The Great Gatsby
discussion
Hidden Significance of Slagel's Call
date
newest »


Good point. Trump has unmasked the neo-Konservative as someone with a larcenous heart and corrupted values. They put him in office, so he represents them.


"Yes?" The nam..."
Agreed.
And thank you, Monty J! You made me reconsider the true meaning of the "stout, middle-aged man, with enormous owl-eyed spectacles" whom Jordan and Nick discover drunk in the library. At first blush his: “𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬?. . . 𝘈𝘴 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭. . . “𝘈𝘣𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭—𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘐 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘣𝘰𝘢𝘳𝘥."
The drunk guest mentions Belasco and weaving that question of what-is-real here vs. what-is-counterfeit.
Gatsby's bonds-- it turns out-- were only a "nice durable cardboard."
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Counterfeit or stolen bonds, when presented for redemption, would not be paid because the serial numbers would be checked against a list of "hot" (stolen) items.
If a "small-town" bank's trust department bought Gatsby's bonds on behalf of widows and orphans, Gatsby would get paid, but the interest coupons submitted for redemption every six months would not, and the widows and orphans whose trust accounts owned the bonds would go hungry and get evicted.
To an informed reader, it should be clear at this point that the purpose of Gatsby's parties was not to attract Daisy but instead to peddle bonds to unsuspecting partygoers. "Most were brought" according to the owl-eyed man. Gatsby tried several times to recruit Nick, a bond salesman, to go to work for him. Nick wisely declined.
But four of the five films based on the novel do not even show the Slagel scene, and the major academic works I have read missed it as well. Are these people just careless or has there been a concerted effort to conceal something that would reflect poorly on Wall Street?
Could Wall Street have an influence on academia and Hollywood?