Well in my opinion, Gatsby is an idiot, but apparently he's supposed to be great, so can anyone help me out? What makes this guy great?
Ginny Weasly
reading the book might answer that question for you.
share"nothing is niether good or bad, but thinking makes it so."-shakespeare's hamlet
that's really the point... because he's so untouchable, the people of east and west egg make up rumors about him to account for his money and his secrecy. the title is ironic.
i think when nick turns to gatsby right before his death and says "they're a rotten bunch. you're worth the whole lot of them," that about sums it up. daisy is fickle and doesn't know what real love is, she just enjoyed attention and lavish gifts that stroked her ego. meanwhile, gatsby has stayed true to her over many years, building his empire in all for her, ("rich girls don't marry poor boys"), and his strength of character and tenacious heart are what make him great.
sharebeing in love with a woman like daisy is what makes him a true idiot in my eyes. what in the world did he see in her? unless of course he too is just as shallow as she is because if he had any depth to him he would have seen nothing worth having in daisy.
shareHe’s not great. The only “greatness” about him is what people build him up to be. While he may be able to blind people by his secrecy and wealth, the real Gatsby is rather shallow and insecure.
Michael
[deleted]
Shakespeare, if alive today, may possibly enjoy shows like the "Hurley" episode of Lost (shown Wed., March 2), of the "Sawyer" episode two weeks before that. Watch for reruns of these.
Not that they compare to dozens of subtle ironies in the Gatsby book (parties failing to bring Daisy directly to Gatsby, a prized possession 'driving' Gatsby to his downfall, the well-shaved irregular lawn mirroring the presentable corruption of Gatsby's life...) The movie serves up many of these ironies, though how well can be argued--but better than most book adaptations.
"Shakespeare, if alive today, may possibly enjoy shows like ...."
What?!?!
Please, don't ever make posthumous assumptions about people, particularly when they're quintessential literary figures!
What's next?
"Fitzgerald, if alive today, may possibly enjoy movies like Donnie Darko"
[deleted]
Please, don't ever make posthumous assumptions about people, particularly when they're quintessential literary figures!Oh please! And just who are you to tell someone what they can and can not do? Shakespeare is considered one of the greats by scholars and students the world over today, but in his time he was considered one of the muck. And if there was in IMDB during his time, folks like you would be howling about him ripping off or remaking, since a lot of his works were re-imaginings of works before( Romeo & Juliet, especially). Don't think he was the pretentious artist as you seem to make him out to be(and you are acting yourself). The poster can't imagine what Shakespeare would like? Every one of us is guilty of imagining what someone great may or may not like today.
"Shakespeare is considered one of the greats by scholars and students the world over today, but in his time he was considered one of the muck."
Completely false. Shakespeare was recognized as the greatest dramatist of his time by his contemporaries, with only Ben Jonson being considered in the same class.
Jay Gatsby is labeled as great because he is well known and is very successful, as well as very rich. This is a materialistic approach, but materialism played a big part in this story. I don't think Gatsby was really an idiot, just too full of false dreams. I actually kind of liked the character of Gatsby; he was a very friendly and pleasant character.
shareOh man you most definitely have to read the book. Gatsby was great because that was what the world made him out to be. but by no means was he an idiot!!! he's one of my favorite characters in literature..read the book!!!!
shareI think the title also has a circus-like quality to it. Gatsby seems like a hidden exhibit... the man behind the curtain. Everyone wants to step up and catch a glimpse of the mysterious millionaire who throws such lavish parties but rarely makes appearances at them. His house is even compared to Coney Island at one point in the book, further emphasizing this concept.
"Everyone is born right-handed, but only the greatest overcome it."share
Exactly.
I like my sugar with coffee and cream.
Hm... I'm writing a paper on this, so I need an opinion...
My prompt is: Does Gatsby deserve to be called 'great'? In what ways is he great? In what ways is he not? In the end, which wins out: greatness or mediocrity?
So from what I've read, everyone thinks that Gatsby is a mediocre man. He never did anything more amazing than throwing a few parties, and he is just like 99.99999% of the country, a simple man with a simple story that no one knows and everyone wants to figure out. (That's good... I'm gonna put that in my paper XD) Heh... I should do papers like this more often... this is actually gonna be kinda easy. sweet!
~
Yea, Gatsby may have lived an imaginary "great" life, but as for his death? Only a few people showed for his funeral. People just used him for his big place, and they never had to clean up after themselves. He couldn't get Daisy, and when he died, she pretty much picked up and moved on. So I think you'd be correct in saying that Gatsby was just mediocre.
"Oh No, Taking care of the maggots is MY job."
Can't help you here. Perhaps I could write a paper about 'A Rose for Emily' for you instead.
share[deleted]
I think the closest any of you got was grule.... but guys, remember who wrote this story... NICK CARRAWAY. He gave it the title, not F. S. Fitzgerald. And what was Nick's view of gatsby? that's right. Now was gatsby great? well... he did great things, and by great I mean immense, not grand. Look at the extents he went to in winning daisy, heck, they were pretty great (once again large, not grand)... that's what I think anyway.
shareYou really ought to read the book. It's a very good novel, considering I had to read it for school. All of the other books I had to read for school weren't very interesting, but this book surprised. But anyways, I don't think Gatsby was an idiot at all. When Nick turns around to Gatsby to say " They're a rotten bunch. You're worth the whole damn lot of them." he means that Tom, Daisy and Jordan are rich and they have everything they already want, except for a few things. Tom and Daisy cheat on each other, and Jordan cheats while playing golf. Gatsby only got rich for love, not to be selfish or to cheat. He thought if he got rich, he could have Daisy, and he did for a while. He never used his money for anything else except for love.
share[deleted]
But for the love of Daisy of all people? He was a fool. Or simply just as bad as the rest of them.
shareBingo! We have a winner! Yes, Gatsby is thought to be great because of his wealth and bacchanals. But his true greatness is his true romanticism which stands in contrast to the cynical class-based merger of Daisy and Tom Buchanan.
http://stevegallanter.wordpress.com
"As his relentless quest for Daisy demonstrates, Gatsby has an extraordinary ability to transform his hopes and dreams into reality; at the beginning of the novel, he appears to the reader just as he desires to appear to the world. This talent for self-invention is what gives Gatsby his quality of “greatness”: indeed, the title “The Great Gatsby” is reminiscent of billings for such vaudeville magicians as “The Great Houdini” and “The Great Blackstone,” suggesting that the persona of Jay Gatsby is a masterful illusion."
That's from the character analysis of Gatsby on sparknotes.com
I don't know why it is, but I can't help but like Gatsby. He's probably one of my favorite characters of all time, and I can't really tell why. I find him easy to relate to... he tries desperately to reach his goals but everything ends up screwed up in the end. The way his father comes into the end of the movie and shows Nick Gatsby's journal thingy almost moved me to tears. He was just one of those characters that makes you think...
Gatsby is great because, in a world of pure materialism, at least his motives are pure. I agree that Nick's little speech near the end captures this sentiment well. Gatsby's illegal dealinga are just further proof of how far he'll go for Daisy, whether that love is misguided or not. Anyone who labels him an idiot is an idiot themself, for they are automatically condemning a man because he loves. Even if his love is too the point of obsession (which the movie doesn't support, see Daisy's reaction to Gatsby's scrapbook of her press clippings), the fact that he loves another human being and uses his wealth as a means to an end instead of how the others use theirs as simply life, floating on without purpose, is a true testament to what makes Gatsby great.
Of course, the title can also be viewed from the ironic point of view that the engima and allure of his parties made him great, I just prefer the previous one because it gets into his soul and scorns the cynicism of human nature rather than adopting it as a reasonable point of view.
The fact that Fitzgerald was never happy with the title is also interesting to this discussion. He wanted to name it "Trimalchio in West Egg<" and "Among the Ash Heaps and Millionaires," among others. Maybe he himself was wondering if he wanted to convey the message that Gatsby was great in the title, or whether he wanted readers to draw their own conclusions. The final title he wanted the book to have was "Under the Red White and Blue." That, of course, would've focused on the American dream aspect of the novel.