Examine your notes from today's seminar on The Great Gatsby. Identify two ideas from the discussion that stand out to you and explain why they make you think differently about your understanding of the text.
Separate your two ideas into two paragraphs and make sure to fully explain each one. Post your comment by 10 p.m. on Thursday evening.
I never really thought about Nick throughout the reading, but in reality Nick plays a very important role in the story. First, I never thought about why Nick tells the story instead of someone else. Since Nick didn't really contribute much to the story besides joining Gatsby and Daisy together I considered him a side character. I thought the only reason Fitzgerald used Nick to tell the story was because it would be a more creative approach. What I figured out today was that Nick can give us an intricate view from the eyes of a man who doesn't side allegiances with the poor or wealthy. Nick is a man who describes himself as someone who doesn't judge another until he gets to know them, which gives the book an even more unbiased view. With both of these traits, Nick gives us the most basic rundown of the events mostly without any biased views. Fitzgerald must have used this to his advantage to allow his readers to develop different opinions of the story through the eyes of someone who is "middle ground".
ReplyDeleteNext, I never really questioned who was the main character of the story because I assumed it was Gatsby. For Shrek's sake the title of the book is The Great Gatsby and the only character who goes through any real changes or has conflicts is Gatsby himself. However, my viewpoints changed today in class when we went over if Nick could be considered a main character. I now feel that while Gatsby has a much deeper story line and conflicts, Nick could be considered a main character. I feel that Nick experiences a great deal without actually doing anything. He witnesses the rise and fall of a "great" man, learns about the dangers of wealth, and figures out that Daisy and Tom aren't his true friends. While Nick doesn't really accomplish much, I feel that he goes through more of a journey than an adventure. He learns a lot about the wealthy elite and the dangers of love and this changes his viewpoints. It is almost like the reader learns through his eyes the same thing Nick learns. This is a radically different viewpoint than I originally had, which was that Nick was ore of a side character and Gatsby was the main point of the entire story.
The first idea that came up that I believe changed my point of view on the text was Gatsby's death being better than for Gatsby to see Daisy leave with Tom because it would be more devastating to Gatsby. I believed if he stayed alive, then Daisy would have left Tom for Gatsby, but the power Tom has over Daisy would stop that from happening ad they would have left anyway. With that, Gatsby would have been emotionally scarred from watching his love of his life leave after all his planning. His death turned out to be a better ending to Gatsby's story, as to seeing the cliche story of Daisy not following through and leaving Gatsby hurt, emberrassed, and alone.
ReplyDeleteThe next idea that came up, was who the main character was. While reading the story I also believed that Gatsby is the main character by all the changes he goes through to complete his goal. However, after reading over some parts in the book, I believe that the main character is Nick, for the reason of the story follows his observations, and even though not oblivious, he has a starting quest or goal that also changes along with his view of society. So first off, Nick only traveled to West Egg because he wanted to work in stocks and bonds, which then changes to watching how the next series of events occur through the book, such as the death of Myrtle or the reuniting of Gatsby and Daisy. Then, after Gatsby's death, Nick comes to a conclusion that the East Egg people have come from the Wes Egg with different situations, with this he knows that the two places though thought to be divided by "old money" and "new money" all came from the same place, with different Variables, leading to the different paths to their money. Gatsby, though goes through the changes can be seen as the anti hero which is why I also decided that Gatsby was not the main character because of the pure goal, but flawed at the same time.
An idea that really stood out to me was the idea that both Nick AND Gatsby represent Fitzgerald. Before I had only seen Gatsby as representing Fitzgerald, his obsession with gaining wealth to earn the love of Daisy mirroring Fitzgerald's own obsession with writing well received novels in order to convince Zelda to marry him. I had never taken a moment to consider that perhaps Nick represents parts of Fitzgerald as well, such as his views on the higher class and money itself. In a way, with the book being from Nick's perspective, it's almost like Fitzgerald is criticizing himself, which perhaps is the point of the book.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea I hadn't really thought of was Owl-Eyes' significance in general and in the fact that he was one of the only people that went to Gatsby's funeral. I thought the point that Christian made was very interesting, that perhaps Fitzgerald decided to call him Owl-Eyes because he could see through Gatsby's act. This also links back to how Owl-Eyes was the only one to notice that none of the books in Gatsby's library were actually read, but just there for show. I also thought it was interesting how people suggested that perhaps Owl Eyes was an attendee at the funeral because the only people that did go were the ones that knew the real Gatsby, not just the mask of wealth that he had put on for others. This cleared up the point of the funeral for me, since initially I didn't understand why Fitzgerald decided to bring back someone who, in my opinion, was completely insignificant to the story.
A noteworthy idea from the seminar that really stuck into my mind was about Gatsby’s funeral and how few people went to his funeral. Even though many people went to Gatsby’s bright and merry parties, nobody went to his funeral because not many people who went to his parties actually knew him. The idea that was really notable, to me, was the connection of the light from the parties and the death of that light. In the seminar, someone said that no one came to his funeral because there was no more light from the party. The light was connected to Gatsby in this situation. The death of Gatsby turned off the light of the party, since Gatsby was the source of his parties, so no one came to the funeral because there was no light in this event and the people are only attracted to the light of the parties. So this idea made me think differently about why no one came to his funeral. I mainly thought it was because the party attendees didn’t really know Gatsby at all. To add on about the funeral, Owl Eyes is also a significant topic that came up in the discussion. He was one of the few that actually went to the funeral. He shows up because he actually sees through Gatsby and he can picture the real and true Gatsby. After all, he is named after a very wise animal that can see very well, even in complete darkness. But why he shows up, I don’t know. It’s not like Gatsby is that great once you go past what’s on the outside. Wolfsheim and his other coworkers who knew him and his sneaky ways didn’t. So why would Owl Eyes come? Is he just that crazy and weird?
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, the epigraph at the beginning of the novel was an interesting topic that came up. The epigraph isn’t too noticeable and I didn’t know about it until it came up in the discussion today. It connects with the theme of the book and Gatsby’s struggle to attract Daisy to him. The epigraph seems to say that Gatsby would try to do whatever it takes to make her say that she wants to be with him. The wealthy and valuable object of “the gold hat” represents wealth and the quality that Gatsby needs to have to get Daisy to be attracted towards him. The “bounce high” statement connects with Gatsby trying to be on the same social class as Daisy by trying to reach out and go higher up on the social ladder. This epigraph is remarkable in its own way because it clears up most of the confusion of what the theme of the novel should be or what Fitzgerald is trying to tell us. Most of the discussion about this epigraph in the seminar helped clear up the overall theme, for me.
During the Socratic seminar, one idea that stood out to me was that Nick was Gatsby’s only friend. Nick and Gatsby are similar in many ways, including the fact that they were both lonely people – Nick felt that he didn’t fit in with or understand Tom, Daisy, and Jordan, people from the East Egg, and although Gatsby was part of the rich and materialistic group, he also felt isolated and was different due to his moral and social values. This is very interesting because both Nick and Gatsby were in the war, so perhaps that is what led to their disillusionment. Before I was introduced to this idea, I would’ve thought that Nick had many friends because he always went to the East Egg where Daisy lived, and that Gatsby knew many people with his lavish parties. Sadly, this was not the case, and I think this says a lot about the 1920s, where many people were distanced or disregarded from society. Likewise, due to the fact that Nick and Gatsby were very different from the rest of the people, they had a strong connection to each other. In addition, this also emphasizes the importance of the story being in Nick’s point of view. Since not many people paid attention to Gatsby, I think that if the story was not told in Nick’s viewpoint, Gatsby’s true self would not have been revealed, and Gatsby might have easily been forgotten following his death.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that really struck me was how the epigraph foreshadowed Gatsby’s struggle to obtain love. I hadn’t paid much attention to the epigraph while I read The Great Gatsby, but now that I look back at it, I realize how huge of an impact it has in the story. The “gold hat” and the need to “bounce high” represent how Gatsby was willing to do anything for Daisy. The gold symbolizes greed and how Gatsby became wealthy, and the act of bouncing high signifies how Gatsby got higher up on the social ladder. This shows how deeply in love Gatsby was, because he focused all of his attention on Daisy. However, despite all of his work, it was not sufficient. This leads me to wonder the reasons for Gatsby’s failure. His journey to find wealth caused him to change his name, or his entire identity, so his materialistic views corrupted him. He figured that since he became rich, he would be able to accomplish anything, but the exaggeration in “Till she cry ‘Lover, gold-hatted, high-bouncing lover, I must have you!’” shows how unreasonable, or maybe foolish, the idea actually was. Therefore, the epigraph really highlights the main idea of the novel, and it led me to understand Fitzgerald’s true intentions in writing The Great Gatsby. Considering how Fitzgerald wrote the epigraph himself, he must’ve had strong feelings toward the subject of the American Dream and its deception.
During the Socratic seminar, my viewpoints regarding Gatsby’s death changed drastically. Before the seminar, I thought Gatsby’s death was utterly depressing because it split him permanently from Daisy. On top of that, she was planning to leave him anyway after the accident with Myrtle, and he basically handed his life over to save Daisy from prosecution. I finished the book thinking that the relationship between Daisy and Gatsby went unfinished due to Gatsby’s death. During the seminar though, we discussed that maybe Gatsby’s death was a good resolution to his unrequited love for Daisy. We also brought up that it was best that he died because he would only live to see Daisy go with Tom, which would make Gatsby utterly heartbroken. On the other hand, we thought that his death had a negative impact because Gatsby was a better significant other than Tom because Gatsby’s infatuation with Daisy’s wealth turned into a more genuine love for her. This seminar helped me to look beyond the normal scope of death, from complete negativity and remorse to a more unique and finalizing outlook on the book.
ReplyDeleteMy viewpoints on who the protagonist is in The Great Gatsby also changed due to the seminar because I originally thought the protagonist was Gatsby. These thoughts were mentioned in the seminar, including that Nick is more of a narrator who highlights the characterization of Gatsby among others. This would make Gatsby the protagonist, most likely more of the protagonist than Nick because he has more focus in the book and he does have a quest- to be with Daisy. Then I realized Nick was also a main focus of the book, especially near the beginning. During the seminar, someone brought up that Nick might have had his own quest when he moved to the West Egg, but it was significantly altered when Gatsby came into Nick’s life. This would in turn make Nick’s new goal to help Gatsby repeat the past with Daisy. This would make Nick the protagonist, even though the rest of the book is focused mainly around Gatsby and Daisy. The fact that Nick’s biases and ideals about the American Dream and the upper class are reflected in his narration also put Nick into more focus. The seminar helped me to see other viewpoints on the purpose of characters in the book, and also gave me new insight on who potential protagonists could be and why.
While I was reading Great Gatsby, I was very focused on how biased Nick was. But after the socratic seminar, I started to see that perhaps he was more neutral than I'd thought. In fact, his personality is extremely neutral, and I think Fitzgerald did this for a reason. Take any one of the other characters in the story and examine their personality and you'll see a trend: they're all bats**t crazy. This trait is emphasized by Nick because he's just a normal guy thrown in with all these people who are slightly unhinged. If Nick had been just as out of his mind as all the others, they would all look saner, because the reader would assume that's just the way people are in Fitzgerald's world. But the presence of Nick brings out those traits in stark detail, leading me to suspect that Fitzgerald wanted to emphasize those traits to show the "whimsical endeavours of the rich." (Thanks whoever wrote that.)
ReplyDeleteThe epigraph was definitely one of the more interesting topics we covered. Besides the fact that Fitzgerald made up a man with an implausibly awesome name to credit it to, it showed me a lot about the absurdity of the entire story (and especially Gatsby). The quote itself makes sense—but at the same time it doesn't. First of all, I were a woman looking for a guy to date, I wouldn't pick the one wearing a gold hat and bouncing like he's on a trampoline. But all that aside, Daisy and Gatsby got together anyway, albeit not for very long. So in Fitzgerald's world, the gold hat and trampoline technique that Gatsby employedactually worked, which doesn't really cast the upper class (or America in general) in a very savoury light. And I think now that this is one of the main ideas of the story—that materialism has gone so far that a woman will date a shady-ish guy just because he's so disgustingly rich that he can afford his own hydroplane.
Out of the entire the socratic seminar, one of the most interesting ideas I heard was the idea that Nick’s role in the story was not just that of the narrator,but as the story’s protagonist. This Now throughout the book I have seen Nick as just the narrator, someone who is simply telling us the story from his point-of-view. But when the idea came up that he maybe the protagonist I began re-examining my understanding of the book, which brought me to the realization that, the book can be read in an alternate view, from a simple narrative about Gatsby’s futile endeavour to a story about Nick realizing the futility of his quest for the American Dream. In this view it is nice to see that the theme that is attributed to this interpretation seems to be the same if not similar; the futility of the American Dream (This is just one of the possible themes). Though I do not see Nick as a protagonist type of character. Despite having an initial quest (getting rich in the East) and a “true” quest (to know more of Gatsby),as the readers we know very little of his background and his motives. He is the narrator therefore he doesn’t say much about himself, but speaks more ( a lot more) of Gatsby and others. This in turn moves the reader’s focus on to Gatsby and the other characters rather than himself. This may show Fitzgerald attempting to move the readers focus to Gatsby as the main character, showing that Nick is just the narrator. Though it is an interesting idea nonetheless.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that got me thinking was the epitaph in the beginning of the novel, which essentially states,” if you can do something do it”. This reflects what Gatsby does, or at least attempts to do in order to get Daisy. He throws incredibly lavish parties, illuminates his house to a ridiculous extent, and when he finally meets her he begins to show her all his possessions. The epitaph at first was very ambiguous, but as we read through the book it’s meaning became very clear and made it easier to understand what Gatsby was trying to achieve. He was trying to recreate the past by doing everything in his power for Daisy to be by his side again, a goal which he never fully achieved.
One idea that stood out to me was the role Nick played in the story. I always saw Nick as just the narrator but now I see the possibility of him being a protagonist. If Nick is placed into the questing trend of a protagonist, the theory pointed out in Foster's book, Nick would be the quester, with the initial intention of becoming successful by selling bonds. He encounters obstacles on his quest, like meeting Gatsby and getting stuck in the middle of the conflicting relationships between the other characters. The real reason of a quest is always self-knowledge, which is demonstrated when Nick discovers the truth behind the dishonest rich and the misconceptions of the American Dream. I now look at Nick's role with a completely different perspective.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that really stood out was the significance of the attendees at Gatsby's funeral. Despite his glamorous parties that attracted hundreds of people with it's dazzling lights, only two people showed up for the ceremony, Nick and Owl Eyes. A good analogy was used to interpret this; the people who attended Gatsby's parties were like moths, attracted to the lights that it gave off. When Gatsby died, the lights extinguished and the moths disappeared. The reason Nick and Owl Eyes remained was because they both saw through the mask of Gatsby and the overwhelming amount of wealth of his that blinded others. They were not solely attracted to the fancy lights but instead the character of Gatsby himself. This explained the idea that Nick and Owl Eyes were the only true friends Gatsby had.
Matthew Masangcay
ReplyDeleteAP Literature period 6
One interesting idea that stood out was that Nick can be seen as the protagonist of the entire novel. The title “The Great Gatsby,” tells one immediately that Gatsby is the main character because of the title name. However, one can also argue that Nick can be the main protagonist. Nick was initially going to be living in West Egg after moving from the Midwest. However, Nick then gets pulled into Gatsby’s quest in his pursuit of Daisy. I thought that Gatsby was the main character since the conflict entirely focused on him. Both Nick and Gatsby go on a quest but it is convincing that Nick is the protagonist because the viewpoint of the story is told in Nick’s perspective. The plot summary would be different if the story was told in someone else’s viewpoint. Nick’s viewpoint is the best one to use because Nick is not heavily biased against or towards any characters. Nick’s quest and viewpoint greatly affects the plot summary. If it weren’t for Nick’s viewpoint, I would not have recognized all the characteristics of everyone. Overall, I never realized that Nick can also be viewed as the protagonist. It offers an interesting idea to think how the plot would be different from another character’s viewpoint. Many view Gatsby as the main character but Nick is the main character because of his quest and the story being told from his perspective.
Also, another interesting topic covered is the significance of Owl Eyes. Owl Eyes was the surprising guest that attended Gatsby’s funeral. Based on Nick’s description of Owl Eyes at the party, one views Owl Eyes as the odd guy who went looking through Gatsby’s library. I did not realize the Owl Eyes could have literally represented the eyes of an owl. Owls pay sharp attention at objects with their eyes just as Owl Eyes pays sharp attention to Gatsby’s life. Gatsby, throughout the novel, was being watched. When one is being watched, it foreshadows an event. Owl Eyes looking out for Gatsby may have foreshadowed Gatsby’s death and failure to engage to Daisy. Owl Eyes kept watching Gatsby because he read several books in the library related to Gatsby’s life and actually attended Gatsby’s funeral. He keeps looking out no matter where Gatsby is. Understanding the symbolism and importance of Owl Eyes after reading the entire novel brings an interesting, new insight to the novel. The symbolism of Owl Eyes watching Gatsby foreshadowed the end of the novel for the reader.
An idea that stood out to me was the significance of the epigraph at the beginning of the novel. I did quickly glance over it at the beginning of the novel, but I really didn't think much of it. It was really interesting to hear people's thoughts on its significance. It was a foreshadow that Gatsby never really loved Daisy, it was more of an obsession. He saw her as an object that he could possess. It also showed how Gatsby was going to show off all of his wealth and possessions to try and get Daisy. It explained that Gatsby's goal was to get into the higher class just so that he could get to Daisy. It also showed that Daisy was a gold-digger that only cared about wealth and status, and not the things that really mattered in life. It was really interesting to learn that F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote his own epigraph and made up an author. After this discussion I'll never look at an epigraph the same way again, I'll actually think about how it connects to the novel.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that stood out to me was who the protagonist of the novel was. I always assumed that Nick was the protagonist, because the novel was narrated by him. After the Socratic Seminar though, I saw why Nick was more of a protagonist (besides by just being the narrator) and how Gatsby could also be the main character. The entire novel is centered around Gatsby and his life, plus the title of the book is named after him. Gatsby has a goal, which is to obtain Daisy. It was mentioned that Nick didn't have goal, but that thought was changed when someone said that Nick had an original goal on why he came to the West Egg. Then when Nick meet Gatsby, his goal shifted to get to know Gatsby better. The readers sympathies with Gatsby and are interested in his life, which could also make him the protagonist. Thanks to the Socratic Seminar, I was able to get a better understanding on who the protagonist of the novel could be.
Stephanie
One idea from the seminar that really stuck with me is that the only people who attended Gatsby’s funeral were the ones that saw through his extravagant persona. I really hadn’t thought prior to the seminar that a reason that owl eyes was there was because he began to find the holes in the image that Gatsby attempted to show himself as. Nick, being possibly Gatsby’s only friend, saw past the falsities of Gatsby and began to know who the real man was, who James Gatz was. Jay’s father knew who the real Gatz was, and truly believed in and cared for him. If you were to follow this idea, it would mean that Daisy never knew who he truly was. That would mean that the love she had for him was, was actually love for the idea of this rich and exuberant man and life style. She didn’t love who he was, just the false idea of him and the false sense of satisfaction that came along with that, therefore neither of them really loved each other. Jay loved the idea of claiming this “grail”, while Daisy was in love with the idea of a rich life and a wastefully excessive lover.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea from the seminar that stood out to me was that one of the reasons that Nick is such a good narrator is because he is willing to learn about people before assuming. This is why his friendship with Gatsby, that drives the novel, blooms. While Nick may not completely follow through on his claims of being a completely honest person and non-judgemental person, he does allow himself to learn who people, instead of accepting the things said of them. Even as Nick realizes Gatsby’s friendship with him is to get with Daisy, he still appreciates Gatsby for who he is and as a friend.
-Forest Reid
While the seminar offered many fantastic concepts that were new to me, a few stood out more than did others. One of these ideas sprouted from the question asking whether or not Nick was actually Gatsby’s friend. Once I thought about it a little more, keeping in mind ideas from the seminar that Gatsby only made “friends” with people if they could benefit his struggle to catch Daisy’s attention, the idea really makes me think that Gatsby was just a shallow man bent on chasing after a girl that was out of his reach. My new perspective contradicts my old view, that Gatsby was an honest fool in love with a siren (Daisy), and really drains my faith in the goodness of any of the characters. Yet, it kind of gives Gatsby an obsessed trait that makes me see the story as one a Romantic would tell instead of a contemporary writer. And so amazingly, one idea opened my eyes to the story in a whole new way.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that popped up in the seminar that struck a chord with me was that the people who actually attended Gatsby’s funeral were the only ones that saw through the Gatsby’s audacious ruse to a worthwhile man behind the mask. This explains the appearance of Owl-Eyes; assuredly, just as he saw the true nature of the books in Gatsby’s private library, Owl-Eyes saw Gatsby for the man that he was, a man with a simple desire for love. In addition, that Owl-Eyes even bothers to show up at Gatsby’s funeral at all must mean that Gatsby is worth the attendance, that Owl-Eyes saw something true and real about Gatsby that eludes the rest who knew Gatsby, with the exception of Nick and Gatsby Senior. So Owl-Eyes’ appearance gives me hope that maybe Gatsby isn’t (or wasn’t) such a terrible person, and had some amount of a sort of goodness in him that would cause someone he barely knew, but one who knew him, to pay some final respects. In that respect, the idea that Owl-Eyes can see the real Gatsby renews my faith in Gatsby as a character, while also revealing a hinted symbol that is in fact Owl-Eyes.
One point mentioned in the socratic seminar that I really liked it the analogy of Gatsby and his guests. Gatsby is a bright light and his guests are bugs that are attracted to the light. When Gatsby dies, no one goes to his funeral because the light is out. I like this because in the book, Fitzgerald also uses this calling the guests “moths” and describing the bright lights at Gatsby’s parties. This helped me make sense of why there were no guests at Gatsby’s funeral, and I was struggling with that. Another point about the funeral was that the people who went knew the “real Gatsby”. His father obviously knew about his past, and was proud of what Gatsby had become. Nick knew of Gatsby’s past because he was told, and Nick felt some sort of compassion for Gatsby. The last attendee at the funeral was Owl Eyes, who didn’t actually know the real Gatsby, but suspected who he was.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the book and talking in class, the epigraph helps to understand the story. In the epigraph it says “Wear the gold hat”, which we interpreted to mean to show of your wealth. In the book, Gatsby does just that to try and impress Daisy. The epigraph also says “Bounce high, if that will move her”. We thought that to mean that to impress a girl, you must do whatever she wants. In the book Gatsby shows of his riches with his parties and his “beautiful shirts” and does what he thinks Daisy would want all to impress her. Knowing that Fitzgerald actually wrote the epigraph lets us know that what we had been speculating and inferring about Gatsby is actually true.
1) One topic that came up in the socratic seminar is the debate between who is the main character, whether it is Gatsby or Nick. When the question was asked, I did not have an immediate answer to the question, and it got me thinking. Many of the students stated that they thought Gatsby was the protagonist of the story because much of Nick's focus was directed towards him. I was not convinced that that fact alone defined him as the protagonist, and the reason being is that he was merely Nick's main subject of interest. So, to prove that Nick is the protagonist, I had to think back to the book, and what purpose they each served in the story. I conclude that Gatsby served as the representation of Nick's association with wealth in the upcoming economy of the 1920's in the US. His struggle with how he views Gatsby parallels his views on society during this time, concluded clearly at the end of the book when he compliments Gatsby and says, “you’re worth the whole damn bunch put together,” but follows by saying he disapproves of him nonetheless. This is the same for how Nick views all of this drinking and partying, to which he is basically saying that he enjoys being a part of that community but does not approve of what they do or their lifestyle.
ReplyDelete2) Another topic that I found interesting was the discussion on why Nick, Owl-Eyes, and father were the only ones to show up to the funeral. I personally did not find it surprising at all, considering how little of Gatsby’s party guests actually got to meet him or talk to him. They came for the hype and for the exciting lifestyle that all the others around them seem to embellish in, and it seemed as though none of them actually came for Gatsby besides Nick. This probably the main reason that none of his party guests came to the party. His close business partners and associates, like Wolfshiem, however, are a different story. We can assume from hints and rumors throughout the novel that Gatsby did not earn his money in a standard and socially moral way. So, his “business” partners probably didn’t want to be associated with him after his death, because when someone dies they are not there to protect those types of secrets any longer, and that could compromise the privacy of what they were doing. Lastly, let’s talk about Daisy for a second. Probably a huge factor that led to her being absent from the funeral was the fact that she caused all this. She was the one that ran over Myrtle, which led to Mr. Wilson go on his man-hunt. Plus, Daisy is a very materialistic person, shown in various points throughout the book. To add some context, there is a part where Gatsby shows her all of these foreign shirts and she begins to cry because she had, “never seen such beautiful shirts.” Not many people cry when they see shirts they like, and she cried because he had now become this rich and successful person that Daisy wanted him to be. I believe the coined term is “Gold Digger,” as the kids of today would put it. So, she would not attend the funeral because now that Gatsby was gone, he had nothing to offer her, and she likely felt it would be more stable just to stay with Tom and indulge in his riches. All in all, Gatsby really wasn’t close to a lot of people, and those other people with whom he was not only sought to reap benefit from an association with him, leaving his funeral near barren of people.
In the socratic seminar, something that really stuck with me was the debate about who actually is the protagonist - Nick or Gatsby? I had always assumed that Gatsby was, because he was the central element of the conflict in the book. Nick’s importance never occurred to me because even though he was narrating the story, he never really asserted his presence. One thing that Monique mentioned is that Gatsby could be the anti-hero and Nick could be a foil character. Looking back at the book, Gatsby being an anti-hero makes complete sense to me. An anti-hero is when the main character lacks traditional heroic qualities, like moral goodness or courage. Gatsby often displays this in the book. For example, when he is going to see Daisy for the first time, he runs out the back door and around the house in an attempt to look cool. This is so tremendously lame that I can not even imagine this actually happening in real life without it seeming ridiculous and performed by a teenager. Additionally, Gatsby has a criminal career, which is nothing close to a morally good occupation. Nick being a foil character also makes a huge amount of sense to me. Nick is completely different than all of the most prominent characters of the book. He is not extremely wealthy or devastatingly poor. He is not loud or dramatic. His quiet demeanor makes all the other characters seem over dramatic, extremely rich, and licentious. All of this makes me rethink how I view the other characters. It makes me wonder what the characters would look like if Nick’s filter is taken away.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that changes my view on the book is the epigraph. The first thing is that Fitzgerald specifically wrote it for the book, which makes me think that Fitzgerald wanted readers to read the poem and find some meaning in it. My interpretation of the poem is that the gold hat represents Gatsby’s wealth, and how he wears it to achieve Daisy. The bouncing part represents Gatsby’s desperate attempt to climb higher in class. The key work in this is “can”. If he can bounce higher, he should. The thing is, though, Gatsby can’t bounce any higher. It is physically impossible for him to get any higher. His origin restricts him from becoming Daisy’s only love. Looking back, the epigraph foreshadows how Gatsby is trying his hardest to get Daisy, but in the end, he can’t because he can not reach the highest class.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMonique Ubungen
ReplyDeleteDelman
AP Lit 6
October 10, 2013
An idea that stood out to me from yesterday’s Socratic Seminar was The Great Gatsby’s epigraph. Somehow, it’s really disappointing to find out that Fitzgerald made up this quote to conform with the story because upon reading the epigraph (again) after finishing the book, I really thought that the “golden” words suited the story all too well. It was almost as if the epigraph and the story were made for each other because of the way the words “Then wear the gold hat, if that will move her” truly highlight the plot. When I think of the epigraph, two things come to mind, fools and peacocks, since the assumed man in the poem is willing to bask in foolishness for whoever this woman may be and he’s eager to show off, and to do anything in his power to impress her or to attract. Thomas Parke D'Invilliers is a fictitious character of Fitzgerald’s from another contemporary novel he authored, This Side of Paradise. He’s only a side character, being a friend of the protagonist, and therefore is able to observe the main characters’ actions from a close distance with occasional interaction, just like Nick Carraway. The story is basically a glimpse at Fitzgerald’s own life, a common plot where the man loves the wealthy girl, the man goes off to war, he returns not-so wealthy, and the girl falls in love with another man of riches and higher social rank. It all sounds so familiar, as Part 1 of the book is titled “The Romantic Egotist”, leaning towards the Gatsby side of things. Learning about the background of the epigraph didn’t necessarily change the outlook I had towards the text, but intensified it because of the way Fitzgerald was so fervent to improve and build off of his novel. On a another note, I thought Fitzgerald ‘choosing’ D'Invilliers’ quote was sort of a celebratory notion on his part, as This Side of Paradise was the work that persuaded Zelda Sayre to marry Fitzgerald.
A second idea posed in yesterday’s seminar was Fitzgerald’s place within the story—does he embody Nick Carraway or Jay Gatsby? Acknowledged slightly in the previous paragraph, Fitzgerald represents Gatsby greater than he does Nick. Nick Carraway, as I had mentioned, is more of a foil character used to deepen the traits of the main character and others, while Gatsby is more of a central character whose characteristics are heightened by Nick’s presence. I had pondered on this idea while reading the book, and I honestly think that Fitzgerald is reflected greatly through Gatsby because of his similar personal struggles. Daisy Buchanan is Fitzgerald’s Zelda Sayre; a woman who demands wealth and takes life’s pleasures for granted. Fitzgerald is no one but the desperate James Gatz, impassioned with the need for affection and material assets. This changed my perspective of the book very little, but it did make me feel as reading The Great Gatsby was more of the author’s way to express his anguish towards his own life and to depict the heartbreak of unrequited love implied through his own experiences.
I really enjoyed tuesday' Socratic seminar, because the discussion covered so many subjects in such great depth. It was not only quite interesting, but it helped me alter and refine my understanding of the meaning behind specific parts of the book.
ReplyDeleteThe first concept I found really interesting was whether Gatsby or Nick was the protagonist. I was not quite sure myself whether or not who the protagonist was makes that much of a difference for the reader. But many of the viewpoints that others in the circle held helped convince me that, not only was it important, but it was not very clear. Originally, like some of the others within the circle, that the protagonist was Nick, as he was the narrator, and we were able to see most of what he was thinking, doing, and feeling. But others proclaimed that Gatsby, because the plot showed vast changes and details in his character, was actually the protagonist. It still do not think I could make decisive argument either way, but the seminar helped me question what I once thought to be one of the few simple aspects of this not-at-all simple book.
The second idea from the seminar that I really enjoyed was the symbolism behind the character the book refers to as the "Owl-eyed Man." I really cast him off as just another character that Fitzgerald threw in to make the story a bit more interesting, in the same vein as Mr. and Mrs. McKee. But after others pointed out a pattern shown in the attendees of Gatsby's funeral- they all saw through Gatsby's big rich persona- I began to realize that Fitzgerald was very attentive when it came to symbols. The more I look at the book and the more we discuss it as a group, the more that seem to pop up. I no longer think any character is just thrown in there because it seems that, whether Fitzgerald ultimately intended it or not, all of them can still have significance to the plot and theme of the book.
One of the ideas that stood out to me the most was the idea of Nick being the protagonist of the story instead of Gatsby. Throughout the book, most of the focus was on Gatsby and Daisy's love, which made me think that Gatsby was the protagonist. He was the one on a quest to become successful and reunite with Daisy. Even though Nick was the narrator, there wasn't much about him. Until this topic was brought up, I probably wouldn't have thought of it. When someone else explained how Nick could be the protagonist because in the beginning of the book it started out about him and as the story developed his quest became bringing Daisy and Gatsby together. It makes a lot more sense now.
ReplyDeleteThe second topic that brought interest to me was the epigraph. I had no idea what an epigraph was until yesterday and I definitely didn't notice it either when I opened the book. It was really interesting how Fitzgerald purposely wrote a quote and made up a name just for that book. The epigraph foreshadowed what was going to happen later on in the story. It relates to what Gatsby was doing just to get Daisy to fall for him. The first line means that he'll do anything to have her. The bouncing part represents how if he could become better than he should. The line about he must have her really shows a connection because Gatsby is doing anything he can to impress her and he hasn't given up even though it's been five years and she's married.
One of the ideas that stood out to me during the seminar was the use of the epigraph. Initially, I skipped that page of the book and did not recognize the significance of the epigraph. The quote used significantly foreshadowed a core part of the book because it pertains to Gatsby’s personality and describes the important scenes in Gatsby’s relationship with Daisy. This brought me to a greater understanding that everything Fitzgerald put in the book had a meaning. Fitzgerald’s use of symbolism and foreshadowing was well used even before the story starts. He was able to effectively piece together components of each character from their past and use every bit of their personalities to bring forth the conflict to where it impacted each character in a specific way. In Gatsby’s case, the conflict caused his death.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that stood out to me was that Nick described Gatsby’s death as being better for him, and his opinion that Gatsby ended his life with the feeling that Daisy wanted to be with him. It’s tough for anyone to consider death as being something better than living, especially in Gatsby’s case because he literally started from the bottom and made his way up to the wealthiest social class. In his position, Gatsby could have easily changed his mindset towards Daisy and could have found another girl worthy of his love, but because he didn’t, it showed how Gatsby wasn’t as God-like as Fitzgerald portrayed him to be. Gatsby was actually more corrupted than anything, because he led himself to believe that he could recreate the past, a feat that nobody could actually perceive as being possible. It seems to me that Gatsby was setting himself up for complete failure, and since he was truly convinced that his dream of recreating the love he had with Daisy could be achieved, the hard truth that Daisy chose to be with Tom instead would have crushed him into deep despair, which makes death a better fate for Gatsby instead of living. It was better for Gatsby to end his life believing that Daisy truly loved him because living with the fact that he wasn’t triumphant in winning Daisy over, would have been too tough of a burden to bear.
During the socratic seminar, when the question of whose funeral would have the most people and why, one student brought up a really good analogy. They used Sutton's idea of light and said that the party guest are like insects they are attracted to the light which in this case is Gatsby, once the light goes off than no one will feel the sense go. This painted a clear vivid picture in my head. The reason why no one felt the need to go is because they hardly knew Gatsby he was just another face in the crowd. He threw these great parties to get attention, however no one ever really knew who he was, what caught their attention was the lights. Thus, giving a clear understanding why the student chose to identify Gatsby as being the light. The only people who attended his funeral were the people that really him, yet bringing my attention to owl eyes he was a character that we don't really know much about, but he went maybe because he knew who Gatsby really was; he never stretched far from the light. Though we never really hear about owl eyes, he is a faint character, but his presence is the kind that shows us that some people, actually stuck by Gatsby. Which made me think, you only know who you are and the people around you once you turn off the lights.
ReplyDeleteYet by far the most surprising was the idea of who is the protagonist, Gatsby or Nick, but I cannot choose between either of them. However the analytical discussion we had gave me more thoughts and ideas and a clear reasoning for both sides. We know that the definition of a protagonist is a character that is seen as a hero, whom we follow throughout the book, and while we think its Gatsby it cant also be Nick. As a reader we try and to sympathize with the protagonist, but we don't realize than in this case we have a narrator who is also a major character in the book, maybe we do but we don't see just how important Nick is. Both characters, Gatsby and Nick have their own plot line and can be their own antagonist at times. A protagonist as we know can be also be a quester who has a reason, a goal, and we follow them in hope that they reach for it, though Gatsby's ended on a tragic note he came so far, he never wanted to give up on his quest. Nick has a quest too, and I see it has a goal to get Gatsby where he wanted to be, whether or not he choose it, his goal was to find out who Gatsby really was and what makes him so great, hence the title of the book. Nick goes through his own obstacles, and we value him because he does not get tangled into the idea of wealth, well for the most part. The points that the students pointed out helped give me accepted reasons on both characters. Nick maybe the foil of Gatsby, maybe Nick is just there to narrate and we as the readers or supposed to accept that and focus on Gatsby's background. Yet I think without Nick being one of the protagonist we would just have another bias story about Gatsby, the only reason why Gatsby came that far, besides the part that he gets shot, was because of Nicks heroism and his act of being able to achieve his goal in helping Gatsby realize that the American dream and having everything isn't so "GREAT".
Anthony Liu
ReplyDelete10 – 10 – 13
One idea that stood out to me was that the reason so few people attend Gatsby’s funeral is because only people who know the real Gatsby show up. Gatsby’s life is largely dictated by Daisy’s desires, and this version of Gatsby isn’t an accurate representation of the man. For example, Daisy is attracted to wealth, so Gatsby does everything in his power to procure insane amounts of money. Daisy lives in East egg, so Gatsby arranges to live in a mansion nearby. His true personality is distorted by love, and the only people who recognize this are Nick, his best friend, Mr. Gatz, his father, and Owl Eyes, an astute observer. Hearing all of this caused me to think differently about the text since I never thought about the just how much Gatsby altered his life for Daisy. To me, it always seemed like there was a single Gatsby, one who started out poor and powerless and developed into an influential man of power. After the fishbowl, however, I realize that the Gatsby at the end of the book is exactly the same as the Gatsby five years ago. Ignoring their socioeconomic differences, both are madly obsessed with Daisy, and both do everything it takes to please her, such as lie, cheat, and even die.
Another idea I found interesting was the claim that Nick was the protagonist in The Great Gatsby. I never viewed Nick as anything more than a narrator, so I was intrigued at the possibility that he could be the focus of the story. At first, I couldn’t imagine how Nick could be interpreted as the main character. Even though the story is from his point of view, most of what he says revolves around Gatsby, Daisy, or Tom. After hearing what other people had to say, I’m now aware of another possible interpretation of this novel. Instead of viewing The Great Gatsby as a story about the American dream and Gatsby, one can interpret the novel as the story of a young man discovering himself through the lives of others. Even though Nick seldom initiates any conflicts on his own, he learns plenty by involving himself with Gatsby. In the end, he understands how the American dream can cause people to become dangerously, mindlessly ambitious, so he moves away back home where life is more relaxed. Nick’s quest is complete, since it turns out his true goal was to learn more about people and all the traps they fall into.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDiscussing the significance of the epigraph helped me understand The Great Gatsby more than anything else had previously. Since I read it so long ago, I completely forgot to think about as I was reading the book. When I was reading The Great Gatsby, I was already aware of the fact that gold – a material object as well as a color – revealed a large theme, but only after our Socratic seminar did I begin to make deeper connections with gold. In the book, Gatsby tends to favor the color gold—wearing a gold suit, a gold tie, and possessing a gold car. Because we tend to associate the sun with a golden color, wearing the color gold may imply that Gatsby is attempting to radiate his light to impress Daisy. In another light, the substance gold is valuable, and perhaps his tendency to wear gold shows how obsessed Gatsby is with his wealth. Nevertheless, the Socratic seminar helped me realize these ideas.
ReplyDeleteAnother noteworthy topic in our Socratic seminar was whether or not Nick is the protagonist in The Great Gatsby. It was interesting how people based their opinions solely on the comparison of goals. A few people argued that Gatsby had a more prominent goal that Nick did, and some people even went so far as to say Nick did not have a goal at all. Before the Socratic seminar, I was not sure which of the two is the true protagonist – even after the seminar I am still not sure – but I do have a broader range of ideas now that I have heard what my classmates had to say, and I think I have enough information to pick one of them if I was forced to. I can argue for both of them being the protagonist, but in a scenario where I am forced to pick only one of them, I would most likely pick Gatsby because his goals, struggles, and flaws are not as masked as Nick’s.
One idea from the seminar that really stood out to me was who the protagonist really was in the novel. All along I had felt that Gatsby was the protagonist; the plot seems the most centered around him and his life, and overall there is more depth to him as a character. There are many sides to him that are revealed to us throughout the book, showing his extremely dynamic personality. In addition, the title of the novel is The Great Gatsby, so one would easily be led to believe that Gatsby is the main focus of the book. Now, I am convinced that Nick is the protagonist, besides the fact that he is the narrator. As stated in the seminar, at the beginning of the book Nick doesn’t really have any goals or ambitions; he merely observes others from a passive point of view. However, once he hears of Gatsby, Nick brings it upon himself to get to know Gatsby better. All of his energies seem focused around Gatsby’s life, Gatsby’s story, and Gatsby’s mystery, another reason why Gatsby could easily be perceived as the protagonist. But after the socratic seminar, the idea that Nick is actually the protagonist really seemed to click.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea from the seminar that stood out to me was the bug/insect analogy. I hadn’t even thought about that and it makes so much sense. I do remember the book comparing Gatsby’s party guests to moths, but when you also compare Gatsby’s death to a light going out, it correlates perfectly. When Gatsby dies, no one shows up at his funeral because the light is extinguished. The guests only use him for his parties; the only real “moths” that stay when the light goes out are the people that know the true Gatsby. Furthermore, Gatsby’s real friends stay even when the light goes out because they are not solely attracted to his wealth and splendor. They actually appreciate him for more than his wealth. I was a little bit stumped as to why barely anyone came to Gatsby’s funeral, but this analogy helped to me to understand it better.
Taylor Womack
ReplyDelete10-10-13
AP English Literature and Composition
Ms. Delman
For me, an incredible change of understanding came about when the Socratic Seminar began speaking of Owl Eyes and why he attended the funeral. I had believed that because Owl Eyes saw through Gatsby’s façade so early in the book that he is one of the few who disapprove of Gatsby and his extravagant parties. However, it was because of Owl Eyes’s keen scrutiny that he believed in Gatsby and could feel for who he truly is. Although Owl Eyes probably didn’t know that Gatsby played up this image to impress Daisy Buchanan, he certainly understood on some level that Gatsby cared for something very deeply, and put all of his effort into achieving his goal. This realization assures me that Gatsby is a truly good man because the only other person who saw into the real Gatsby is the only other person who felt that Gatsby deserved attendance at his funeral. Just as Nick states in the beginning of the novel, “it is what preyed on Gatsby” (2) that caused all of the disinterest and lack of compassion for him in the end, but he himself “turned out alright” (2).
The epigraph presents itself to me as a clear summation of the book, up until the catastrophic climax. Much of the book seemed complex, yet the plot is simply put in the very beginning. “Wear the gold hat, if that will move her”. Throughout the five years that Daisy and Gatsby spend apart, Gatsby simply tries to become as rich as humanly possible in order to impress her. When he first reunites with her he is wearing gold; in addition, his car is gold, he is wearing the “gold hat” in order to win Daisy over. The next sentence, “bounce for her too” is telling whomever to do everything possible to impress the woman they are after. Gatsby throws vivacious parties and is a charming, charismatic person of such skill that “it is not likely I shall ever find [one] again” (2). He is trying so very hard to grasp Daisy’s attention by any means at his disposal. And finally, after all of this hard work, Daisy cries, “I must have you!” because Gatsby is a “gold-hatted, high-bouncing lover”. This is practically all that happens in the story, Gatsby works to become rich and to become talented at being rich, and as soon as he can he uses his fancy clothes and fancy mannerisms to win Daisy’s love. Of course, the love quickly deteriorates into loathing and depression, and the major themes of the novel kick in, but all in all the epigraph at the beginning of the book is an incredible, clandestine spoiler.
The idea of light, Gatsby's artificial light and Daisy's sun really helped me to understand the story better, and make their relationship much more clear. When we read the essay for homework the other day about light, it spoke about how they are like competing light sources and Daisy always being in the lead because she is the sun, and the sun is like the source. In the Socratic Seminar someone talked about how at Gatsby's parties the people were like insects attracted to the light and when Gatsby died the light went out and they didn't go to his funeral. Additionally in this metaphor, the example of Icarus came up a lot for me. Icarus put on his wings and flew too high- like Gatsby who got money from boot legging- and when he got too close to the sun his wings which were held together with wax, melted. This is like Gatsby also because when he got rich enough, he began to realize that money isnt going to get him what he wanted and after that realization he fell - died.
ReplyDeleteLater on in the Seminar we talked about who the protagonist is and brought up the idea of Nick as the protagonist, and how maybe we view the story though his eyes for a reason. Nick is in place maybe, to understand Gatsby and to play the role of an observer in Gatsby's life, like a friend. Nick changes in the story from someone who is confused about his life to some one who knows what he wants. He gets this through experiencing Gatsby and all of the rich folk in entirety. Nick learns from Gatsby, just as much -maybe even more than - Gatsby learns from Nick. Nick is in the book to give depth and show the difference of the two life styles, and his goal is to help prove and explain how the american dream is unattainable.
Many points during the socratic seminar stood out to me, but one of the most important points was about light. I believe it was Alexanderson who stated that the reason not many people attended the funeral was because "the light was out". The attendees were, as Fitzgerald called them, moths - insects attracted to light - meaning all of the attendees were only attracted to Gatsby's house because it was bright, it was gleaming, and it was glamorous. Basically, they were there because of his wealth and nothing else. Now that Gatsby has died (therefore the light being put out) there is no more light to attract these "moths" and that just blew my mind. It amazed me how creative that was and definitely changed my understanding of the text. I was never able to dig out these fine details, but now that everything is surfacing, I can see it.
ReplyDeleteAnother point I found very appealing during the discussion was the idea of Owl-Eyes who saw through Gatsby even when no one else did. When I think of owls, I think of that owl from Winnie the Pooh, his ability to read and such intelligence which reflects Owl-Eyes in this book. He's wise and intelligent, especially at the part where he's in Gatsby's library, browsing through his books. Owl-Eyes exclaims that Gatsby's books are real, but the pages are not cut and says that he really tried hard. I thought that specific part was really significant to explaining how much Owl-Eyes understands Gatsby. Even if he didn't know him, he was able to figure out that Gatsby is fake yet tries his best to reach an (ultimately) unattainable goal. Though Owl-Eyes does not have a major role in this book, he had a major impact on the reader's experience and again, has changed my outlook on the text.
In the socratic seminar, one of the ideas that stood out to me was why so few people showed up at Gatsby’s funeral. The only people to go to the funeral were his father, Nick, and owl-eyes. Though, it was predictable that would eventually happen. Sure, Gatsby had many extravagant parties that countless people would attend, but most of them weren’t even friends with Gatsby. Many of the attendees didn’t even know Gatsby, and just went to his parties for the hype, without truly getting to know Gatsby. Even the people who used to associate themselves with Gatsby, such as Wolfshiem, made up incredulous excuses in order to get out of going to Gatsby’s funeral. Also, it seemed that the only people who went to his funeral were the people who genuinely knew who Gatsby was, a man who longed for love.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that sparked my interest was whether many people would come to Nick’s funeral or not, and if Nick had any true friends. Throughout the book, I didn’t realize that like Gatsby, Nick didn’t have that many acquaintances or family. Also, somebody brought up the point that Gatsby was possibly using Nick from the beginning, and didn’t think of him as an actual friend. It seemed as if Gatsby only became friends with Nick as an attempt to get Daisy’s attention. It changes my whole perspective on Nick and Gatsby’s “friendship” because it could have been one-sided. Nick, even though he was annoyed with Gatsby at times, did think of him as a great friend. On the other hand, Gatsby could’ve known that Nick was cousins with Daisy from the beginning, befriending him in order to get closer to Daisy once again. It worked, but it shows how low and obsessed Gatsby was with Daisy, and how he was always blinded by love. He could’ve been using Nick simply as a pawn in his game of trying to get Daisy’s love once again.
A lot of ideas about the Great Gatsby from the Socratic Seminar really stood out to me specially those Ooh’s and Aah’s moments. One idea that really made me think differently about my understanding of the book is the green light’s representation. From the beginning, I’ve always known that the green light would be a really important symbol. As we discover that the green light illuminates from Daisy’s house, I believed that the light essentially represented Daisy and Gatsby’s dream. When Gatsby tries to reach out for the light, he’s reaching out to attain his dream and to regain Daisy’s love. Although it wasn’t until the class had suggested the idea of the color green representing money that had made me see Gatsby differently. Instead of longing for Daisy’s adoration, Gatsby is actually yearning for her riches. I became more convinced of this idea as the class further discussed how Gatsby always describes Daisy’s wealth rather than her character and her other feminine traits. Gatsby was never in love with Daisy as a person and he treats her as if she’s a prize that once achieved, it will be Gatsby’s ultimate success thus achieving his goal.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that has made me reconsider is the topic of who’s the real protagonist of the story. The novel is titled “The Great Gatsby” and I had no doubt that Gatsby is obviously the main character of this narrative. In the Socratic Seminar, the class discussed the possibility of Nick Carraway being the protagonist instead of Gatsby. I was immediately convinced after recalling the reading from Foster’s book “How to Read Literature Like a Professor.” Gatsby had already had a goal in the beginning (to get Daisy) in contrast to Nick who moved to the East egg to make a living for himself. Although the book focuses on Gatsby, he is eliminated in the end and never arrives to his important discovery after the journey. It is Nick who reaches a conclusion in the end. Through Gatsby’s death, he deduces that unlike Gatsby, society can be greedy and hopeless and that the American Dream has its limits. This topic, however, is open to many different interpretations and that’s what makes it so interesting.
One idea discussed during our The Great Gatsby Socratic Seminar that enhanced my understanding of the text was that Gatsby’s life and personality changed with his name. Born as James Gatz, he was living the life as a janitor until he met Mr. Dan Cody, whom he then acquired a taste of luxury from. From then on Jay Gatsby, a name given off by luxury, found a new motive for life and dedicated himself to become wealthy and successful. With a new name, new style, and new hopes and dreams this, was Gatsby’s turning point in life. This idea also connects to another one mentioned in our Socratic Seminar which was that the few attendees at his funeral were people that knew Gatsby from his past. This connected idea taught me that those who attended his funeral respects and acknowledges him for who he was before, while everyone else that knows Gatsby as just that supremely rich and popular guy doesn’t really care about him; which then suggests that Gatsby doesn’t have that many close friends even though he now lives a highly lavish life. The idea of Gatsby’s name change really helped me enhance my understanding of the novel because I got to see how Gatsby made the transition from a rather dull, boring life to an obsessive, sad, but successful one and it also helped me understand how other characters perceive him as well.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea discussed during our Socratic Seminar that enhanced my understanding of the text was that Gatsby’s timely death was a pretty good ending and resolution to his life. Having spent the entire summer finally catching up with his dream, he lived the real life he has always wanted to live for a short while until his life in general was taken away from him by an accident and misunderstanding. This incident was tragic as death is absolute and final for Gatsby but at least he got to see the climax of his life (reuniting with Daisy and sharing a romantic experience with her) without getting to see the spiraling downhill mess that pursues (Daisy choosing Tom over Gatsby in the end), which would have ultimately torn him apart with pain and sorrow. The idea that the timing of Gatsby’s death was so perfect really helped me enhance my understanding of the novel because it taught me that Gatsby had achieved the American Dream but this achievement was only a stepping stone to his real dream; which taught me about the misconception of the American Dream that no matter how hard you work, you still might not be able to obtain your desires.
It had never occurred to me to consider looking at the epigraph, but the socratic seminar opened my eyes and got me thinking. Reading the epigraph after having read the book, brings light to new meaning and metaphors behind Gatsby and Daisy. The epigraph says, "Then wear the gold hat, if that will move her." Gold often refers to wealth, and in this instance it very strongly does. Just in that one line it explains why Gatsby changed his whole life around to become wealthy, for Daisy. Next it says to bounce high for her if you can. This can be interpreted as Gatsby going up the social class and taking Daisy with him, connecting to the previous line about wealth. All of this is so that she will cry, "I must have you!" clearly stating the purpose of all the hat and bounce work; to get the girl, Daisy!
ReplyDeleteI found it very interesting that owl eyes was the only "friend" to go to Gatsby's funeral other than Nick, so I looked more into the matter of Gatsby's friends. It occurred to me that Gatsby didn't have real friends, only people who enjoyed his party. With all of that said, I had never paused to think about his business partners. As a result of the socratic seminar, it made sense to me why they wouldn't be too forward with their relationships with Gatsby. They are people who were regularly in touch with Gatsby yet they didn't make that all too public because they didn't want the knowledge of their "sketchy" business picked up by the wrong person. So after Gatsby dies, of course they wouldn't come to the funeral and expose themselves, they would just move on to continue doing business to make as much money as possible; Gatsby's gone, so they're moving on!