[the] ENGLISH-BLOG [.com]

Ava L.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
22 January 2009

(6) Stages of the Hero's Journey: Refusal of Return / Flight or Rescue

The hero in F.Scott Fitzgerald’s novel The Great Gatsby is Nick Carraway. Nick, who is originally from the West, finds that he enjoys life in the East. Nick’s experiences in the East are far more exciting than the life he has lived in the West. He takes temporary residence in New York in a small village called West Egg. There he is introduced to the mysterious Jay Gatsby. Nick is intrigued by Gatsby. Nick also becomes close with a young woman named Jordan Baker. Although Nick becomes increasingly aware that he does not fit in with Gatsby’s crowd, he continues to remain in West Egg. There are several times throughout the story that Nick feels compelled to leave or be alone (flight). Some examples that support his desire to flee include his attempt to remove himself from the room when Gatsby decides to reveal his relationship with Daisy to Tom, Nick’s desire to be alone after returning home from the city, and Nick’s attitude toward Jordan during their telephone conversation. All of these examples support Nick’s own realization of how out of place he is in his current surroundings. However, Nick refuses to remove himself completely from the situation. Nick’s gut feeling is that he does not fit in nor does he belong, but he continues to place himself in the midst of all the commotion. His refusal to flee from the commotion emphasizes his fascination with Gatsby.

Nick’s fascination with Gatsby helps to shape Nick as the rescuer of the story. Nick states earlier on that one of his flaws is that he never lies, yet when he discovers Gatsby and Daisy are responsible for Myrtle’s death, he does nothing to about it. In fact, he comes to Gatsby’s aid. He tries to convince Gatsby to go away for a few weeks to Atlantic City or Montreal. Gatsby refuses Nicks attempts to rescue him from the situation. Gatsby winds up dead. Nick feels a sense of responsibility to organize Gatsby’s funeral. He attempts to recruit mourners for Gatsby’s funeral.

Prior to his departure from West Egg, Nick feels it is necessary to tie up all the loose ends that he has left. He attempts to patch things up with Jordan. He does not want to leave without having closure. For a brief moment, Nick is reluctant to leave, but comes to the realization that the city life is no place for a Westerner.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. _The Great Gatsby_. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

--------------------------

Notes from Professor:

You have clearly identified the refusal of the return and the rescue stages in Gatsby. Based on your interpretation, we have a new dichotomy to consider: East versus West. Is one of them the ordinary world for Nick and one the special world? Is one of them the world of Jay Gatsby?

~Dr. Hobbs

Wesley J.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
January 25, 2009

(1) The Early Sequence of the Monomyth in The Great Gatsby: An ordinary day, Call to Adventure, Refusal of the Call.

In The Great Gatsby, the ordinary day seems to be the early part of the novel. Nick details his younger life and the advice that his father gave him about criticizing others. From here, Nick continues discussing the opening of “curious natures” (Fitzgerald 1) and happening that his life has provided. However, as Nick begins to narrate the actual story of the novel, it also seems that the ordinary day occurs as Nick goes to Tom and Daisy’s house. This meeting also initiates Nick’s adventure. The mention of Gatsby’s name strikes Daisy but it is not developed as to why. Likewise, as the characters sit for dinner, Tom receives a call from his mistress. This acts as a second call to adventure in that explains the events that will occur.

One could argue that the refusal of the call is in Nick’s reluctance to attend Gatsby’s parties and failure to address that Gatsby is his neighbor in Tom and Daisy’s company. It is not until a butler invites him that Nick attends the party and interacts with Gatsby. Also, while Nick is at the party, he is not vehement about meeting Gatsby and fortuitously meets him. While there is no actual refusal to do anything, Nick is not vocal about not wanting to go, he doesn’t take it upon himself to seek out the adventure that was initiated by Tom and Daisy.

However, there are other possibilities. One could argue that the call to action is when Gatsby requests that Nick set up a meeting for Daisy and Gatsby. And, perhaps the ordinary day occurs on the day that Daisy hits Wilson’s wife. This day, while marred by coincidence seems fairly regular. But in light of the fairly familiar flow of the book, rising action, climax, and denouement), I feel pretty confident that as far as the Monomyth is concerned, The Great Gatsby follows a pretty chronological and orderly path.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Cecilia B.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
25 January 2009

(8) Stages of the Hero's Journey: Elixir to Heal the Land/Master of Two Worlds

Considering F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel _The Great Gatsby_ and its hero Nick Carraway, the final two stages of Campbell’s monomyth design heavily documents Nick’s struggle between the familiar mundane life of the middle class and Gatsby’s foreign world of opulence and carelessness.

In these stages of the return phase, Nick must heal what has been afflicting the alien world to be able to return to the original and thus gain full awareness and control in both. Gatsby’s lavish life intrudes on Nick’s common existence and consequently introduces Nick to people corrupted by wealth who not only take advantage of Gatsby’s generosity (consider Klipspringer) but are also self-interested. As a result, Nick must introduce an elixir of compassion to heal the illness of Gatsby’s world-and does so when trying to assemble mourners for Gatsby’s funeral including non-relatives as a means of establishing selflessness in him as the hero and projecting it out into the community of West Egg.

Lastly, Nick finally becomes the master of both worlds. Nick has successfully adopted a role in Gatsby’s world while healing it and made the journey back to his original destination and function in the lower middle class stratum. Also, Nick is still capable of making a distinction between the two worlds rather than becoming disillusioned and blurring his role in either one. For example, Nick becomes a selfless friend to Gatsby who momentarily enjoys the luxuries of the upper class but does not try to carry forth these indulgences into the ordinary world. Rather, Nick would be able to maneuver back and forth through each of the worlds without damaging his interior character and contaminating either world with the other’s values. Moreover, Nick can become a hero in the special world without forsaking the values he originally started with (i.e. he goes back home) but still transforms into a more enlightened being with compassion.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. _The Great Gatsby_. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Travis R.

Dr. Hobbs

ENG 435

January 26, 2009

(7) Stages of the Hero’s Journey: Rebirth/Return and Crossing the Threshold (Out)

The two themes of the Hero’s Journey utilized in this post are “Rebirth/Return” and the “Crossing Out of the Threshold.” However, before we dive directly into analysis, it is probably best to define exactly what comprises the other world. Though the Special World of Campbell’s Monomyth illustration can be applied to many themes in Fitzgerald’s novel “The Great Gatsby,” for this purpose it will be referred to as Nick’s adoration of Gatsby, a man whom Nick in many ways wishes to emulate, and his lavish lifestyle.

Nick’s crossing of the threshold into the other world takes place when he begins to acquire a taste for the way Gatsby lives (hosting large parties, frivolously spending money, etc.). He spends time with Gatsby and learns to appreciate the amenities of life that are a product of this newfound friendship. It follows, then, that the crossing out of the threshold takes place when Gatsby plummeted from the pedestal on which Nick had placed him. This fall from grace can be seen shortly after Gatsby’s car strikes (and kills) Mrs. Wilson, the mechanic’s wife and the woman with whom Tom Buchanan is having an affair. After Tom, Jordan, and Nick arrive at the Buchanan household, Nick, while waiting for a taxi, encounters a loitering Gatsby holding vigil over the place of residents. Nick’s belief that Gatsby was driving the car when Mrs. Wilson was killed gives way to an interesting realization: Nick, for the first time in the novel, disdains Gatsby. Nick has become disenchanted with Gatsby and what he represents. In other instances where the integrity of Gatsby’s “good” name had been challenged (e.g. by Tom in a hotel room in New York City mere hours before the accident) Nick turned a blind ear (to mix a metaphor) and refused to believe the accusations. It seems apparent that Nick’s loathing of the man he once so highly regarded is his crossing out of the threshold.

Following Nick’s crossing out of the threshold is his rebirth/return. Here, his continued disenchantment with Gatsby’s lifestyle can be seen by his returning West, to his home. He completes his rebirth by removing himself from the company of Tom and Daisy, whom by the end he saw as fickle, and by also breaking off his relationship with Jordan, his last remaining “gonnegtion” to the special world inhabited by Gatsby and the other residents of both East and West Egg.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. _The Great Gatsby_. 1925. New York: Scribner, 2004.

Kristin B.

Dr. Hobbs

ENG 435

26 January 2009

(2) Stages of the Hero’s Journey: Helpers/ Supernatural Aid

Nick Carraway is a young man from Minnesota who moves to Long Island. The move began his journey as hero in F. Scott Fitzgerald classic novel “The Great Gatsby.” Nick was a man of meager means. His move to the East was motivated by his desire to further himself through the bond business. He rented a house in the wealthy upcoming district of West Egg. Nick enters the unfamiliar “other world” of Western high society.


His departure from the familiar is aided by two specific characters, firstly the dazzling Daisy Buchanan and secondly the mysterious charming Jay Gatsby. It is during the first initial meetings with both Daisy and Gatsby that Nick is aided to continue on his journey. First of all, Nick joined Daisy and her husband Tom for dinner one evening at their fashionable and wealthy home in the East Egg district. During the first dinner with Daisy he met his potential love interest Jordan Baker and also learned first hand the distressing marriage situation between Daisy and her husband. Witnessing everything at first hand, and after meeting Myrtle, the evening really set the stage for the rest of the story. As the summer continued Nick was personally invited to attend Gatsby’s lavish party. During this event Nick is introduced to Gatsby himself and it gave the two a starting point for their friendship. Through out the rest of the novel Daisy and Gatsby act as helpers and propel Nick along his journey. Nick is invited over Daisy’s, Nick is invited over Gatsby’s, Nick invites Daisy over, Nick arranges a meeting between the pair, and etc. The introduction to both Daisy and Gatsby fully immerses Nick into the other world and in fact it is their (potential) relationship that colors Nick’s journey.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. _The Great Gatsby_. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Sarah T.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
26 January 2009

(5) Stage of the Hero’s Journey – Blessing/Sacrament and the Final Gift

Contrary to the title of the book, The Great Gatsby, Nick Carraway is the hero in the novel. He travels from his ordinary world into the special world of Gatsby in which he experiences various trials. The “Marriage, Baptism, or Blessing” of his journey (stage 5) is towards the end of the novel after his final battle.

The blessing/sacrament that Nick goes through is Gatsby’s funeral and meeting Henry Gatz, Gatsby’s father. In this portion of the journey the blessing is supposed to represent the change the hero is undergoing. This is usually displayed in the form of a marriage but in the case of Nick it represents the death of the special world and helps lead him to decide on whether or not to return to his ordinary world. In the events leading up to the funeral Nick desperately searches throughout “high society” looking for friends of Gatsby’s to attend his funeral. Unfortunately, Nic k does not know how to navigate through this world on his own and cannot get in contact anyone. Henry Gatz is another aspect of this stage because he opens Nick’s eyes to the difference between the two worlds.

The “Ultimate Boon/Final Gift” is represented when Nick runs into Tom on the streets of New York. This is the final gift from the Gods because it helps Nick realize his self-worth. In this scene he comes to understand how low Tom and Daisy truly are and chooses to no longer associate with them. He even feels pity towards them. This is a segue for Nick to enter into the return phase.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Liz H.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
January 26, 2009

(4) Stage of the Hero's Journey: Supreme Ordeal / Final Battle

For Nick Carraway, the protagonist in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, the ordeals, and battles he must deal with come on a literal and symbolic level. As a young man from the Midwest, he must confront the challenging ideologies and social structures of his day; for example, Nick is not used to a world where the rich live so lavishly and can just forget about the existence of the poor because Gatsby has servants who can worry for him. Gatsby is allowed the privilege of only focusing on himself.

However, Nick’s journey throughout the story deals with literal challenges as well. Relationships are a source of strength and struggle for Nick. By dating Jordan, Nick is attempting to become comfortable in a world of affluence. Nick is also able to form a close relationship with Gatsby, and he ends up being the one who discovers Gatsby’s dead body floating in the pool. Gatsby’s death marks the true end of Nick’s life in the West Egg. Gatsby dies because of Wilson’s rash judgments, but suddenly, Nick must deal with the aftermath. One realizes what a strong impact that event has on him when Nick notes that he is writing two years after the funeral. This long passage of time serves as a psychological marker for the difficult strain he must have been under particularly because of the rumors that developed after Gatsby’s death.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Jessica P.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
26 January 2009

(3) Stages of the Monomyth: Cross the Threshold/Road of Tests/Trials/The Belly of the Whale

According to Campbell, a hero must cross the threshold to enter the special world, where he encounters the road of tests/trials and falls into the belly of the whale. In Fitzgerald’s novel, The Great Gatsby, Nick Carraway is identified as the hero and Nick’s relationship with Mr. Gatsby is the special world that Campbell describes. On the last page of this book, readers see Nick’s reflection on Gatsby’s life which was a disillusionment of the American dream versus his simplistic, real life back West. “And as I sat there brooding on the old, unknown world…” (180). Thus, Nick’s friendship with Mr. Gatsby caused him to be sucked into another existence of overwhelming wealth, unrealistic dreams, complicated, damaged love affairs, and open deception.

It can be deduced from the text that Gatsby crossed the threshold to enter the special world when he went to his first party at Gatsby’s house. Previously, Nick had known about Gatsby’s existence and observed his display of wealth, but not until he went to the party, did the relationship with Mr. Gatsby begin.

The Road of Tests and Trials can be defined by relationships. Nick’s encounter and interaction with Jordan can be considered a trial because of the indecisive pain that she caused him. He did not know whether he was in love with Jordan or not, and her presence reminded him of his love back West. Other encounters of Tom’s mistress and husband also were a test, because it drew Nick into Gatsby’s world, where matrimonial deception and lust were prevalent.

Nick’s luncheon with Mr. Gatsby in Chapter four is the dive into the belly of the whale. During this lunch, Mr. Gatsby asks Nick to invite Daisy and him over for tea. It is at this point, the affair with Daisy begins. Having no idea what conflict this is going to cause, this invitation favor is Nick’s first step into turmoil.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. _The Great Gatsby_. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Sarah Tatko
Dr. Hobbs
Eng-435
28 January 2009
Nick’s Epiphany
The epiphany I am addressing is Nick after the car accident. What he comes to realize is the desolate nature of the world he occupied with Gatsby; the world of high society. However, I do not feel that Nick was a permanent resident of this world but merely a temporary participant and observer. He was briefly blinded by the shiny lifestyle in which Gatsby, Daisy, and Tom lived and it lured him in. He did not know the true nature of the world just the representation of it through the jewels, fancy cars, parties, and “fun”. The process of Nick’s epiphany is similar to the inhabitants of Plato’s cave. He was bound to the world of high society by his friends and he could not look around to see the reality of it. Rather, they flashed representations in front of him to present a façade of what the world is. They whisked him to New York, flew him in hydroplanes, and dragged him to parties; all materialistic objects. Yet, when Daisy hits a kills Myrtle, Nick is released from his cave and led back into his world of reality. He finally sees that the fancy things of Gatsby’s world (such as the car) were not true representations because he finally saw the car for what it was a senseless machine that kills. This is exactly what the truth of the world is and Nick is enlightened of this concept.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Jessica P.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
1/28/09

Fitzgerald: “Shaking Hands with Tom”/Plato’s Cave Analogy

In the Great Gatsby, Nick’s summer is spent with the primary characters of the story—Gatsby, Tom, Daisy, and Jordan. On page 178, readers see that Nick shakes Tom’s hand after the plot had dissolved; thus, resulting in an epiphany experience. Developing over the course of the story, this particular epiphany resulted because Nick realizes he is different than Tom and the other characters, who he named “careless people”. Recognizing that Tom had the emotional maturity of a child, he saw that these people were in a world surrounded by themselves and their desires. Using their immense wealth to cover up their mistakes, they simply lived together in a self-centered, worldly-pleasured existence, which was a part of Gatsby’s world. In Plato’s Cave analogy, the people entrapped inside the cave lived in an artificial existence—where one was chained to the wall and forced to look at images. Like these prisoners, Tom and Daisy lived in a fake world. However, after shaking Tom’s hand, Nick broke free from this imprisoned world of disillusionment, and stepped away into the light of honest existence

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. _The Great Gatsby_. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Kristin Brittain

Dr. Hobbs

ENG 435

Plato’s allegory of the cave and "The Great Gatsby"


Nick Carraway, the protagonist in “The Great Gatsby” written by F. Scott Fitzgerald, had an epiphany at the time of Jay Gatsby’s funeral. The epiphany that Nick experienced can be compared to Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” in which an epiphany experienced by the main character leads to enlightenment. Nick was a prisoner of Gatsby’s world of lavish parties, hopes, dreams, and wealth. Nick remained in a state of awe of Gatsby inspired by his notoriety and great portrayals of wealth. However, as Nick soon learned after Gatsby’s death that the world in which he was held captive in is nothing but shadows on the wall. Much like the character held captive in Plato’s allegory that realized the true aspects of the cave’s deception, Nick too eventually realized the falsehood of Gatsby’s reality. Nick’s inability to find mourners to attend Gatsby’s funeral lead him to the epiphany that Gatsby’s world was not real and no one really cared about him. This was Nick’s moment of enlightenment. His desperate search for mourners was Nick’s roadway to truth. After Gatsby’s pitiful funeral Nick realized that the story he told was of the west and not of the east. “I see now that this has been a story of the West, all—Tom and Gatsby, Daisy and Jordan, and I, were all Westerners, and perhaps we possessed some deficiency in common which made us subtly unadaptable to Eastern life” (Fitzgerald 176). Nick’s conclusion was that the westerner’s were inadaptable to life in the East and so Tom, Daisy, and Jordon will remain in their blissful ignorance in the “cave” of the east and Nick will return to the sunlight of the west.


Fitzgerald, F. Scott. _The Great Gatsby_. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Wesley Johnson
Hobbs
Eng 435
February 3, 2009
“The Language of Paradox” inside The Great Gatsby
Cleanth Brooks’ article “The Language of Paradox” illuminates the notion that poetry is virtually paradox. He argues that full understanding of poetry is only available through an examination of the paradoxical nature of the writing. Applying this article to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby presents a few problems. First, Fitzgerald’s work is a novel. So, there is an inherent conflict between the poetic focus of Brooks and the prose of Gatsby. Also, Fitzgerald’s paradoxes are not quite as explicit as those in the poems that Cleanth Brooks examines. Therefore, one may have to take a theoretical leap to imagine the occurrences in The Great Gatsby as paradoxical.
An initial examination of the narrator of Fitzgerald’s novel, Nick, may leave one feeling that he is a rather biased and a non-objective narrator. Sarcasm abounds in his initial descriptions of the lifestyle of Tom, Daisy, and Gatsby. He describes Tom and Daisy’s peripatetic lifestyle as leading them to “wherever people played polo and were rich together” (Fitzgerald 6). This type of bucolic regard for the fellow characters that populate the novel creates a paradoxical ambiguity for the readers. Upon examining this type of behavior, the reader is left only to wonder why Nick is the narrator and how the story is going to be told. But, this paradox is rectified in that Nick’s initial sarcasm illustrates his growth as a character. From beginning as an anti-Gatsby persona, his shift into appreciating the namesake of the book highlights his human unfolding.
The above paradox is fairly visible and clear. But, Fitzgerald’s novel contains some very subtle paradoxes that yield far less concrete or ascertainable explanations. The most obvious paradox occurs early in the text. Nick says, “I was standing beside his bed and he was sitting up…clad in his underwear” (Fitzgerald 38). This strange scene seems to depict a potential homosexual tryst between himself and a strange man. This veiled homoeroticism even continues throughout the novel as Nick’s attempts to woo Jordan Baker appear out of place. The paradox is not explained nor focused. Nick’s rendezvous occurs at the end of a chapter and only encompasses little over a paragraph of mention. Without focusing on this scene too much, and potentially falling into the era of queering the entire text, the best a reader can guess is that this awkward scene serves primarily to reinforce Nick’s position as an outsider in the world of Gatsby. Another blatantly created paradox is the actual nature of James Gatsby. The reader never actually learns his past. A description of his life is presented by Nick, but that is a retelling from Gatsby himself, who could easily be lying as he has throughout the novel.
Whether implied or explicit, paradoxes abound in The Great Gatsby. And, while readers can attempt to explain the cause and reasoning behind the paradox, one is ultimately unable to fully explore this. Unlike the explicit poetic language that Cleanth Brooks examines in “The Language of Paradox,” Fitzgerald’s prose is more dense and potentially problematic. Brooks examined poems (the Romantic and metaphysical works of William Wordsworth and John Donne) that had specific goals and authorial explanations for some of their paradoxes. The Great Gatsby does not have this. The best one can do is to pinpoint the paradox of Fitzgerald; actual understanding of the paradoxes and purposes served is too limiting and provides too narrow a scope with which to examine The Great Gatsby.
Work Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Travis Rathbone

Dr. Hobbs

ENG 435

February 3, 2009

Formalism Application Paper: “Art as Technique” and “The Great Gatsby”

In his essay “Art as Technique,” Viktor Shklovsky champions art as a way of shaking people out of the reverie of life that is a product of a habitual and automatically unconscious way of existence. Art accomplishes this by casting a different light on what would otherwise be automatic sensations; art achieves its end by de-familiarizing our perception of what is already familiar: “The technique of art,” Shklovsky states, “is to make objects ‘unfamiliar,’ to make forms difficult, [and] to increase the difficulty and length of perception…” (Rivkin, Ryan 16). Finding the unfamiliar (and how it is best executed for this essay) in Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby” is no small task, but, under close scrutiny, some interesting revelations can be made.

Fitzgerald’s mastery of the novel is something to marvel at, and the layers produced in his text quickly become apparent when one looks to apply critical theory. The scene to be analyzed is Nick’s introduction to Gatsby’s business partner, Meyer Wolfsheim. Nick’s sense of unease is apparent when he first describes his encounter with the unsightly little man. In fact, Nick appears to be repulsed by Wolfsheim’s presence, and is unsure how to compose himself. When they first shake hands, Wolfsheim pays him no attention at all and is instead conversing with Gatsby. Throughout the entire scene Nick seems to be uncomfortable (and out of his familiar element), and when he is confronted with another one of Wolfsheim’s little eccentricities, his human molar cufflinks, he has no idea how to acknowledge these disturbing pieces of jewelry: “Well!” He states, “That’s a very interesting idea” (Fitzgerald 72). The molar cufflinks are integral, here, and work on multiple levels. Not only is the protagonist of the narrative thrown even further out of his familiar state of existence by the presence of these cufflinks, but emergence of said items also affects the reader outside of the realm of the characters. By introducing an unusual element into the story, the molar cufflinks, Fitzgerald causes the reader to take pause. The familiarity of cufflinks becomes very unfamiliar very quickly. Not only does this speak about the character who is sporting them, but it also causes this same character to become prominent in the reader’s (and Nick’s) mind because of the defamiliarization that occurs.

Another instance (within the same scene) where defamiliarization can be witnessed is in the author’s excellent use of dialogue. By causing Wolfsheim to pronounce his hard c’s as soft g’s, Fitzgerald not only successfully brings to life a character’s speech pattern (one can practically hear the words come to life off the page), but also causes the reader to pay attention and take note. Because of this, Wolfsheim is again brought to life through familiar speech patterns made unfamiliar. In addition, Wolfsheim is the only character whose speech patterns are written phonetically, making him even more of a unique character, and further appealing to the unfamiliar and causing this character to be even more pronounced in the minds of the reader.

When dissecting this scene and viewing what would normally be considered familiar in a different way, one can see the power making something unfamiliar can wield if utilized correctly. Shedding a different light on an object that is normally mundane and automatic can breathe new life into that same lackluster item. By presenting a man who reels against normalcy, he becomes more alive. And that, ultimately, is the object of defamiliarizing; in other words, that is “art as technique.”

Works Cited
Shklovsky, Viktor. "Art as Technique." Literary Theory: An Anthology, Second Edition.
Eds. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. 15 - 21.

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Kristin Brittain

Dr. Hobbs

ENG 435

2/3/2009

Formalist critique: The Great Gatsby

The Great Gatsby written by F. Scott Fitzgerald is a timeless novel. Fitzgerald’s successful use of imagery and symbols emphasize the hollowness that resides within unfulfilled dreams and the drastic occurrences that can happen by desperately trying to obtain them. The universal desire for wanting more takes the characters in the novel through an emotional cyclone.
The Great Gatsby was written during a time of corruption—the American dream that once sought life, liberty, and happiness quickly became the hollow pursuit of wealth and distinction. Many historicists are quick to pinpoint the novel as a commentary on the Jazz Age. Whether Fitzgerald visualized his work as a scathing commentary and representation of America during the 1920’s (his everyday world) is unimportant. When examining the text closely readers realize through Fitzgerald’s use of language, imagery, and symbols that the characters and story line are representations of the haunting universal realization of unfulfilled dreams. The green light at the end of Daisy’s dock is a symbol of such strong desires. For Gatsby, the symbol at first motivates him. Fitzgerald creates an unforgettable image of Gatsby trembling at both the closeness and the proximity of the light. His lifelong dream to be together with Daisy again is witnessed from the very beginning, “he stretched out his arms toward the dark water in a curious way, and, far as I was from him, I could have sworn he was trembling” (20-21). At the very beginning of the novel the light is at first a symbol of hope. In fact, Gatsby is overcome physical overcome by his desires. However, by the end of the novel the green light shows its true colors, so to speak, and it is really a symbol of Gatsby’s unfulfilled dream.
“And as I sat there brooding on the old, unknown world, I thought of Gatsby’s wonder when he first picked out the green light at the end of Daisy’s dock […] and his dream must have seemed so close that he could hardly fail to grasp it. He did not know that it was already behind him, somewhere beyond that vast obscurity beyond the city” (180).
The green light was merely a symbol for what Gatsby wanted most in life, but could never have.
It was also a symbol of the corruption of Gatsby’s dream. The color of the light is green— the same color of money. This light at the end of the dock became a beacon for Gatsby, and Gatsby needed to become affluent before he pushed his way into Daisy’s materialistic world. Gatsby earned his money by illegally bootlegging liquor, and thus the green light became a beacon of corruption and materialism.
Fitzgerald’s use of imagery and symbols truly depicts the universal desire created by unfulfilled dreams. The greatest example is the way Gatsby reached out to the green light as if it could unlock his dream future with Daisy. The green light is a beacon; it stands as a symbol for unfulfilled dreams—what Gatsby wanted the most but could not have.

Work Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Sarah Tatko
Dr. Hobbs
Eng-435
11 February 2009
The Great Gatsby According to Social Classification
A key concept of Pierre Bourdieu’s work “Distinction” is the idea of social classification being a determinate of one’s taste towards an object (237). Society is divided according to different classifications which have been determined over the years by the people. The majority of the population is aware of the classification system and the proper place in which they belong. It is for this reason that individual readers respond to literature in different manners according to their own classifications. Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby is one text that is open to multiple perceptions due to the wide range of class issues present in the book.
A good application of this concept would be to analyze the book through two perspectives: a middle class citizen and an upper class citizen. A member of the middle classification would view upper class members as more conceited and superior due to their social status and amount of wealth. He would also view himself as more “down to earth” and level-headed because, as middle class, he had to work for what he earned. This is a common perception for this social status.
Due to these pre-conceived ideas about the upper class the middle class reader would feel bitterness towards the Buchanans and Gatsby. He would feel a kinship towards Nick because of the personal struggles he undergoes while socializing with the upper class. Nick feels out of place and awkward at Gatsby’s party and the reader would be able to empathize with him. However, an upper class reader would not understand because it is not different from any other social setting; the party guests are people just like Nick. Bourdieu would recognize this as the opposition between free and forced. For example, the middle class reader would feel forced while the upper class reader would feel free, and the difference between the two readers is their understanding of society and the classification system.
Another opposition present in the book is the dominant and the dominated. This theme would be perceived differently by the two readers. The middle class reader would feel that Gatsby and the Buchanans are the dominated; the same would be true with Nick whenever he participates in their social setting. The reasoning is because they are confined by social restrictions and they need to uphold their appearance of superiority. Nick would be viewed as the dominant at the end because he overcame the oppressiveness of high society. On the other hand, an upper class reader would perceive Nick to be the dominated because he could not succeed in the high society. The evidence for this is because he was not able to get over Myrtle’s accident and it weighed him down in life. Each scene is open to different perceptions and interpretations according the reader and their own personal social experiences.
‘
Works Cited
Bourdieu, Pierre. “Distinction.” Literary Theory: An Anthology. 2nd ed. Eds. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. 237-253.
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Cecilia B
Dr. Lee Hobbs
ENG 435
11th February 2009
Reader-Response Approach to The Great Gatsby
Tacit persuasion patterns, as expounded upon by reader-response critic Robert Lanham in his same-titled article, involve the various rhetorical devices that contain similar linguistic structures which in turn are attractive to readers (Lanham 178). This is evident in Fitzgerald’s work, The Great Gatsby, where chapter three alone demonstrates such linguistic patterns which Lanham mentions such as anaphora, isocolon, chiasmus, and alliteration (Lanham 180-183). These rhetorical devices affect a reader’s understanding of the logic within the world of the book and also allow one to observe how the characters in the work are affected by such devices as well. For example, Klipspringer’s rant on the authenticity of Gatsby’s book collection empowers his bold and enraged statements towards other partygoers’ skepticism by the use of anaphora; “What thoroughness! What realism! ...What do you want? What do you expect?” (46). Such lines of similar opening construction do not simply startle the logic of the characters into rethinking their fixed beliefs but also become ingrained in the reader’s memory. Further in the text’s chapter, inverted anaphora is additionally employed to impact the reader and emphasize the singularity of the figure Gatsby: “girls were putting their heads on men’s shoulders, girls were swooning backward playfully into men’s arms,” then its negative counterpart follows: “but no one swooned backward on Gatsby, no French bob touched Gatsby’s shoulder, no swinging quartets were formed with Gatsby’s head” (50).
The concept of isocolon is also scattered throughout chapter three of Fitzgerald’s work. This device uses “phrases of equal length and corresponding structure” (Lanham 182) and is expressed in the following lines: “with mops and scrubbing-brushes and hammers and garden-shears” and “A celebrated tenor had sung in Italian, and a notorious contralto had sung in jazz” (Fitzgerald 39, 47). Each of these lines follows the ABAB pattern and therefore satisfies the reader’s sense of mathematics, symmetry, and reason. Furthermore, chiasmus and isocolon are both at work to present logic in Nick’s evaluation of the intimate party setting: “It understood you just as far as you wanted to understand yourself, it believed in you as you would like to believe in yourself” (48); with this passage, inversion is evident in each independent clause but the two clauses exhibit similar structure patterns when paired. Finally alliteration is the last of Lanham’s lecture on tacit persuasion patterns and, though a simplistic model of persuasive word patterns, saturates Fitzgerald’s third chapter such as “repairing the ravages,” “funny fellow,” and “sound of silver scales” (Fitzgerald 39, 43, 47). These straightforward coupled words involve concentrated symmetry and thus appeal to the reader and his logical control.

Works Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York: Macmillan, 1980.
Lanham, Robert. “Tacit Persuasion Patterns.” Literary Theory: An
Anthology. Eds. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. New York: Blackwell
Pub., 1998. 177-194.

Ava Littlefield
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
16 February 2009
Seeking out the Structure in Gatsby
According to Stephen Lynn, author of Texts and Context, “structuralism is a pattern or design that is somehow “in” a text, that the reader must actively perceive” (Lynn 107). Structuralism is focused on both the text and the reader’s response; more specifically it aims to reveal how the text affected the reader and why. The intended purpose of structuralism is to “expose the system of meaning that enabled the response of the reader” (Lynn 110).
Several of the structural systems that exist in F.Scott Fitzgerald’s novel The Great Gatsby include the structure of plot formulas, romantic, and ironic structures, and patterns of narrative structure among the characters (Tyson 226-244). Each type of structural system within the novel actively influences the reader’s perception of what is taking place. A close examination of each structural system allows the reader to associate the text to its proper discourse.
Conflict and resolution, struggle and reconciliation, and separation and union are used to create the plots of formula structure. These types of structures are implemented through the “actants, also referred to as the characters (Tyson 225). The character of Nick serves two very important parts of this type of structure. Nick is the “hero’s helper and a quester” (Tyson 225). Nick attempts to help Gatsby on his own quest to regain the love of Daisy Miller but in the process is on his own quest for individual identity and belonging. Nick’s conflict is that he is unsatisfied with his current position in life and desires a deeper fulfillment. He finds his resolution to his conflict at the end of the novel when he realizes that he “was unadaptable to Eastern life” (Fitzgerald 176). His desire to return home was directly impacted by his own individual struggle to find identity. Nick’s attempts to separate himself from the West failed and resulted in his realization that he will always be united with what he refers to as “My Middle West” (Fitzgerald 176).
Gatsby “embodies the structure of romance (the mythos of summer, the quest)” (Tyson 239). Gatsby’s attempt to reclaim the past (his quest to reunite with Daisy) is unsuccessful. Gatsby is reunited with Daisy but only momentarily. His quest is unsuccessful because Daisy remains with Tom and Gatsby is murdered. Nick’s narrative serves as the “structure of irony (the mythos of winter, realism)” (Tyson 239). Nick initial desires were to lead a lifestyle similar to that of Gatsby’s. However, when everything is done and said Nick comes to the realization that his life, the one in the West, is superior to Gatsby’s. Nick’s search for identity results in his return home, where he can find happiness. The structure of romance is overridden by the structure of irony because by the “close of the novel Nick realizes that romance is no longer possible in the modern world” (Tyson 239).
One very important structure that can exist within the novel is the patterns of narrative structure. The narrative pattern of structure enables the reader to associate the text with its proper discourse. Some of the patterns included in this structure are the wealthy world, the poverish world, the combining of the two worlds, the triangle of romance, the explosion of the triangle, the intersection, and finally the narrator’s reflection at the end of the novel. Gatsby serves as the wealthy world. Gatsby lives in a mansion which Nick describes as “a colossal affair by any standard” (Fitzgerald 5). Nick on the other hand serves as the poverish world. He lives in the part of West Egg that is “less fashionable” (Fitzgerald 5). Irregardless of the social division that exists between Nick and Gatsby, they still become acquaintances. This union of the two worlds, rich and poor, is a typical structure that is seen in many different texts. The union between the wealthy and the poverish is but one element to consider when attempting identifying the discourse that the text belongs to. The triangle of romance that takes place between Gatsby, Daisy, and Tom can also be considered a structure. This type of romantic triangle is typical within texts as is the explosion of the triangle (Gatsby confronting Tom at the hotel about his feelings towards Daisy). The final narrative structure that takes place within the novel is the narrator’s reflection or meditation. The narrator’s reflection (Nick’s realism) is another element that the reader might consider when trying to categorize the text to the appropriate discourse.
The application of a Structuralist approach is an important part of understanding how the reader is affected by the text and why. It allows the reader to “identify the subjects, the verbs, the modifiers so that the sentences being read make sense” (Lynn 107). By approaching the text using Ferdinand Saussure’s synchronic view of structuralism the reader is able to “look at the relationships of all the parts of the language” (Lynn 109) rather than examining a singular element of it. Saussure’s view of structuralism “seeks to find commonalities and distinguishing differences, bringing a scientific approach to the language” (Lynn 109). These distinctions and differences are the “basis for the underlying structures” (Lynn 109) within the language of the text.

Work Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York: Scribner, 1925. 5-176.
Lynn, Stephen. “Opening Up the Text: Structuralism and Deconstruction”. Text and Context: Writing About Literature with Critical Theory 5th ed. New York: Pearson, 2008. 107-10.
Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User Friendly Guide 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2006. 225-44.

Jessica P.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
2/25/09

Deconstructing The Great Gatsby Through Differance

Jacques Derrida wrote an essay in 1968, Differance, which draws from the work of Saussure, Heidegger, and Nietzsche to justify and explain his theory of differance (Derrida 278). Although it is not a word or a concept, differance embodies both meanings of the verb, “to differ”, and is at the root of everything. Representing differing both in the temporal sense and unique identity factor, differance can be used to deconstruct literary texts such as F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby (Derrida 279).

In The Great Gatsby, readers can identify the differance by examining the differences that make up the story. One example is Fitzgerald’s description of the East and West. Readers must understand that these two geographical locations only exist because there are differences that separate them apart. Nick, originally from the West, is dissatisfied with living there; therefore, he comes to the East to work in the bond business, hoping to find a better life. In the beginning, the East is the idealized, desired, good location; however, by the end, Nick becomes disillusioned with the East and its role switches from good to bad (Fitzgerald 3, 176) In addition, readers find that this difference exists in the present. Thus, the differences that identity the East and the West are not from the past or the future. Instead, they are in a present state of being because one exists due to the contrast of the other.

Another differance that can be easily identified is the contrast between Nick and Jordan’s character. Specifically, Jordan is identified as a dishonest individual (Fitzgerald 58). In contrast, Nick identifies himself as “one of the few honest people I have ever known” (Fitzgerald 59). Thus, this is an example of differance because it represents a definite identity contrast, and in the temporal sense is a present state that they are both identified with. If both Nick and Jordan acted the same way, then there would be no reason to distinguish their different characteristics. However, this distinct difference allows differance to come in play; thus, naming the characters honest and dishonest.

Since differance is at the root of everything, then one can find it everywhere in deconstructing literary texts such as The Great Gatsby. Differance deconstructs texts to reveal the structure that the book, even down to language it is comprised of. Thus, readers find that meaning is unlocked through the understanding of the differance.

Works Cited
Derrida, Jacques. “Difference”. Literary Theory: An Anthology. 2nd ed. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004.278-299.
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. _The Great Gatsby_. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Travis R
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
4 March 2009

Scrutinizing Swastikas: A New Historical Approach to Fitzgerald

Though Louis Montrose’s essay, “Professing the Renaissance: The Poetics and Politics of Culture,” describes (in detail) many aspects of New Historicism, applying the actual essay to a text is somewhat difficult. So instead of applying the essay itself to Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, the aim will be to apply New Historicism as a whole to the work and explain how further research may be performed.

Upon an intense scrutinizing of The Great Gatsby, one seemingly minor detail stuck out among the rest: a swastika. Near the end of the novel, Nick Carraway travels to the office of Jay Gatsby’s shady business partner, Meyer Wolfsheim, in order to invite him to Gatsby’s funeral. The name on the office door inspires no interest in Nick, but should to modern day readers: “The door that I pushed open, on the advice of an elevator boy, was marked “The Swastika Holding Company,” (Fitzgerald 170). This information arouses no emotion in Nick, nor perhaps would it do so for the common reader in 1925. But the same apathetic reaction by a more modern reader should not be assumed. Upon reading the title on the office door, one might be inspired to ask: was Fitzgerald a modern day Nostradamus, attempting to warn his audience of a group that would become a scourge to humanity little more than a decade after the novel’s publication? This is an interesting train of thought, though ultimately flawed, and upon further investigation, some interesting background information gives way to an interesting reading.

Research turned up an article discussing prohibition era New York City and a bootlegger, Larry Fay, who owned nightclubs and used the symbol of the swastika as a good luck charm. With Fitzgerald’s knowledge of the city and its night life, he would have certainly known of Fay. It does not even seem implausible that Gatsby’s character was based loosely off this actual man: “Fay's sartorial tastes and lifestyle were very much like Gatsby's; he was given to loud shirts and ties, and once returned from London with twelve trunks of clothes” (Gross 1). Basing Gatsby off of this unsavory person does not help laud the fictional character’s overall good-but-misunderstood disposition. If The Swastika Holding Company of the novel is based off an authentic, unlawful business, it does not seem logical that the fictional business would pride itself on altruistic endeavors. Therefore, Gatsby—seeing as he was a business associate of this company’s owner—and his true nature are both suspect.

In order to continue this line of research, I would need to perform an exhaustive investigation of multiple facets of the novel. Because The Great Gatsby is set during the prohibition, I could begin by searching for books and articles concerning this topic. Fitzgerald and the New York City bourgeoisie night life would be another logical step in accumulating information for a New Historical look at the novel. In addition to this, swastikas and the rise of Nazism might be another avenue to pursue. In the end, performing background research can bring to light some interesting discoveries, and perhaps alter one’s perception of a work and its author. The research performed here, though not exhaustive, was already enough to alter the perception (or interpretation) of a small aspect of The Great Gatsby. It would be interesting to see what dedicating more time to delving into the past might uncover and how this knowledge would, perhaps, further add to the reading experience.

Works Cited

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Gross, Dalton and Mary-Jean Gross. “F. Scott Fitzgerald's American swastika: the prohibition
underworld and 'The Great Gatsby.'” Literature Resource Center. 1994. GALE.
3 Mar. 2009

Montrose, Louis. "Professing the Renaissance: The Poetics and Politics of Culture."
Literary Theory: An Anthology, 2nd Ed. Eds. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan.
Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. 584 - 591.

-------------------------------------------

Remark from Professor:

Travis, this sounds fascinating

You will find that much has been written about Antisemitism elements in both Fitzgerald and Hemingway's works. To get away from what has already been covered, it sounds like a an investigation into the Swastika as a symbol would be a good start and how that symbol was "read" by Americans in the period between the two world wars (preceding the rise of the Third Reich).Good work.

~Dr. Hobbs

Jessica P.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
3/4/09

Understanding The Great Gatsby through Music

F. Scott Fitzgerald novel, The Great Gatsby, was published in 1925 by Charles Scribner’s Sons. Understanding this novel requires a familiarity of American culture during the 1920’s. Thus, researching the historical meaning behind different parts of the book will give readers insight that they may not otherwise have obtained.

One interesting aspect of Fitzgerald’s book to examine is the music that was chosen to be included in the story. In particular, the scene in chapter five, featuring Daisy, Gatsby, Nick, and Klipspringer, has two songs that are mentioned. This scene begins with Daisy, Gatsby, and Nick browsing through Gatsby’s house when Gatsby summons his guest, Klipspringer, to play them a song on the piano. Reluctantly, Klipspringer plays Love Nest. Stopping after this song, Gatsby encourages and orders his guest to continue playing. Readers are then given the lyrics to “Ain’t We Got Fun” dissected by a paragraph of setting description.

Looking closely at this scene, readers should question why these two songs were chosen to be played. Thus, researching whether these songs were real or fiction is useful information. In fact, both of these songs were composed and popular during the 1920’s.
Love Nest is a song used in George M. Cohen musical, “Mary”, with music by Louis A. Hirsch and Lyrics by Otto Harback. Further, it was sung and popularized by John Steel in 1920 (http:www.nme.com/video/id/kgm6xrdLiggl). Once establishing that the songs are real, readers should question why these songs were picked. Looking up the lyrics to these songs may provide insight to Gatsby and Daisy’s affection for each other. Researching the music that was popular during this time period would also prove useful as one must know whether readers at the time Fitzgerald published The Great Gatsby would have recognized these songs. Readers can use books like Twentieth-century Music: An Introduction to help familiarize themselves with music of the 1920s. More significance can be placed on the song choices if these songs were popular and well identifiable to the average reader.

Examining these two songs in the Great Gatsby can be useful in determining the mood and purpose of the scene. Not understanding what these songs imply or why they were popular is critical information necessary for understanding the scene. Thus, readers must research these songs in order to gain complete benefits of the novel.

Works Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.
Salzman, Eric. Twentieth-century Music: An Introduction. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1967.
NME First For Music News. IPC MEDIA 1996-2009. March 3, 2009. .

Kristin Brittain

Dr. Hobbs

ENG 435

3/2/09

Power and discipline within The Great Gatsby

The Great Gatsby written by F. Scott Fitzgerald is a commentary on America during the Jazz Age. Power and money are crucial to the characters within the novel which lead them into moral decay. During the time when “the self made man” gained rising status Jay Gatsby climbed up the ranks at whatever means. Gatsby had no ruling authority figure and was excluded from the only source that held power over him, Daisy Buchanan. The society in which The Great Gatsby is immersed in is based on disciplinary models used in seventeenth and eighteenth century Europe according to Michel Foucault’s, “Discipline and Punish.” Because Gatsby is stuck within the disciplinary model he, the society he lived in, along with the people he interacts with, spiral downward into their delusional world of emptiness and greed.
The disciplinary model Foucault dissects primarily separates people from one another. It created division amongst everyone. This correlates to the novel when it comes to East and West Egg—Gatsby and Daisy. The division is clear: “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. […] Across the courtesy bay the white palaces of fashionable East Egg glittered along the water” (5). The disciplinary model that Gatsby operated within kept him in “a segmented, immobile, frozen space. Each individual is fixed in his place. And, if he moves, he does so at the risk of his life” (Foucault 551). Both Gatsby and Daisy were fixed in their own world. Gatsby could not seek out Daisy; he had to get helpers Nick and Jordan. And, when Gatsby finally reunited with Daisy everyone eventually met their demise; the main victim was Gatsby himself. So, when Gatsby did try to move out from his “fixed place” he risked his life and died.
The characters within The Great Gatsby exist in their own world. This is actually fitting of the time period. Primarily the division among Gatsby and Daisy are the strongest. Gatsby’s ruling authority figure is not present in his life. Thus, he worked outside of the law to gain the money and power that is so vital to not only him but the other characters in the novel. Gatsby is trapped within the disciplinary model, secluded from the society he truly wanted, and spiraled downward until he died.

Works Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. “The Great Gatsby.” New York: Scribner, 2004.
Foucault, Michel. “Discipline and Punishment.” Literary Theory: An Anthology 2nd Ed. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 1998. 549- 566.

Sarah Tatko
Dr. Hobbs
Eng-435
11 March 2009
The Neo-Colonial Impressions in The Great Gatsby
According to Ania Loomba in Colonialism – Postcolonialism, many societies today do not live in a postcolonial culture. Rather, they live in a neo-colonial culture because they are still dependent upon the culture of their colonizer (1103). Fitzgerald demonstrates this in his book The Great Gatsby where the American dream acts as the colonizer as it forces the “natives” to assimilate to its traditions and rituals.
In the novel, the major characters are all from the west and come from meager means; this includes Gatsby, Nick, Tom, Daisy, and Jordan. At first it appears that it is the east that colonizes these characters because they all move from the west to east which is where the action of the story is set. However, they only moved to the east as way to capture their American dream. This is because the east is viewed as progressive and a place where the money is made and in order for them to achieve their goal they must take the eastern culture and that of high society as their own; this is where the problem begins.
When the characters take the rituals of high society as their own they become greedy and have difficulty remembering who they really are. Daisy wants to be with both Tom and Gatsby and expects Tom to accept it, while, Tom is being hypocritical because he has his mistress Myrtle on the side. Nick just wants to be a part of something and to have friends and Gatsby wants Daisy all to himself. Nothing is ever good enough for these characters and they become capitalistic in the idea that they always want more.
The reader is not able to see the neo-colonial culture until the end of the book because it occurs after their American dreams are crushed by the accident and the death of Myrtle and Gatsby. After these events Tom and Daisy flee, Jordan becomes engaged to another man, and Nick realizes that this culture is not meant for him (he is the only character who can be designated as postcolonial). Tom and Daisy still are dependent upon the rituals of high society (the colonizing culture) because they no longer belong to the old culture, yet, they do not belong to the new either. This can be witnessed when Nick runs into Tom two months after the funeral: “When I went to give up that flat and saw that damn box of dog biscuits sitting there on the sideboard, I sat down and cried like a bay. By God it was awful” (Fitzgerald 178-179). This demonstrates Tom’s dependence because he is lost without this accessory of the high life. Jordan is another example because she quickly becomes engaged to another man during the two months. It is clear that Tom, Daisy, and Jordan are all living in a neo-colonial culture because they are caught between their old culture in the west and that of the American dream.

Works Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.
Loomba, Ania. “Situating Colonial and Postcolonial Studies.” Literary Theory: An Anthology. 2nd ed. Eds. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. 1100-1111.

Cecilia B
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
11th March 2009
Postcolonial Reading of Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby
The postcolonial implications in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel, The Great Gatsby, are diluted in comparison with C.C. Eldridge’s essay on imperial ideology and colonialist intention, yet there are still instances of social/cultural intrusion with Gatsby character Tom Buchanan. Of Buchanan, C.C. Eldridge would suggest Tom exhibits imperial motives since Eldridge’s idea of cultural transformation and expansion of empire (1091) are relevant to Tom’s actions with his wife, Daisy, and mistress, Myrtle. Beginning with Daisy, Tom metaphorically expands empire and capitalizes on new resources by marrying the girl with “the largest of banners and the largest of lawns” (Fitzgerald 75). In effect, Tom’s marriage to Daisy Fay is similar to the Victorian colonists’ desire to increase estate. Additionally, Tom’s surname alone is transcribed to Daisy’s in traditional marital fashion which is itself an extension of personal domain. Through matrimony, Tom is able to add a new individual under the ‘empire’ Buchanan while simultaneously making use of Daisy’s fortune. What’s more, Tom’s interaction with Myrtle Wilson is also indicative of imperialist ideology since he is concerned with re-colonizing her social status and class. As the wife of a middle-class car mechanic, Myrtle has neither the money nor the social connections involved with Tom’s aristocratic station. To essentially level Myrtle’s ‘savage’ position to the refined class, Tom lavishes her with expensive clothes and an apartment with which she can engage in upper-class social relations. Tom’s action with Myrtle are similar to the nineteenth-century colonizer who perceives other native peoples to be inferior because of their lack of material and technological goods, and as a result strives to ‘bless the savages’ (Eldridge 1091) with his culture.
Works Cited
Eldridge, C.C. “The Revival of the Imperial Spirit.” 1996. Literary Theory: An
Anthology. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. New York: Blackwell Pub., 1998.
1090-1099.
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York: Macmillan, 1980.

Ava L.
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
14 March 2009

Artificial Love
According to Sigmund Freud in his 1920 essay “Beyond the Principle of Pleasures” humans possess two types of psychological drives. The first drive is influenced by an individual desire to secure attachments in life for pleasure. The second, known as the Death Drive, is influenced by the desire to prohibit oneself from becoming attached to anything or anyone. The Death Drive is a predominant drive within F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel The Great Gatsby. Most of the characters within the novel suffer from a psychological defense mechanism called the fear of intimacy, as described by Lois Tyson in her literary text Critical Theory Today. Tyson defines this defense as a “fear of emotional involvement with another human being” (Tyson 16).
Some of the ways that this psychological defense is utilized by Fitzgerald is seen through characters like Tom and Daisy Buchanan, Nick Carraway, Myrtle Wilson, and Jay Gatsby. The Buchanan’s do not present themselves as a happily married couple. The tension that exists between both Tom and Daisy is very apparent. They both step outside of their marriage and engage in extramarital affairs; Tom with Mrs. Myrtle Wilson and another woman only revealed as one of his chambermaids, and Daisy with Jay Gatsby. Although both of them eventually become aware of the extramarital affairs that each is involved in, they resolve to remain married. Tyson regards this type of behavior as “a drama of dysfunctional love” (Tyson 40). Both Tom and Daisy find it easier to remain in a relationship that is free of intimate expectations.
Nick exhibits similar behavior concerning his relationship with Jordan Baker. Although Nick is intrigued by Jordan, which he himself states claiming that “I wasn’t actually in love, but felt a sort of tender curiosity” (Gatsby 57), he purposefully remains aloof, continually imposing limitations on the time that he spends with her. Nick always signs his letters love but states that “Nevertheless there was a vague understanding that had to be tactfully broken off before I was free” (Gatsby 59). This statement on Nick’s behalf reinforces Tyson’s assertion that he is one of the numerous characters within the novel that suffer from a fear of intimacy.
Fitzgerald presents Jordan Baker similarly to the way the other characters are presented with one exception. Jordan seems to genuinely care for Nick, yet she too remains aloof at times. There are subtle hints throughout Gatsby that suggest Jordan would consider embarking in a relationship with Nick if given the opportunity. However, although Jordan seems to be emotionally attached to Nick, there are also comments that allude to the fact that Jordan may also suffer from a fear of intimacy. One such example is when Nick and Jordan are at one of Gatsby’s parties. Jordan states that she likes Gatsby’s large parties because they are always so intimate and that small parties prohibit privacy (Gatsby 49).
Myrtle Wilson’s affair with Tom Buchanan is also an example of the psychological defense, fear of intimacy. Myrtle enjoys the outward affection that Tom shows her. Tom dotes over Myrtle but in a sexual way, free from any emotional ties. Myrtle and Tom have an unspoken arrangement between themselves that stifles any intimate expectations from being imparted. Myrtle is under the misconception that her relationship with Tom will somehow free her from the bonds of intimacy that her husband George places upon her. If she is able to free herself from George’s expectations through her adulterous behavior with Tom, then she can live her life carefree and without any commitment to others.
Unlike some of the other characters within the novel, Jay Gatsby’s fear of intimacy is not as obvious. To understand the depths of Gatsby’s fear, the reader must first recollect on Gatsby’s history. Gatsby has done a great deal of traveling throughout his life. He was in a war, he isolated himself almost completely from his parents and as an adolescent, and he found it difficult to express an interest in girls, with the exception of Daisy. Gatsby has a different perception of Daisy because she is of upper class and does not seem to be like the other girls. Gatsby’s relationship with Daisy serves as a symbolic form of his own security and acceptance in the upper class. Not only does he achieve social elevation, but he also regards Daisy as a trophy of his elevation. When he returns from his travels abroad, the only unfinished business that he feels compelled to complete is re-securing his relationship with Daisy. Although he and Daisy do reunite, it is only for a brief time because Daisy does not want to engage in anything that requires intimacy. Daisy departs with Tom to continue to repeat her lifestyle of prohibiting intimate expectations. Freud regards Daisy’s behavior as a “compulsion to repeat” (Freud 434). Daisy’s behavior parallels Gatsby’s desire to return to the lifestyle he once had with Daisy.
The many love triangles that exist within Fitzgerald’s novel are not fueled by the desire to be intimate. The characters within the novel are not in search of some pleasure principle that will allow them to be completed by another individual, but rather the desires to keep them from having to commit to such relationships. The fact that Fitzgerald’s characters chose to repeat all of their unwanted situations and endure these painful emotions in transference reinforces the fear of intimacy that they all seem to suffer from (Freud 435).

Work Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York: Scribner, 1925. 49-57.
Freud, Sigmund. “Beyond the Principle Pleasures.” 1920. Literary Theory: An Anthology 2nd ed. Eds. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. 434-35.
Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User Friendly Guide. New York: Routledge, 2006. 16-40.

Liz H

Dr. Hobbs

ENG 435

March 24, 2009

The Great Gatsby and Trauma

In F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel, The Great Gatsby, the protagonist Nick Carraway must deal with a number of difficult situations: from learning to fit in with this new society and expectations of conduct to the unfortunate death of Myrtle. I believe one can apply essential concepts from “The Black Hole of Trauma” ” by Bessel A. van der Kolk and Alexander C. McFarlane to Nick especially after the death of Gatsby.

The novel ends with Nick reflecting back on what a mad circus Gatsby’s funeral was, and he is able to share his reflections nearly two years after Gatsby’s unfortunate and untimely death. This long passage of time between the story’s narration helps to support Kolk and McFarlane’s premise that trauma does indeed affect an individual’s ability to cope and think rationally. Nick is overwhelmed by the loss of his friend, and he is unable to best articulate just what the loss means to him immediately after his death. The passage of time is realistic and lends an air of credibility to the story overall because death is an experience that every reader would experience at some point in time.

Trauma as Kolk and McFarlane allege is indeed a part of the condition of being human. Nick Carraway’s experiences of the events that surround Gatsby’s death support these claims even though he is not diagnosed with PTSD or any other severe or adverse mental ailments.

Works Cited

Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Van der Kolk, Bessel A., and Alexander C. McFarlane. "The Black Hole of Trauma."
Literary Theory: An Athology. Eds. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. 2nd ed. Malden: Blackwell, 2008. 487-502.

Travis Rathbone
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
8 April 2009

East and West Egg, Sunny Side Up: Societal Assimilation in The Great Gatsby

In Lisa Lowe’s essay concerning Asian American literature, “Heterogeneity, Hybridity, Multiplicity: Marking Asian American Differences,” she spends a significant amount of time presenting the dangers of both nationalism and assimilation. Like radical nationalism, complete assimilation into a culture creates a dichotomy, which can be a breeding ground for negative aspects of character: “Their nationalism…can be distorted easily into racism, territorialism, separatism, or ethnic dictatorships” (Tyson 1038). For Lowe, the answer does not lie in either extreme but, rather, in the middle somewhere between the two opposite ends of the spectrum; Asian Americans should find a middle ground between the East and the West where they can accept American culture while still incorporating their Asian roots. In The Great Gatsby, by F. Scott Fitzgerald, the dangers of assimilation become apparent if one looks closely. For Nick Carraway, assimilation into the culture of the East Egg was his main purpose. His purpose changes at the end of the novel but not until horrific events transpire.

The dichotomy of East and West is prevalent throughout The Great Gatsby. Beginning with Nick’s career in the military where he fought in the East, enjoying it so much he was restless back in his Mid West home. Because of this, he relocates East (from his home in the Middle West) for a change of scenery and to try his hand in the bonds business. After arriving East, He settles in West Egg, not only the less posh of the two residential Eggs but also the most geographically unsavory—it is the most “West” of the two. In the novel, Nick’s pursuit of complete assimilation into the world of the East is sharply trenchant, but he is not the only character to attempt this same end. Both Myrtle Wilson and Jay Gatsby were casualties of failed attempts to assimilate into a culture to which they were not born.

Jay Gatsby did not originally hail from a wealthy background. Instead, he spent most of his life in pursuit of such a lifestyle, and even though he achieved great success and perpetuated a façade of wealth and class, he was still unable to feel like he fully belonged to his beloved social tier. He did, after all, live in the West Egg. In the end, his pursuit of the East would be his downfall, and he met his demise before he could fully assimilate and establish himself in the culture and status of the East. Myrtle Wilson is another character whose attempts at grandeur were thwarted. Like Gatsby, she was not satisfied with her lot in life, her subsistence in West Egg married to a mechanic. So, she attempted to rise above her conceived, mediocre notion of existence in the West by perpetuating a relationship with Tom Buchanan, a patron of the East. Myrtle attempted to live a life of wealth, with her apartment in the city and her taste for the more expensive clothing. However, Myrtle also never fully achieved assimilation into the society of the East, for she too fell prey to the pursuit of wealth as her life was cut short by an icon of prosperity—the automobile.

In the end, the only character who attempted assimilation and survived was Nick. Unlike Gatsby and Myrtle, Nick found an existence between the two worlds of the East and the West. He may have attempted assimilation into the East, but he did not succeed: “perhaps we possessed some deficiency in common which made us subtly unadaptable to Eastern life” (Fitzgerald 176). Indeed, it seems the point of Lowe’s essay is not far removed from the point of Fitzgerald’s story. Even though it is folly to suggest there is only one truth embedded in either the novel or the essay, the reeling against complete cultural assimilation presented in both texts is difficult to overlook.

Work Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.

Lowe, Lisa. "Heterogeneity, Hybridity, Multiplicity: Marking Asian American Differences."
1991. Literary Theory: An Anthology, 2nd Ed. Eds. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. 1031 - 1050.

Cecilia B
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
15th April 2009
Feminist Reading of Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby
Judith Butler’s claims that sex and gender are inextricably linked because of societal ideology are greatly applicable of the female characters in Fitzgerald’s Gatsby. In effect, Jordan Baker and Myrtle Wilson are molded under a sexist patriarchal lens. For example, before the concept of the New Woman, negative and powerless connotations were generally ascribed to the idea of a woman, and this rings true for Jordan’s and Myrtle’s condition as they are continually placed in defaming situations.
To start, Jordan comes off as a liar between her interactions with Nick when she blatantly deceives him about leaving the top down on a car she had borrowed from a friend after a rainstorm. Despite the fact that she is an accomplished golfer and can therefore uphold her own autonomy without the assistance of a male, Jordan is still portrayed negatively. Even as a golfer, Jordan is accused of cheating through bribery and is therefore unable to support herself righteously. In a man’s sport and even the masculine task of driving, Jordan is construed as careless and manipulative.
Moreover, Myrtle’s character is overtly sexual, carrying “her surplus flesh sensuously” (29) and thus destructive to her fate. To explicate, Myrtle’s extramarital affair with Tom Buchanan only proves fatal for her rather than proving consequential for Tom. For instance, Tom never loses his reputation or his wife because of his infidelity yet Myrtle suffers death for the same transgression.
Work Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York: Macmillan, 1980.

Sarah Tatko
Dr. Hobbs
Eng-435
15 April 2009
Imperial Feminism in The Great Gatsby
Gayatri Chakrovaorty Spivak discusses in her 1986 essay, “Three Women’s Texts and a Critique of Imperialism”, about imperial feminism. This concept is based on the idea that literature, especially female characters or authors, can demonstrate the role of women in society through imperialism (Spivak 838). The reason for this is because literature is used as a tool in English society to produce the cultural representation of English imperialism, therefore, it can be used to comment feminism as well. Fitzgerald’s novel, The Great Gatsby, illustrates the idea of imperialism through its female characters.
One of the first characters is Myrtle. Myrtle is having an affair with Tom Buchanan. Tom, however, is married to Daisy which makes Myrtle the mistress. Because Myrtle is the mistress she remains a secret and in seclusion from society but she does not like this and attempts to speak out and expand. The way she does this is through taunting Tom about Daisy: “Tom Buchanan and Mrs. Wilson stood face to face, discussing in impassioned voices whether Mrs. Wilson had any right to mention Daisy’s name [. . .] shouted Mrs. Wilson. ‘I’ll say it whenever I want to! Daisy! Dai—‘ Making a short deft movement, Tom Buchanan broke her nose with his open hand” (Fitzgerald 37). In this scene Myrtle attempts to assert her right to imperialism by expanding her role, however, Tom effectively her by breaking her nose. Fitzgerald is commenting on the wrong way for women to make their way in society; it is not through force because they will be shut down.
Yet, Fitzgerald does provide the readers with a successful character who uses imperialism to her advantage, and this is Daisy Buchanan. Throughout the novel Daisy is seeing Gatsby behind Tom’s back; even in front of his back. She is able to enjoy her married privileges while being able to have fun with Gatsby. While Daisy’s set up ultimately causes ruin, it is interesting to note who it causes ruin for, Myrtle. Myrtle is the only female character who ends up dead and it is because of Daisy’s successful imperialistic qualities kill Myrtle’s ineffective qualities. Symbolically it represents the proper way for women to expand because it kills the improper way.

Works Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. “Three Women’s Texts and a Critique of Imperialsim.” Literary Theory: An Anthology. 2nd ed. Eds. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. 838-853.

Kristin Brittain
Dr. Hobbs
ENG 435
4/13/09
Homosexuality’s indirectness within The Great Gatsby
Epistemology of the Closet is a book written by Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick concerning gay and lesbian representations within literature. Sedgwick focuses on deconstruction in the theme of binary oppositions that create categories which mirror cultural situations. The Great Gatsby is a timeless novel written by F. Scott Fitzgerald that represents the binary oppositions of heterosexual over homosexual.
The binary of heterosexual over homosexual reflects the cultural dichotomy of homosexuality being inferior to heterosexuality. Fitzgerald reflects society’s refusal to fully acknowledge the homosexual choice of lifestyle. Towards the end of chapter two Nick accompanied Mr. Mckee home. Mr. Mckee requested to see Nick again, “Come to lunch some day” he said. After agreeing to see Mr. Mckee again and an interesting employment of ellipses the text un-expectantly jumped to Nick standing beside Mr. Mckee in his bed only in his underwear. “… I was standing beside his bed and he was sitting up between the sheets, clad in his underwear, with a great portfolio in his hands” (Fitzgerald 38). The possibility of the nature of the men’s encounter is left questionable because the text does not supply any other information on the two men’s possible sexual encounter. Fitzgerald does not directly address the reasoning’s of Mr. Mckee’s almost nakedness and Nick’s presence in his bedroom. Instead the possibility of the men’s homosexuality is hinted at mirroring society’s actual binary opposition of heterosexuality’s acceptance over homosexuality. “It makes every difference that these impactions of homo/heterosexual definition took place in a setting, not of spacious emotional or analytic impartiality, but rather of urgent homophobic pressure to devalue one of the two nominally symmetrical forms of choice” (Sedgwick 913).
Fitzgerald refused to pronounce the homosexual aspects of The Great Gatsby. Instead, Fitzgerald simply hinted at the likelihood of a possible homosexual encounter between Mr. Mckee and Nick. This skirting around the issue of homosexuality reflects the society in which Fitzgerald lived in.

Works Cited
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Scribner, 1999.
Sedgwick, Eve. “Epistemology of the Closet.” Literary Theory: An Anthology 2nd Ed. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 1998. 912-921.