the Great Gatsby

[Anonymous No.5871791]

Why do so many of you think this isn't at least top 10s Patrish?

[=^.^= No.5871804]

>Patrichè*

[Anonymous No.5871934]

>>5871791
>American
>poor use of symbols. HEY GUYS LOOK AT THE GREEN LIGHT, ITS A SYMBOL
>overdone prose
>awful characters(awful people too, but that's not necessarily a bad thing)


All in all an average book.

[Anonymous No.5872050]

The Great Gatsby is brilliant.

[Anonymous No.5872058]

>>5871791

it's a very good book but it's not one I feel much of a connection to. I can understand why some people love it as much as they do but I don't consider it a book like Don Quixote that I have a hard time imagining anyone having a less than ecstatic reaction to

[Anonymous No.5872570]

>>5871791

Evelyn Waugh did the whole rich people thing better than Fitzgerald ever did.

[Anonymous No.5872836]

Hivemind

[Anonymous No.5872900]

>>5871934

protagonist is a faggot who would probably use me and forget about me like the guy in Nick's apartment

[Anonymous No.5872909]

>>5871791

Yes.

It's one of the few "Great American Novels" that isn't parochial. You can read the symbols as existential or applying to capitalism instead of the "american dream." It's also much more highly structured than people think it is. Many don't pick up on it because they read it early on as readers because it's accessible on the surface level; it has lots of mirroring descriptions, passages with carefully tuned meter. Also this makes it arguable better than a lot of obviously wrought novels. If you don't believe me, Eliot admired it. Sent Fitzgerald a letter.

[Anonymous No.5872916]

>>5872909
This, I don't necessarily like the book but it accomplishes what it attempts and only retards discredit it for being too simple

[Anonymous No.5873380]

The tacit ideas are vapid at best and it's semi well-written. To be frank, when I read The Great Gatsby, I really felt like I was reading an assigned reading book. It garners attention because the ideas aren't out of anyone's reach along with the book being semi well-written. It's easily recognizable greatness that pretends to be hidden.

[Anonymous No.5873401]

>>5871934
it never says its a symbol, you are just assuming it is.

[Anonymous No.5873414]

>>5873380
>>5872909
accessible messages /=/ bad book

[Anonymous No.5873425]

>>5873414
I never said it was bad.

All I'm saying is it's as basic as it is good, though it is very good.

[Anonymous No.5873806]

oh lordy

Gatsby is not a fully formed character, his essence is entirely his fucked-up love for Daisy.
Daisy is pretty loosely characterized. For all Gatsby's passionate love for her, we're never that into her. She exists as an object for his desires, and nothing more. Which in turn makes his desire and therefore his entire personality seem flat and contrived.
The symbolism is heavy and overdone.
The writing is saccharine and slow.
the most interesting scene in the book is the party nick goes to with tom and myrtle. by faaaar the most interesting. And gatsby has nothing to do with it

[Anonymous No.5873838]

Inelegantly tryhard prose
Boring and pointless
and to top it all off, probably the work of fiction that has been the most ridiculously overrated by americans after the christian bible, obviously.

[Anonymous No.5873850]

>>5872570
>>5872570
This. Gatsby is great until you read the authors who did the whole thing better, then you realize how simplistic and two-dimensional Gatsby is.

[Anonymous No.5873887]

>>5873806
And our go-to "good guy" Nick isn't being an asshat not able to see past his own preconceived notions of these people and unreliably narrating them into being a little two dimensional? I'm not being contrarian, but some of the inconsistencies come from the fact that Nick is entitled and selfish to a degree aswell.

[Anonymous No.5873922]

I read it for the 2nd time a few weeks back, then I read Tender is the Night. I preferred the latter. More interesting setting, a few more characters, some subplots, and the structure is more to my liking.

[Anonymous No.5874021]

I think the Great Gatsby is a bit overrated.
Tender is the night is much more brilliant. The heavy cold shit that Fitzgerald can write is just chilling.

[Anonymous No.5874086]

>>5871934
>>American
Ohh, so you're a pleb.

[Anonymous No.5874129]

It has some heavy-handed themes and images, which makes it great for high schoolers. But there's a lot of subtly that never gets brought up here (and rarely in high school).

The people who say the prose is overwritten are especially hilarious. Whose prose are we complaining about, Fitzgerald's or Carraway's?

[Anonymous No.5874272]

>>5873850

I thought Fitzgerald's portray of rich people in a different age was very hollow and not very deep as a lot of people claimed, Brideshead Revisited manages to do it so much more better because everything surrounding it feels more genuine.

[Le redditor needs an editor No.5874523]

>>5874086
America is a collection of plebs and degenerates. Worse than 'stralya.

[Anonymous No.5874531]

>>5871791
I fucking hated all that characters the first time i read the book

[Anonymous No.5874581]

Gatsby is a beta (trapped in le friendzone again, m'old sport), Daisy is a shallow bitch, Nick is a third-wheeling homosexual, and Fitzgerald is a purple-prose-loving sissy. Definitely worth the read.

[Anonymous No.5874605]

>>5871791
ill admit that, from an objective standpoint, its a near flawless novel. but, thanks to deconstructionism, im able to say i dont like it.

[Anonymous No.5874636]

>this fucking thread

[Anonymous No.5874772]

Nick was gay. His obsession with Gatsby was linked to his secret sexual desires. Gatsby was heteroflexible and they shared a few nights of sex and cuddling. Jordan watched (she was a total fujoshi.)