In The Great Gatsby F. Scott Fitzgerald presents a specific portrait of American society during the roaring twenties and tells the story of a man who rises from the gutter to great riches. This man, Jay Gatsby, does not realize that his new wealth cannot give him the privileges of class and status. Nick Carraway who is from a prominent mid-western family tells the story. Nick presents himself as a reliable narrator, when actually several events in the novel prove he is an unreliable narrator. Although Nick Carraway may be an unreliable narrator, he is the best narrator for the novel because he creates the correct effect.
Nick Carraway wants the reader to think his upbringing gave him the moral character to observe others and not pass judgment on them. If this were true he would be a reliable narrator. A hint to Nick’s true moral character is given on the first page of the novel when he misunderstands his father’s advice. His father said, “Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages you’ve had.” Clearly his father was telling him of the importance of not criticizing others, but Nick interprets this as a judgment on others (Donaldson 131). This shows how Nick’s upbringing has actually made him a judgmental snob toward others. He is not partial; he judges and condemns nearly every character in the novel. He says Tom Buchanan has “Straw hair, a hard mouth, a supercilious manner, and a cruel body with which he pushes people around.” Daisy Buchanan is described as insincere and snobbishly thinks she “has been everywhere, and seen everything and done everything.” Myrtle Wilson is sai…
… middle of paper …
…ich distorts everything. Nick is partial to Jay Gatsby because Gatsby has the guts to chase after his dreams. Gatsby represents the American dream; he rose up from the gutter to fabulous wealth and gets the chance to pursue the girl he loves. He will never be able to have her though because he does not have the same class or status as Daisy.
Works Cited
Daley, Linda. The Great Gatsby Website. 16 July 2000. <http://www.geocities.com/andrew_dilling/
Donaldson, Scott. “Fresh Approaches.” Critical Essays on F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby. New York: G.K. Hall and Co. 1984. 131-32.
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1992. 34.
Taylor, Douglas. ” Using a Dramatic Narrator to Present a Bifocal View.” Readings on The Great Gatsby. Ed. Katie de Koster. San Diego: The Greenhaven Press, 1998. 147 – 51.
Oedipus the King: Fate vs. Free Will
Sophocles’ Oedipus the King: Fate vs. Free Will
In Oedipus the King, one of Sophocles’ most popular plays, Sophocles clearly depicts the Greek’s popular belief that fate will control a man’s life despite of man’s free will. Man was free to choose and was ultimately held responsible for his own actions. Throughout Oedipus the King, the concept of fate and free will plays an integral part in Oedipus’ destruction.
Destined to marry his mother and murder his father, Oedipus was partly guided by fate. This prophecy, as warned by the Oracle of Apollo at Delphi, was absolute and would inevitably come to pass. As for free will, Oedipus’ actions, temper, impulsive nature and pride (hubris) as well as his erroneous judgment (hamartia) all contributed to his eventual downfall.
At the beginning of the tragedy, Oedipus was made aware of his destiny. Immediately after receiving the news, Oedipus fled Corinth and headed for Thebes thinking he could escape his fate. Unknowingly, Oedipus had just begun to walk the path that led to his downfall. Shortly after, he killed his father Laius and later married his mother Jocasta. These actions proved that his life was predetermined by fate and that he was unable to change it. Years later, Oedipus is informed of the plague that has struck Thebes, and is asked to help in the matter. Oedipus could have waited for the plague to end, but feeling pity for his suffering people, he sent Creon to Delphi where he was to plead before Apollo to relie…