The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald (Moderator's Choice Jan & Feb 2017)

[Jan C]

I think Jordan lost Nick when he learned that she was willing to cheat to be on the inside.

[Michael]

If the novel is complete or almost perfect then would we need to discuss the importance or a character such as Jordan? Sorry but that is an obvious question.
Without Jordan I think Daisy would be appear to be an isolated character, then we would need to discuss why? Was is Tom controlling her, was she disfunctional, has she opted out etc.
I think we need Jordan who I took to be a bit cynical. At first I thought her sports competition would be equine in nature or tennis I didn't expect golf, which even today has separation of the genders is Jordan herself a reactionary?

Fitzgerald was always on a loser, he tried to marry into money as he brought only uncertain income with him. The expectation at that time and maybe still is, a man is the financial provider that idea even permeates today in all social strata.
Ask youself to what extent you would marry a person who earns less than you or is from a different class background? Are we guilty of this class ethos too when it comes to social divisions?

[Ally]

He he, I did say an 'almost perfect' novel.

I like your perceptions about Jordan being necessary to stop Daisy looking too isolated. I do find Daisy to be almost 'off limits' or, I hate to say it, vacant. Jordan does ground her. Perhaps Jordan, taking your point about cynicism, is the 'worldly' side of the type of woman typical in that social set?

Daisy is an interesting name for the character don't you think? The purity of the white petals surrounding a 'sun like' centre. A lot of the action takes place in intense sunny heat and there is a frenetic and heated quality to the parties. The car that is involved in the accident is yellow too and there is lots of 'gold' about in terms of great wealth. Doesn't Gatsby have a silver suit and gold tie at one point? Is Daisy really as pure as the white Daisy flower?

[Michael]

Daisy.....a delicate flower easily broken or crushed by it's surroundings. Or malleable, weak or serving little purpose other than to be pretty. She is disengaged even with her own child as if she doen't know how to define herself.
Contrast to Jordan who appears to have opted to define herself by her achievements and not to be defined by marriage and producing an heir and a spare. Nick was sceptical that Jordan had got engaged is there more to Jordan than we see.
The most pivotal female is of course Myrtle whose name gives an air of dowdiness. But is is around her that the house of cards falls and all because of a dog. Without the leash and collar Mr Wilson may not have been forced to act. I felt Mr Wilson knew of the affair but now it looks like Myrtle &Tom are playing happy families - a step too far.
Yellow car again 'look at me I'm the American Dream, I started of with nothing'.
For a bit fun, if we consider the the author chose the name Daisy to help describe or define the character what name would chose for yourself and would it work?

[David]

Michael wrote: "Thank for your comments.
For me the novel didn't give any more insight to class divide than I already had.
If I read it in my youth I may have had a different opinion, having said which knowing me ..."

There is a rich strata in every society so other societies will get it.

[David]

Ally wrote: "For me this book does stand alone. In fact, I'd go as far as to say it's almost a 'perfect' novel. - I'm always impressed with how much nuance is packed into what is a very short novel...the discus..."

Yes, it is compact but it has a lot of weight in a small package.

[Michael]

Of course there are rich in every society who seek to hold on to that wealth and the power it brings.
Here in the UK we still have a Monarchy and people who hold hereditary titles, who to some extent aren't cash rich.
I was drawing a distinction between wealth, new or old, and that idea that someone is better than you because of their breeding rather than of wealth.

[Natalie]

The book stands alone for me. It was one of the first "adult" novels I read at just age 14 and I was sucked into what I interpreted as the idealism of Gatsby, the unworthiness of his friends, his outsider status and his popularity based on parties. I was naive and did not question the source of his wealth. I thought Nick Carraway was wise and had a privileged ability to analyze people.

I am now a lot older and feel that the literary magic still works even though I'm now much older than the characters. It worked for me in a way that _Tender is the Night_ or _This Side of Paradise_ did not. I enjoyed that but the greatness of Gatsby is that it became instantly memorable when I first read it.

[David]

a very nice way to sum it up:
the greatness of Gatsby is that it became instantly memorable when I first read it.

[Ally]

I completely agree Natalie - memorable and re-readable (...if that's even a word). Like David said, what a wonderful way to sum it up.

[Michael]

What I am going to take from this is that we interpret the words we read with a different emphasis and insight.
The issue for me is that the book had been talked and written about in such terms I expected more.
I try to under promise and over deliver. lol.
Will I read it again (re-readable? - if its not a word it should be). Possibly but some time later.

[David]

Re: plays
This is a time to look at the Auden-Isherwood anti-fascist plays
The Dog Beneath the Skin (1935) and the Ascent of F6 (1937)

[Natalie]

I always thought that Jordan yet another part of the lying, cheating theme. In this book we see the ethics of sports undermined--by Jordan and by Meyer Wolfsheim, the man "who fixed the World Series back in 1919". Her cool cynicism also contrasts with Gatsby's hopeful idealism.

[Roisin]

Yes, I think you right Natalie, is another person the scheme who is not very honest. Sheen on these characters fade quite fast in this book.