East Egg, and (to a lesser extent) West Egg, while The Crow is mostly concerned with inner city Detroit, a sort of modern day valley of ashes. The failure of the american dream (which is a popular interpretation of Gatsby) can also be applied to The Crow. While Gatsby only wants Daisy Buchannen, Eric Draven and Shelley Webster only want to be married. Both are denied their greatest desire.<br> The characters of Gatsby and Eric Draven react to this in different ways. However, both must be empowered before they are able to pursue their vindication. Gatsby is empowered by Wolfsheim and the Jewish Mafia. Eric Draven is empowered by supernatural means, but the result is the same: the both make a daring attempt to attain what they need.<br> This is where one would think that the two works begin to differentiate. While Gatsby continues to strive for Daisy, it seems that Draven begins to strive for revenge. However, it is stated over and over again in the movie that Draven needs justice in order to be at peace, and rest. In other words, Draven must assure that justice is done in order to be with Shelley.<br> The big difference in this theme between the two works is that, in the end, Draven attains his goal, and Gatsby does not. While Draven and Shelley have had to lose their lives in order to be together, they are still together at the end, and that is important to remember. Gatsby never attains Daisy, and, soon after, he dies for her (albeit, not by an act of his own commission).<br> Another notable difference between the two works is that, in The Crow, justice is done for the work's victims: Eric and Shelley are revenged, and Sarah (a victim of a different variety) is reunited with her mother. In Gatsby, there is no justice for Gatsby; there is no justice for George or Myrtle Wilson. The guilty are allowed to go unfree, untouched by the consequences of their actions.<br> More parallels can be drawn between the works as you examine the themes of them. In both, innocent (or at least relatively so) people are drawn in, corrupted, and often destroyed by their surroundings. While drugs, crime and despair destroy the denizens of The Crow's motor city, excess, debauchery, and carelessness corrupt the denizens of East Egg. Many of those who have been corrupted so (Daisy, Jordan Baker) have become irredeemably corrupted.<br> Just a few thoughts.<br> Until next time, kiddies,<br> BANG!<br> Patrick Ross<br> a.k.a. Kid Cash

User deleted.

Damn i shouldn't have read that as I'm at present half way through the story. I really love Fitzgerald's style of writing. Gatsby is an excellent central character and his eccentric, quite humorous behaviour brings an air of excited foolishness which I think we can all relate to when we realize our own behaviuor with women we like as Gatsby's with Daisy.

User deleted.