56 pages • 1 hour read
F. Scott FitzgeraldA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Between each character in The Great Gatsby there are intricate tensions informed by class. So-called “old money” aristocrats like Tom look down upon the perceived gaudiness of “new money” individuals like Gatsby. Industrialization during the Gilded Age (between the 1870s and 1890s) led to massive wealth for people in the Northern and Western USA who grew railroad, oil, coal, steel, or construction companies. Nick’s family pretends that they are “old money,” but their origins trace back to a mid-19th-century hardware store, suggesting they were a tangential part of industrialization. In contrast, families with “old money” inherited their wealth from generations of income brought about by colonial expansion in the USA; relatedly, Tom and Daisy’s house is a “Georgian Colonial mansion” (6), explicitly highlighting this history.
After World War I, there was another economic boom driven by the rise of consumer goods, increased construction, and technological progress. Once again, people who ran these companies gained massive wealth. Thus, characters like Tom (who comes from “old money”) must seek new ways to assert their superiority over equally wealthy men like Gatsby based in something other than money. This is why Tom derides Gatsby’s ostentatiously large mansion, his flashy suits, and his imposing Rolls Royce.
Meanwhile, Gatsby himself internalizes these jibes—after all, even though he has more money than he ever wanted or needed, he continues to pine for Daisy’s elegance and grace. He uses phrases such as “old sport” to imitate those from “old money.” Gatsby himself capitalizes on the demand for alcohol during Prohibition (1920-1933) when it was illegal to produce and sell alcohol. He is embroiled in class-based corruption: His wealth means the law does not threaten him or his enterprise, as seen when a policeman lets him off for speeding because he is friendly with the police commissioner.
The economic boom during the 1920s partially depended on exploiting people for cheap labor, leading to an unprecedented level of socioeconomic inequality. The tensions between “old money” and “new money” are thrown into relief when the characters visit the “valley of ashes,” an industrial wasteland choking on the pollution created by American prosperity. Ashes from factories are dumped in this area, which is a metaphor for the fact that people rise to wealth at the expense of the wellbeing of others. A railroad runs alongside this area, similarly recalling the industrial expansion of the previous decades and highlighting its human and environmental cost. The debates and competitions between two equally rich people have little bearing on the lives of the individuals who in the valley of ashes, like George and Myrtle. Yet George and Myrtle are the ones who suffer most because of Tom and Gatsby’s fight over Daisy. This is a microcosm of how people in low socioeconomic brackets pay the biggest price for the single-minded competition for wealth that defined American capitalism in the 1920s.
Fitzgerald situates his three main female characters within the context of shifting gender roles in the 1920s. Jordan is most emblematic of the “flapper” ideal of the 1920s: She smokes and drinks without reservation; her attire would be considered scandalous or inappropriate in any earlier era; and she unapologetically pursues her wants and needs. She differs in many ways from Daisy, who carries herself with “old money” grace and is content to fulfill a traditional gender role of a wife and mother in a household supported by her husband’s wages. Daisy merely hopes that her daughter will grow up to be a “beautiful fool” so that she can continue the same role that she has, suggesting that Daisy is aware of the constraints of her role. The fact that Jordan earns her own income, combined with her “masculine” name for the era, further sets the two apart in their gender roles.
Yet at the same time, Jordan is constrained by many of the same patriarchal structures as Daisy. To succeed in her field, she must cheat. While Nick views this as a moral failing, it partly represents the lengths women must pursue to achieve the same professional success as men. Moreover, she projects her own model of statuesque perfection, albeit one that is constructed on her own terms. In an early meeting with Jordan, Nick describes her: “She was extended full length at her end of the divan, completely motionless, and with her chin raised a little, as if she were balancing something on it which was quite likely to fall” (55). Fitzgerald hence suggests that a flapper is not as free to express herself as her image suggests.
Meanwhile, Myrtle is depicted as both “unattractive” and more sensual than either Daisy or Jordan. Myrtle’s femininity is negatively defined by what it is not: graceful, beautiful, modest. She is the opposite of Daisy, and thus they fit into a limiting dichotomy of wife and mistress. Her character also suggests the limits of the relative liberation that women like Jordan experienced in this period. Myrtle is from a much lower socioeconomic bracket and so does not have career opportunities or any avenues to social mobility. Her only means of achieving a different life is marriage to a wealthy man.
By F. Scott Fitzgerald