The Great Gatsby
discussion
Is the storyline of Gatsby similar to Wuthering Heights?
date
newest »
newest »
nah, Wuthering Heights is wonderful and peerless, Gatsby is poorly written drossand aside from that, aside from the very surface level similarities you've noted the plots are very different
As much as I hate agreeing with the previous poster's conclusion... The story-lines are only superficially similar. As to being poorly written dross... I couldn't disagree with the previous poster more. F. Scott Fitzgerald has an amazing way with turning a phrase and painting a picture with words. Unfortunately I don't think much of his story telling ability.
The parallels that you mention are indeed there but they are really just storytelling mechanisms that are not unique to these two works.
I can´t undestand whiy Gatsby is´s so aclaimed. I couldn´t get the point of that book, if it has it.
Fair call, although I feel those surface level similarities were relevent to both respective novels.Obviously the plots take very different routes, the characters have different motivations etc, but still, I think Fitzgerald was subconsciously inspired by that basic aspect to Wuthering Heights; the poor boy can't be with girl, so he runs away, becomes a "man", returns to win her back with wealth, power and prestige. I guess the similarities do end there, now that I think about it more. Very different novels, I agree.
And, I guess Heathcliff's idea of winning Cathy back were more vengeful and ruthless. He was a much more complex character than Jay Gatsby, no doubt.
Pixie wrote: "Fair call, although I feel those surface level similarities were relevent to both respective novels.Obviously the plots take very different routes, the characters have different motivations etc, ..."
Big difference between Cathy and Daisy and their spouses as well.
Heathcliff and Gatsby are very different characters though. The main difference, I think, is that Heathcliff is bitter and resentful, while Gatsby is still hopeful and optimistic- he's meant to be symbolic of the American dream, after all. I think Heathcliff has a lot of villianistic tendencies that Gatsby lacks.
The funny thing about Heathcliff is, we don't actually know what he did during his years away from Wuthering Heights to aquire his wealth.We know Jay Gatsby was a bootlegger, but as far as we know, Heathcliff didn't break the law. Morally, yes, Heathcliff was brutal and vindictive, but Gatsby was the one who resorted to shady practices to aquire his wealth.
I find that I agree with Stephen, in that the parallels between the two stories are sort of timeless. The class barrier between lovers, and the work to overcome such obstacles has existed for a long time.I've found that the more I learn/read about Fitzgerald, the more I find his novels (and those of his peers) to be autobiographical in nature. I think Fitzgerald's preoccupation with personal and financial success as well as his relationship with Zelda (a wealthy young girl hesitant to leave her predestined life) are the stronger parallels than the stories that have come before.
Fitzgerald writes like a dream. I re-read the book in anticipation of the new film and fell in love again with this gorgeous sentences. In the story there are parallels between Gatsby and Heathcliff in their quest to return to their lost loves after building fortunes and obsession. Jay barely knows Daisy compared to Heathcliff's history with Cathy. Tragedy through obsession and failure to respect the marriages of the heroines underlies it all.
I found them both really dry; forced myself to finish Gatsby, but not W.H. Usually if a book has made it to "classic" status or received a prestigious award, there's a reason for it, and there probably is one for both of these novels, but darned if I can figure out what it is.
Interesting similarities. I think the drastic differences in time period, style, character traits, etc are the reason why most people don't really notice it. Someone above asked why Gatsby was so popular. I think it's because of mystery and rumor. It's been a minute since I've read it, but I'm pretty sure they talk about how everyone just goes to Gatsby's because that's what everyone else is doing. No one knows him but they all know they should be there to be in the in crowd. Which is absolutely different from Heathcliff. Anyone in their right mind would stay as far away from that horrible P.O.S. of a character as possible.
Gatsby is popular beacuse of the mystery factor. Wuthering Heights is more of a gothic classic. Scott Fitzgerald might not be the greatest story teller but he has a knack of painting with his words and turning a phrase!! Emily Bronte has a very smooth and suave style and it the book clashes with usual the "male" antagonist because even female characters excite something of loathing and contempt (clearly)!! Yeah, the two books have superficial similarities but the dramatic sense in each of them is not on the same scale!
The writing in Gatsby certainly helps. Some people comment about it being superfluous, but I like how easy Fitzgerald seems to weave his words. It makes a short novel seem much longer. I find it strange that a story essentially about rich people would have such poetic prose, not the most romantic of settings, and yet Fitzgerald is trying to channel Keats and the great British romantics in a story about rich people in New York!
Heh, never noticed the similarities between the two books. Most of them are superficial plot points, the direction, basis and concepts of the books are entirely different. The entire undercurrent of Wuthering Heights is a relentless bitter despondency, whereas The Great Gatsby is more a hopeful, tragedy.It is interesting to see the wide opinions on The Great Gatsby though, certainly a love it or hate it book.
Not sure if I agree with your assessment of Wuthering Heights, I felt there was indeed hope at the end of that tunnel.
You could draw simplistic similarities between many many novels, just as you can cars, but I doubt many people would have to ask if an Aston Martin is basically the same as a Skoda or Yaris. They both go from A to B, in essentially the same way.... So may essential differences have already been pointed out that it seems redundant to point out any of it again here. What you should consider by this is how easy it is to find similarities (or differences) among things when that is what you are looking for, and is probably done too often in literary analysis. When you read a novel, I think one of the valuable things to consider is what you think the author was thinking/feeling, or maybe it comes through characters and has nothing personal to do with the author. In any case, you get a 'feel' at the end of a work of fiction, when you've read the story, it does something to you, some kind of effect, usually (hopefully). I certainly don't get the same feel from these two stories, nor really believe anyone could.
Stephen wrote: "As much as I agreeing with the previous poster's conclusion... The story-lines are only superficially similar. As to being poorly written dross... I couldn't disagree with the previous poster mo..."
Nor could I disagree more with that comment. It continues to amaze me to see people disregard Fitzgerald's accomplishments in Gatsby. To not enjoy the novel is one thing, but 'poorly written dross,'? Please.
I agree that some tidbits are merely just tidbits, and not worth fleshing out. Great Gatsby is its own force of nature and vision. Certainly not suggesting that Fitzgerald was aping Bronte. But for me, I like to know who my favourite artists, writers and composers took inpiration from, or were paying homage to, in inspiration for creation of their own work and style. I like knowing Van Gogh was heavily inspired by François Millet. But then, he went far beyond his initial influence.
The similiraties between WH and GG aren't something you need to think about too much, they are just there. Remember when Heathcliff kept his vigil outside Edgar and Cathy's house? I like to think Fitzgerald was echoing this when Jay Gatsby held his vigil outside Tom and Daisy's house.
Not at all! I don't see a connection at all! Gatsby isn't a psycho like Heathcliff and Daisy is much less selfish than Catherine. There really isn't any connection--in my opinion.
Many people have told me there are none at all, but I can see quite a few, even down to Nick Carraway and Mr. Lockwood.
YES!!!1) Both are narrated by a young man - Nick, Lockwood - who is not the main character or part of the central plot. He is new to the neighborhood and becomes morbidly curious about the goings-on therein.
2). The male lead is a charismatic Byronic hero of humble origins who isn't rich enough to marry the girl he wants. Heathcliff is obviously more disturbed than Gatsby, who at least knows how to ACT like he's having a good time. Different temperaments, same archetype.
3). The female lead is a narcissistic child-woman. Catherine has a lot more depth than Daisy, granted, but she's also angry and vicious in a way that Daisy could never be. Catherine is all emotion, while Daisy has to be told to feel at all. Daisy wants to be the envy of every other society belle, while Catherine spits in the face of social expectation. But both consider themselves the center of the universe, and destroy the lives of others without a thought.
4). The male lead is obsessed with the female lead, to the point of moving back into the neighborhood after she marries and obsessively watching her house. Heathcliff is open about his quest for vengeance, while Gatsby childishly thinks he can lure her away from her husband without hurting anyone's feelings. As previously mentioned, Gatsby is not nearly as maladjusted as Heathcliff and he can at least feign happiness.
5). Both books end with the male lead dead, the female lead and her husband either dead or absent, and the narrator shaking the foul dust of that messed-up neighborhood off his feet.
The Phantom of the Opera also has a similar set-up - narrator who is not a main character, love triangle with an obsessive Byronic hero vs. a "respectable" guy - but while WH and GG have female leads, PotO has a HEROINE. Also, Raoul is neither a bigot like Tom nor a weasel like Edgar; he's just an (overall) nice boy who got in way over his head.
Wow. Four and a half years since there had been a post on this one. Impressive thread necromancy, Sarah. Nice numbered list too.To throw in my two cents, I'd suggest that most of the similarities between Gatsby and Heights are commonalities of Romantic Tragedy as a genre. One could make a similar comparison between either/both Gatsby and Heights with Romeo and Juliet, Pride and Prejudice, Tristan and Isolde, etc. Any particular Romantic Tragedy might not line up the same way, and compare item for item. Very often there's an economic disparity between the characters that manifests differently than it does in Gatsby, for instance. These are very general ideas, and it's the particulars that matter. But most books that fall under the Romantic Tragedy category are going to contain certain broad strokes.
Fede wrote: "I can´t undestand whiy Gatsby is´s so aclaimed. I couldn´t get the point of that book, if it has it."Perhaps this review will help: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Donna wrote: "I found them both really dry; forced myself to finish Gatsby, but not W.H. Usually if a book has made it to "classic" status or received a prestigious award, there's a reason for it, and there prob..."You have to read between the lines in TGG. Here's a review that may help: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
As much as I fancy F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby--while a decent read--was not one of his better works. Wuthering Heights, in my humble opinion, truly stands the test of time and is not comparable to Gatsby. Sure, most classics tend to play on the same general thread of romance and love unrequited or not realized, and perhaps that's the string that might link these two books together in an alternate universe.
When I was reading WH, I kept thinking that it reminded me of TGG, I didn't quite know why, and was looking for an answer. So I googled key words and landed on this page. While I agree with the readers who say there are lots of surface similarities in the story line, that still doesn't fully explain why I feel there is a connection between the two books. Admittedly, I don't think I would have been wandering down this path, had those similarities not existed. For me, the Gatsby character eerily reminded me of Heathcliff. The two characters are enigmatic, stoic, and I can't figure out what motivates them. They are both aloof, and Heathcliff down right cold. We get to know Heathcliff a bit more, and we can see his vulnerability in some of the passages, but I never could really empathize with him.
Both Heathcliff and Gatsby became successes in mysterious ways to impress shallow women who didn’t really care about them. Both men were totally obsessed. Both men were indifferent to their own wealth except where the objects of their obsession was concerned. They were both indifferent to others and totally narcissistic. Neither of them were likable because of that trait. Gatsby is indifferent to others.Heathcliff is hateful and vengeful and cruel. The men are both impossible to like.The story lines of the books are completely different though. Wuthering Heights is superior in my opinion but The Great Gatsby is an excellent book.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Both are classics, and rightfully so, both employ wonderful poetic prose, so how come the similarities are never really noticed, or discussed? Is it because one novel is set in the isolated and windy moors of the Yorkshire moors, while the other is in Long Island New York with all the glitz and decay of 1920's materialism?