Yet again, the "criticism of the week" failed to bring insights that I didn't have before. The notion that the theme is "[the] unfilled longing... part of human condition, common to all and inescapable," (152) shown through "Fitzgerald's lyrics imagery in... three ways...: (1) as nostalgia for a lost past; (2) as dreams of future fulfillment; and (3) as vague, undefined longing that has no specific goal" (152) is nothing new. It's obvious that all the characters are unsatisfied with there lives in some way. It is also obvious that even though Gatsby dies, he never stopped longing for Daisy. But that was while he was still alive. When you're dead, you're not longing for anyone anymore. You're dead. That's it. The end. Worm food.
Personally, I prefer using New Criticism. I know according to Lois Tyson, Psychoanalytical Criticism is the most approachable, but I don't find that true. Because we have used the four elements throughout our high school English classes it seems more relevant to start with New Criticism.
The only "critique" I have for this specific use on Gatsby is found on page 162: "... like the lovers carved on the Grecian urn in Keat's famous Ode: 'Bold, Lover, never, never canst thou kiss, / Though winning near the goal--yet, do not grieve; / She cannot fade, though thou hast no thy bliss, / For ever wilt thou love, and she be fair!'
I'm sorry, but what? I understand that this shows unfulfilled longing, but I think it hinders Tyson's point. Earlier in the reading, Tyson mentions that Keats is Fitzgerald's favorite poet, however this quotation does not belong in this essay. The point of this section is to show the images of unfulfilled longing in Gatsby, not in this Ode.
In some eyes, this Ode could help, not hinder. In what ways does it hinder or help?
No comments:
Post a Comment