The Great Gatsby - F. Scott Fitzgerald

The Great Gatsby is a classic text that many know and love, but it is also blatantly sexist and racist. When Fitzgerald’s novel was first published in 1926, civil rights for women and people of colour were basically non-existent. To read this text today without de-constructing these problematic elements would allow the novel to display these prejudices, perpetuating unsavoury perceptions based on gender and race. Now, I am in no way suggesting that we should no longer read this novel, or that we can not teach Gatsby to students; I am proposing that we take a materialist feminist lens to critique the text, exploring the work by displacing and intervening in the narrative. Fitzgerald still deserves recognition for his beautifully distinct use of language, and adept implementation of symbolism. However Fitzgerald's talents also house the problematic elements of this classic text.

Tom Buchanan is the most obvious problematic character in the novel, who is often touched upon in educational settings. Instead, I want to focus on Nick (the narrator), and the subtle ways his character perpetuates gender binaries and reinforces women in passive roles.

Nick is a problematic character because as the narrator he continually and subtly reinforces the reader’s view of women. Nick controls the reader's perception of the novel. He has the power to influence the reader's interpretation of characters - and therefore he is the one responsible for the representations of gender presented to the readers. Nick's use of language equates women with objects or images to either worship or expel; to keep high on a pedestal, untouchable and delicate, or to brush off as stupid and child-like. Nick portrays women as sexual and tantalizing objects; he describes Daisy early in the novel by saying “I’ve heard that Daisy’s mumur was only to make people lean toward her” (14). His choice of the word 'murmur' is meant to suggest an alluring quality designed to draw men in and wind them up, as opposed to a calming murmur used for reassurance, by a grounded individual. He sexualizes her by suggesting that her murmur is only meant to tempt men, which reduces her complexity as a character.

Moreover, he often describes women by only focusing on their body, compartmentalizing them, therefore de-humanizing them. Nick describes Jordan Baker by explaining, “I enjoyed looking at her. She was s slender, small-breasted girl, with an erect carriage”(16). This judgement of 'the whole' based on 'the parts' mentality is an objective approach similar to the mentality one may have when first assessing a nice car or piece of furniture. This is problematic because it places women on the objective end of the subjective-objective continuum, and Jordan should be a subject, a complex human being, instead of being described as an object to merely be admired.

The narrator also reinforces the gender binaries of women as small fragile creatures compared to men. When Nick recalls Daisy saying “That’s what I get for marrying a brute of a man, a great, big, hulking physical specimen of a -” (17), Nick is paraphrasing Daisy and claiming her autonomy for himself. By removing her ability to speak for herself, Nick is unconsciously or subtly reinforcing that the man's opinion is worth more than a woman's. Nick is also reinforcing the problematic perceptions of men (ie. men should be strong and aggressive) that are continually perpetuated by the patriarchal system even in contemporary media, while making clear that women are lacking in comparison to men (to possess 'feminine' qualities is a sign of weakness).

Furthermore, Nick perpetuates the stereotypical gender binary that divides women from men. Nick claims that “Dishonesty in a woman is a thing you never blame deeply” (58-9), suggesting that women are fickle and irrational, compared with the ideal man who is the opposite; equatable with reason, logic, and rationality. “[F]or a moment I thought I loved her," Nick explains, "But I am slow-thinking and full of interior rules that act as brakes on my desires... I am one of the few honest people that I have ever known” (59). Nick places himself on a moral high-ground, claiming that he is superior as a man because he is not swayed or controlled by his emotions but instead takes his time to think things through, in contrast to his earlier statement about women, who, as a brush-stroke of the gender lacks control over their emotions. Because Nick is responsible for the representations of gender presented to the readers, we must hold him accountable when analyzing the text, for his blatant reinforcement of outdated gendered beliefs.

Nick furthers his portrayal of women as irrational and hysterical when he recalls “Most of the remaining women were now having fights with men said to be their husbands... she appeared suddenly at his side like an angry diamond, and hissed: ‘You promised!’ into his ear” (52). This description of the ‘crazy angry woman’ is one that is assumed ‘to be laughed at’ and dismissed. At the same time this description suggests that women are to be idolized as sexy, beautiful creatures/objects, with his comparison to a ‘diamond’ (ie. hard, impenetrable yet something to be revered), and the primal (sexual and animalistic) nature of ‘hissing’ in his ear.

Gatsby also worships Daisy in a way that makes her less-than-human. He is in love with the idea of loving Daisy. The memory of their past love haunts Gatsby, and Nick describes, “He knew that when he kissed this girl, and forever wed his unutterable visions to her perishable breath, his mind would never romp again like the mind of God. So he waited, listening for a moment longer to the tuning-fork that had been struck upon a star. Then he kissed her. At his lips’ touch she blossomed for him like a flower and the incarnation was complete” (107). This language attempts to shift the power from Gatsby to Daisy, but Daisy has no power in this moment. This is made clear by the sentence “she blossomed for him”, but only “at his lips’ touch”. Daisy is portrayed as passive, weak, an object with no authority. She is compared to a flower, something that is pretty but delicate, seemingly wild yet plucked against her will. This language of ownership and objectification is problematic, and found continually throughout the novel by the men (Nick, Gatsby and Tom) towards the women (Daisy, Jordan and Myrtle).

This novel is such a great example of a beautiful, yet problematic classic that we can actively critique and analyze. Fitzgerald's mastery of language should not go unrecognized. Contemporary feminist readings of this novel must question and subvert the specific choice of language used in the novel, through discussions, dialogues and interventions. For example: in a classroom setting students could perform problematic scenes / sections of dialogue and intervene using theatrical techniques from theorists such as Brecht, and/or re-write sections of the text in a way that allows the women to gain active authority and power over their bodies. There is so many potential (problematic) topics to discuss and dissect from The Great Gatsby, but I will leave this for now.

Sonic Approved