Finished: July 5, 2024
Why I read this
Does there really need to be a story behind reading The Great Gatsby? I feel like it is a title so ingrained in modern culture that I could come up with a half a dozen anecdotes for what motivated me to read it (recently discussing it with a friend, seeing articles about the American Dream or the current and increasing wealth gap, seeing a film starring Leonardo Dicaprio, or seeing one if its copies prominently displayed in a book shop while you browse. Hell, even seeing an unrelated story of rich people doing crazy things, like then Indian Marriage where Justin Bieber privately performed makes you instantly think “Gatsby”). At the end of the day I think it is just the constant appeal of a story about the American dream that keeps people coming forever back to this title, and as it applies to everyone it applies to me.
What I learned
On the very first page we are confronted with a life lesson that I’ve seen echoed through several other books (fiction and non fiction alike) from our narrator Nick that states “Whenever you feel like criticising anyone just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had.” perfectly setting the tone for the rest of the book. Each character we meet has had, in their own way, a life full of remarkable chances. Yet despite the warning of Nick’s father few, if any, of these characters seem content with their lot. Actually, it goes on to show that they are all pretty discontent with their lots. Each of them spending most of the novel unhappily trying to “fix” their lives. Rich or poor, educated or ignorant, prestigious or base, all want more (money, attention, power, love), each pursuing it in their own, usually self destructive way.
Despite the fact that each member of this rat race evokes a silent scolding of “just act like a normal person for christs sake!”, the feelings solicited by these idividuals are dramatically different. The writing leaves us drawn to certain characters and repulsed by others. Gatsby is universally loved as a romantic in search of the unattainable Daisy, while Tom is demonised with his adultery although, like Gatsby, he is simply searching for what he cannot have. Daisy herself searches for more in her life, but when confronted with the realities of having to choose between Gatsby and Tom she is paralysed and ultimately cannot choose, leaving her with what feels like the lesser of the two despite the similarities of the men (one a rich bootlegger, another a rich adulterer).
Hinting at his own manipulation of the reader Fitzgerald tells us how “a sense of the fundamental decencies is parcelled out unequally at birth”, foreshadowing his ability to make each reader feel exactly how he wishes about each character. It reminds me of the famous study that appears in several psychology books (I am always impressed how the classic authors managed to capture human psychology so well before the time, for example we now have studies showing that people like you more when you smile, and 100 years ago Fitgerald wrote of how “Gatsby had noticed that people liked him when he smile”) where people can tell in seconds of black and white, soundless video which professors will be good or bad. From reading just a few words you know who the good and bad people of the story are, and regardless of any information presented about these people the reader is disinclined to change their opinions. For example, Gatsby’s obsession with Daisy could easily be seen as creepy, over the top, excessive, even dangerous and stalkerish. How he pushes her to publicly reject Tom is cruel, and how he earned his fortune is definitely not above board, yet despite all this the reader eagerly takes his side, and emphatically wishes for him to succeed, and once he does not you cannot help but feel as if you have also lost something, depressed to see that despite all the odds being in their favour the hero can still lose, that the unattainable remains unattainable even for the greatest among us.
Another aspect I liked was Fitzgeralds criticism of the wealthy, describing how “They were careless people, Tom and Daisy – they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.” It is something that I am learning is more and more true each day, that the wealthy can make messes, can make mistakes, can have failures and do-overs without fear of the destruction of their lives, and it appears that the more money you have the more insurance against failure you have. We see it daily in the modern world where rich politicians can get away with murder while the poor can be ruined because of a simple accident. So while many rules of life say we should embrace mistakes to grow, or we should lean into failure, these statements remain true only for those lucky enough to be in a situation where failure will not bear the serious consequences faced by those unblessed with safety nets (financial or otherwise). Wealth gives you an enormous appetite for risk that brings with it a complete decoupling from reality. So when, Owl Eyes stated “the poor son of a bitch,” referring to Gatsby, maybe he meant more than just unlucky. Gatsby’s poor upbringing came out in the end. His quick millions had not built him the safety net required to protect him, and he fell according to his original station, while Tom and Daisy, insulated by their elevated existences, come away from the events scot free. Maybe this too can be a darker interpretation of the advice of Nick’s father. Perhaps it includes those more fortunate than you as well, implying that with them either 1: they have not had the same advantages as you growing up poor (or poorer) and developing the life skills more often required by the proletariat than in circles of old money, or 2: they have enormously more advantages than you, and thus you cannot criticize them for acting in a certain way that those advantages bring (such as when we criticize the ultra rich for spending thousands on superfluous items, but if we had the same advantages as they do wouldn’t we do the same?).
What I didn’t like
What can you say that you didn’t like about one of the most critically acclaimed books of all time? That I wished it ended differently? That I hated some of the characters? That I ended eager for more information about the rise of Gatsby which we know will never exist? Each of these “negatives” was undoubtedly intentional from Fitzgerald and it isn’t fair to complain about them here even if I really don’t want to leave a book with no negative feedback.
Questions I asked
What makes a classic a classic? Why does this book live in fame while so many others are forgotten?
Why can’t humans be satisfied with what they have?
Why is it that different writing styles can achieve similar acclaim? For example certain books almost ignore adding description while others add paragraph after paragraph of lavish description while others add sharp description of certain key items and ignore everything else, etc. From most phsychology books we understand that the majority of humanity is rather psychologically predictable, yet there is not a formula for “the right way to write”. Why?
My Favorite Quote
“It is invariably saddening to look through new eyes at things upon which you have expended your own powers of adjustment.”
Nick Carraway
Books I liked like this one
To Kill a Mockingbird : Harper Lee (for a classic book so good that it needs no further introduction)
Monsignor Quixote : Graham Greene (for a short, engaging, and philosophical read)
Book Reviews for Mom 