Gatsby : Conclusion. Part Two.


It is finished. Finally. It… Sort of became better. In that there are now two layers to the characters! Fitzy seems to be very good at creating two-dimensional people. And it seems the entire plot focusses around the fact that Gatsby is in love with some bird who fucks off at the end. Big deal. All I got from it was that the entirity of Gatsby’s life was centred around Daisy – his reason for being alive was her. Which was insane as she had her own home, family and life. Ok it wasn’t necessarily a happy one, but Gatsby’s complete disregard for anything that was hers was just unbelivable. His overriding confidence she would down-tools and swan over to his life was cliche and arrogant. Just because he has money doesn’t mean happiness. How can a story centre around such an unstable major character? Christ alive Scott. Or is that what you were trying to say? The whole glitzy exterior of the 1920s hid this incredibly sad inside? I find that very hard to believe that was your only meaning.

I did like the sick irony that it was Daisy who killed her husband’s lover though. That was good. Although it was quite 19th century, quite convenient. Like the house Jane Eyre stumbles across just happens to contain her cousins. And just the right people seem to die at the end of ‘Return of the Native’. All a bit suspect, but it was the most exciting part.

But the insanely irritating narrator seemed to be so terrible at chronologically retelling things I had to re-read things at least twice just to know where I was. If anything, he became less interesting. Maybe it was the style to be deliberately vague, but it really hacked me off. Good work Fitzgerald. Good bloody work.

This novel left very little impression on me, aside from mild annoyance that others can see meaning in it and I just can’t. 1920s fail.

Advertisements

What Is So Great About Gatsby? Part One.


Currently I reside on page 105 of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s ‘The Great Gatsby’. You may get to page 106 and ask yourself “Have I been wasting my time?” The answer is YES, yes you HAVE. Douchebag.

I have read over one hundred pages of nothing, it feels. I am aware there’s this character Gatsby, who’s a bit of a cad and and rich tosser, and a main narrator who is quite obviously so bloody boring the story had to be about someone else. He appears to have no personality. I am of the opinion that Fitzgerald has made a classic mistake – focussing on the wrong character. There are some interesting people to read about – or at least more interesting compared to the main two – but we get minimal information about them. Fail, Fitzgerald, serious, serious fail.

Going back to our narrator with no personality, what’s his game? He has no strong feelings about anything. Ever. He mentions a relationship, in about two lines, that he had over the summer, but he cuts this off because the bird’s brother started to get angry. That’s some serious love dude. There is no hate about anything in particular, not really even a “this was good” at the end of each day. BORING.

But maybe I’m not giving Scott boy enough credit. Oh no wait, yes I am.

Maybe he was trying to achieve a reflection of the 1920s? How it was all money a-go-go, parties and frivolity, but all surface and no feeling? The trouble is, he is actually a good writer. I have enjoyed – or at least been able to read – the first part of the book easily. Is this a very shrewd writer who draws you in with his way with words but doesn’t have any effect on your life? Reading ‘The Great Gastby’ is kind of like watching a Richard Curtis film, or listening to an Eno album – perfectly enjoyable the first time, but no real meaning.  Maybe the last eighty pages will improve. Or at least have an exciting incident in there…