a) Pre-Reading Expectations
Since there is an array of meanings and collocations of the word
‘great’, it’s not an easy task to fathom out its
corresponding sense in the context of a proper name. Yet we can
pick out the ones that may come in handy sifting away the inappropriate
meanings.
The moment I got rid of everything useless I could scrutinize the
header in an attempt to target the right meaning. Perhaps the word
‘great’ implicates the size of the character, his physical
dimension. It may have sounded rather ridiculous but I presumed
that it could in no way be true.
The next assumption was that the title had to deal with some event
or toponym like the Great October Socialist Revolution.
On the other hand, it harked me back to the classical American
titles, the way they dub almost everything. And not only the American
ones, to be honest. In this sense, it may have misled yours truly.
My first expectation could have been, “Wow, way dazzling!
It must be a humdinger,” whereas in effect it was not. Hence
my conclusion: the book is nothing more than a commonplace US cheap
stuff, even though it was concocted in the disputable heyday of
the American literature. With these reflections I turned the first
page of the book, skim-reading the annotations, and things.
In short, I expected the book something to be chewed over, guzzled,
torn up, and slamdunked into the dustbin.
b) Post-Reading Impressions
On reading the book I had to reconsider my initial contemplations
about the link between the title and the protagonist of the book.
Gatsby emerged to be the title character, yet I couldn’t but
pose a reasonable question to myself: Why was he ensconced as great?
Indeed, what was great about his actions, his behavior, his character?
Nothing, I dared assume. At the same time I was more than certain
that the header of the book somehow epitomized the plot or the pivotal
idea of the script.
And at that very moment it occurred to me that the magicians used
to be called the greats. It aroused another question: Was Gatsby
a thaumaturge to be given that solid prefix to his name? The unexpected
and mind-boggling answer to it was: sure, he was. To my way of thinking,
it is Gatsby’s ability to convert a dream into reality, to
always conjure up something out of virtually nothing, his knack
of making things happen that underpins the plot of the novel. He
acts very much like a magician who is desperately striving to accomplish
a set goal, like a biathlete digging deep to arrive at the shooting
range and clear his targets.
That is why my posterior impressions drastically diverged with
what I expected to read. And the title has to do with the protagonist’s
magical abilities, it clarifies why it is “The Great Gatsby.”
Plot
The story unfolds the way that the protagonist himself is inducted
after we have found out some basic facts about his unconventional
and vibrant lifestyle. We do get his reputation and his image as
seen from the angle of the other characters whilst we don’t
know anything about him in person. Nor do we have a notion of his
illegal actions and their purpose that will be intrinsic for getting
Gatsby as a personality. But do we actually need them for the culmination?
The author could easily expand on them later. The point I’m
making is that the climax of the story may well be staged with us
possessing rather sparse information about the protagonist’s
inner world and the overview and prehistory of his yearnings. Personally
I could have managed to perceive the climax of the novel having
a hazy idea of what was truly going on prior to that both inside
and outside Jay Gatsby.
Concerning the climax itself, I can admit that the highest point
of the plot could be seen dually, or I should say there is no set
touchstone for stating a certain climax.
If the criterion is what conduced to the tragic finale we can point
out that it was a fatal car crash after which the accused Gatsby
was gunned down by Wilson.
Yet if we regard the moral and historical context the pivotal one
we should see the end of Gatsby’s relationship with Daisy
as the climax of the story after which the life of the protagonist
made no sense any more.
The finale of the novel is catastrophic, for the highlighted Gatsby
is shot at the hand of George Wilson, the couple of Myrtle run over
by Gatsby’s car. Moreover, the failure of Jay’s dream
of living together with his beloved Daisy and happiness indicates
that the American dream on the whole won’t be viable and will
break to pieces alike. The narrator Nick Carraway gets disillusioned
by the society in New York and moves back to the Midwest.
Co-Authoring
The plot of the story makes for the readers looking into the reasons
of some of the events. For instance, a reader may himself endeavor
to find out the way Gatsby could be justified and prove that the
predicament with Gatsby’s guilt was trumped-up. It provides
a reader with a sort of an opportunity to contribute to the contents
of the novel.
In case Wilson knew some of the details he wouldn’t have
killed Gatsby. And the rest of the novel would have made an intricate
curve.
Russian-American Association
When I revise the characters of the Russian literature in quest
for someone resembling Jay Gatsby two names instantly spring to
my mind: Pavel Famusov and Nicolay Stavrogin. To be honest, neither
of the two is compatible with the qualities of Jay Gatsby, yet there
is something about both of them that has to do with Gatsby as well.
For example, Pavel Kirsanov from “The Fathers and the Sons”
by Ivan Turgenev longs for one gal very much the same as Jay Gatsby
does and when she loses her he kind of shifts to placid life with
actually no aim, and is bound for living in solitude. The same sort
of thing would have happened to Jay Gatsby provided he weren’t
assassinated.
As for Nicolay Stavrogin, he appears the same ambivalent person
as Fitzgerald’s character. On the one hand, he is prone to
some high moral issues but on the other – he falls victim
to the demonic ‘trends’ of the society, proceeds in
the wrong direction, and finally ends up committing a suicide.
Cultural Background
In April, 2007 I watched the movie “The Great Gatsby"
(1974), and was groundbreakingly upset by all of its facets. Since
the ideas of Francis Scott Fitzgerald including the one of American
dream are revealed lousily in it, I made up my mind it would prudent
of me to publish a brief review of the said movie:
The movie I viewed had to deal with the book “The Great Gatsby”
by Francis Scott Fitzgerald. From my humble corner I expected the
directors to convey the atmosphere of the roaring 20s of American
history and to somehow outline the highs and lows of the capitalist
yesteryear. And as far as history is concerned, that span of time
was, disputably, the most controversial one throughout all the history
of the United States. Yet to be honest, the flair suggested this
hope will be dashed to pieces, and next up....
From the very outset it appeared quite obvious that the profundity
of the novel was in no way reflected in the movie shot in 1974.
Incidentally, only a handful of the so-called cinema pundits deemed
that vision of the novel successful, whereas the vast majority of
revered critics dubbed it the worst out of the four versions of
“The Great Gatsby”. On the other hand, we can surely
pick out a bunch of daft venal pressmen who would have scribbled
epithets like “dazzling” or, say, “mindboggling”
in reference to the movie under consideration, and it will also
be a point, yet it is utterly up to a certain viewer to rate the
product. The rest of the geeky movie just proved the maiden evaluation
right.
The directors screwed up to unveil the gist of the novel and to
anyhow depict the chasm, that stark contrast between the East and
the West of the country of boundless opportunities. Nor did they
manage to toss up an appropriate cast.
Instead, what we got was a piece of sobby stuff highlighting the
ritzy and glitzy lifetime of American wheeler-dealers of aristocratic
mold. To make matters worse, some of the protagonists were truly
misleading, for they didn’t match the characters of the book,
like Jordan, an ordinary babe of the 20s according to the script,
was portrayed almost as a gorgeous pin-up.
After watching one and the same scene of high-octane partying I
got the impression of the director as of the one who superficially
focused attention on those wild throngings featuring boisterous
sprees of activities of those rich playboys of the 20s who whiled
away their time in a bevy of leggy chicks and with a decent drink,
to boot. Thus, if you are prone to those louche-living ideals that
story will meticulously display it to you.
To sum it all up, the movie “The Great Gatsby” failed
to strike a chord with my mood and reflections on reading the book.
The movie emerged a commonplace for the greedy movie-guzzlers, those
avid cinema freaks who don’t care about the ideas, the literary
or philosophical insight but carry on watching whatever they are
offered. That target audience somehow even resembles the protagonists
of the on-screen “The Great Gatsby.” Hopefully, the
best version of the novel is yet to be released.
Read more:
|
