Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Oh I was just explaining some background, not necessarily critiquing the book (not in that post anyway). Like_That and I sort of have this thing about 'historical context'

Like I clarified in my post I think there were people who appreciated the book (hell on a level I can appreciate the book, I just don't like it that much). I like to think that Fitzgerald's friends feld bad he never managed to achieve his dream and hoped that they might be able to help him out after his death by getting his book out there in any way they could. I don't hate them for this (hell I can't even remember any of their names and had completely forgotten Edmund Wilson had a relationship with FSF).

I just don't think the book is very good and that its status in the modern classroom was built upon a generation that could very strongly and easily identify with the work. To those of the newer generation though, we're highly detached from its themes and without that personal attachment, the book is revealed to be what it really is. Dull and dry (imo). EDIT: The book will forever be of importance because of its huge impact throughout the later half the 20th century, but I suspect that's what it will be remembered for in the years to come. It's impact, rather than its worth (though that's kind of splitting hairs I guess).

 LordofHats wrote:
To those of the newer generation though, we're highly detached from its themes and without that personal attachment, the book is revealed to be what it really is.

In this day and age of "We are the 99%" slogans, do people really feel detached from the Great gatsby's themes?

 Easy E wrote:
In this day and age of "We are the 99%" slogans, do people really feel detached from the Great gatsby's themes?

People still say that?

 Easy E wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
To those of the newer generation though, we're highly detached from its themes and without that personal attachment, the book is revealed to be what it really is.

In this day and age of "We are the 99%" slogans, do people really feel detached from the Great gatsby's themes?

I did have this thought while typing that post out I think my main issue is that the primary thrust of Gatsby is (in a phrase) "The American Dream is a lie." Americans are getting further and further away from putting any real stock in the American Dream, so a book about how it can go wrong doesn't really sit as powerfully for us as it does for people from the Depression era. Sure we can always get behind rich people are douches, and love is hard, but that isn't really Gatsby's central theme. It's main point isn't one that I think effects Americans quite like it did.

EDIT: Actually the Great Gatsby was used in my history class as a commentary on how the American Dream was a lie, so in high school these days I assume we're all taught this lesson anyway XD

Oh, so you are arguing that the Themes of the book seem self-evident now and therefore make it irrelevant?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Every newspaper and magazine from Juno Alaska to John O'Groats in the UK is featuring this film. Dakka cannot be left behind, Dakka cannot be seen to be a cultural wasteland!

Reading the GG is every high school kid's worst nightmare, but here on Dakka we need to ask the hard questions:

Will you be watching it at the cinema?

Is it reflective of the American dream turned sour?

What the feth is it really about?

It's an overrated book. Now War and Peace...

Speaking of over rated garbage worthy of only being kindling..

 Easy E wrote:
Oh, so you are arguing that the Themes of the book seem self-evident now and therefore make it irrelevant?

No, just that its not as potent a message as it once may have been. It harkons to a culture that I think is less powerful today, so it means less to an audience. Likewise, my argument would be that The Great Gatsby became so great because it spoke to a generation of Americans. It told a story that for them was extremely real, so they overlooked what was otherwise a boring and dry novel because it meant a lot to them.

It means less to me, so to me, the book doesn't seem quite so great.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Oh, so you are arguing that the Themes of the book seem self-evident now and therefore make it irrelevant?

No, just that its not as potent a message as it once may have been.

And if you snort enough cocaine you'll stay awake through the crappy, tedious writing long enough to to find them.

 Frazzled wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
What i have to say about that book for fill a book three times it size. in 4 point font.
I hate that book with a passion, It simbilizes everything that is wrong with high school literature.

Exquisite agreement. Now lets break that down for an entire class to find my deep meaning.

Repulicans and Democrats finally agree on something. Maybe we can use that as a jumping ground for political reform.
Still. I just hated school books, I remember i had to beg to read "War of the worlds" because the copy i had was only 140 pages while the requirement was 250.
WAR OF THE WORLDS!!!!!!!!
Then we didnt get to finish the good books because my teacher didnt like them, like Lord of the flies, or Brave new world.
Why didnt we finish brave new world? Because near the end it mentioned abortion.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Oh, so you are arguing that the Themes of the book seem self-evident now and therefore make it irrelevant?

No, just that its not as potent a message as it once may have been. It harkons to a culture that I think is less powerful today, so it means less to an audience. Likewise, my argument would be that The Great Gatsby became so great because it spoke to a generation of Americans. It told a story that for them was extremely real, so they overlooked what was otherwise a boring and dry novel because it meant a lot to them.

It means less to me, so to me, the book doesn't seem quite so great.

Okay. Thanks for taking the time to talk it through.

Also, Fraz you make it sound like snorting Cocaine is a bad thing?

I remember doing The Great Gatsby at school, it was about the same time I was having my wisdom teeth removed. One of these experiences was painful and not something I'd wish on anyone, the other.,. I can think you can guess where I'm going!

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
What i have to say about that book for fill a book three times it size. in 4 point font.
I hate that book with a passion, It simbilizes everything that is wrong with high school literature.

Exquisite agreement. Now lets break that down for an entire class to find my deep meaning.

Repulicans and Democrats finally agree on something. Maybe we can use that as a jumping ground for political reform.
Still. I just hated school books, I remember i had to beg to read "War of the worlds" because the copy i had was only 140 pages while the requirement was 250.
WAR OF THE WORLDS!!!!!!!!
Then we didnt get to finish the good books because my teacher didnt like them, like Lord of the flies, or Brave new world.
Why didnt we finish brave new world? Because near the end it mentioned abortion.

Agreed.

Sigh. It's sad how little regard people have for literature, simply because they don't want to take the effort to actually understand it.

There is "Understand" and then there is "forcing it down our gullet to think things that are not true"
In HS english you cannot have an Opinion that differs from the teacher, lest you fail

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
There is "Understand" and then there is "forcing it down our gullet to think things that are not true"
In HS english you cannot have an Opinion that differs from the teacher, lest you fail

That's a problem with the instruction, not the texts.

Yes, But gatsby is SO flamboyant about its symbolism that it in a way doesn't have some.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
There is "Understand" and then there is "forcing it down our gullet to think things that are not true"
In HS english you cannot have an Opinion that differs from the teacher, lest you fail

Again, despite your heretical purple bronie avatar, you are correct.

hotsauceman1 wrote:There is "Understand" and then there is "forcing it down our gullet to think things that are not true"
In HS english you cannot have an Opinion that differs from the teacher, lest you fail

This has not been my experience

 azazel the cat wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:There is "Understand" and then there is "forcing it down our gullet to think things that are not true"
In HS english you cannot have an Opinion that differs from the teacher, lest you fail

This has not been my experience

You didn't go to an American high school.

 Frazzled wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:There is "Understand" and then there is "forcing it down our gullet to think things that are not true"
In HS english you cannot have an Opinion that differs from the teacher, lest you fail

This has not been my experience

You didn't go to an American high school.

I did, publicly schooled all twelve years. I have expererienced what hotsauce is describing, but I have also experienced the opposite. Regarding a piece of classic literature as "nothing more than kindling" simply because you had a teacher that taught it in a way that you didn't like is kind of ridiculous.

 rubiksnoob wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:There is "Understand" and then there is "forcing it down our gullet to think things that are not true"
In HS english you cannot have an Opinion that differs from the teacher, lest you fail

This has not been my experience

You didn't go to an American high school.

I did, publicly schooled all twelve years. I have expererienced what hotsauce is describing, but I have also experienced the opposite. Regarding a piece of classic literature as "nothing more than kindling" simply because you had a teacher that taught it in a way that you didn't like is kind of ridiculous.

No the teacher just makes the horror show unbearable and unending. They seem to take great joy in hammering certain books, all of which sucked.

Some teachers do so. Your experience doesn't necessarily equal everyone's experience.

 pretre wrote:
Some teachers do so. Your experience doesn't necessarily equal everyone's experience.

No but if you know whats good for you, it does!

My experience in high school was more "Exasperated teachers with eyes that quietly beg for death in the face of a semi illiterate Junior level class." then "Shove my ideals down your throat" that's reserved for college professors and the science department on a HS level in these parts.

Someone mentioned Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter earlier, which is a boring, but mercifully short book. It took us a couple MONTHS to chew through the book because of the mouth breathing leprous retards that populated that course. I assure you that that was the average, not a wild deviation as well. Then again I may have unfair standards. As of the seventh grade my favorite book was The Count of Monte Cristo.

Oh I didn't love the Scarlet Letter, but it was better than Gatsby. That book actually had a *gasp* compelling story. There was a lot of flowery scene setting (which while pretty I don't enjoy) but you could skim over all of the flowery prose and just read the meat of the story pretty easily and it was a meaty story.

 Frazzled wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
There is "Understand" and then there is "forcing it down our gullet to think things that are not true"
In HS english you cannot have an Opinion that differs from the teacher, lest you fail

Again, despite your heretical purple bronie avatar, you are correct.

There are aspects of these posts that make me question the quality of a certain poster's education on the subject of English.

I'm actually a pretty big Hawthorne fan, though.

Well, In nearly ALL of my english teachers where hacks from HS
Freshmen: Because of being placed in special education I was in a class that was above my Level, therefor i didnt work
Soph: out of special ed,, ut thrown in with a teacher who gave us a jo to re-write Shakespeare plays to our fancy(I made Macbeth into a sci-fi action thriller, I failed)
Junior: Teacher never let us finish a book.
Senior: Because the program i was in got new cameras and editing software for the comps the first quarter of english was nothing but making movie based on the Jungle book for the first quarter. Then the teacher left and we had a string of Subs.
And that is why i hate english,

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Well, In nearly ALL of my english teachers where hacks from HS
Freshmen: Because of being placed in special education I was in a class that was above my Level, therefor i didnt work
Soph: out of special ed,, ut thrown in with a teacher who gave us a jo to re-write Shakespeare plays to our fancy(I made Macbeth into a sci-fi action thriller, I failed)
Junior: Teacher never let us finish a book.
Senior: Because the program i was in got new cameras and editing software for the comps the first quarter of english was nothing but making movie based on the Jungle book for the first quarter. Then the teacher left and we had a string of Subs.
And that is why i hate english,

Hate the system, not the literature. If you can recognize that it was poor instruction, not poor texts, there's really no reason not to go back and re-read them. That goes for all of you heathens!

I hate the literature to.
The Great Gatsby was OVER the top with its metaphors. The eyes of god being overly used and was just stupid.
If it was written today, it would be a wirerack dimestore novel