Daisy through Marxism (Sarah)

The Marxist interpretation of Gatsby, “You Are What You Own,” gives us a very clear perspective of Marxist theories and how the capitalist system of America plays a vital role in The Great Gatsby. However, one important aspect I feel Lois Tyson skipped over was Daisy. Daisy is seen as a commodity, something to be bought and sold. We can see the references of Daisy to money numerous times throughout the book, however, the most memorable is "Her voice is full of money," he said suddenly. That was it. I’d never understood before. It was full of money — that was the inexhaustible charm that rose and fell in it, the jingle of it, the cymbals’ song of it,”(120). At this point the reader realizes Daisy is a commodity, like money, that both Tom and Gatsby want. Seeing as Tom nor Gatsby represent old money, it is obvious they only want Daisy because she is true old money, however, what I still do not understand, and what I propose to you is why if Daisy represents true old money would she marry or love someone that was not old money (Tom or Gatsby)? Because through a Marxist perspective this would lower her social standing, which is the exact opposite of what all people are trying to achieve (in a capitalist system). Is this simply a flaw in the theory or does it say something deeper about Daisy and her intentions?

Marxism Ruins Everything (Leslie)

As with all critical lenses, the Marxist lens takes a classic love story and turns it into a story where everyone is out for socioeconomic domination, and will do anything to get to that point. What really stuck with me the most from this essay was the Marxist perception of Daisy. The first time reading through "The Great Gatsby", she was perceived, at least in my opinion, as a flighty, innocent, dimwitted girl that is quick to make decisions and choices, but she doesn't know how to stick to them. For example, she is quick to jump back into Gatsby's arms, but on the spot, when she is forced to make a decision between Tom and Gatsby, and she doesn't know who to go to because she has told both that they are her final choice. After reading this essay, it made me sad because it took an innocent character who wasn't out for money or to get other people (besides her accidental murder) and turned her into a money grabbing, conniving, out-for-herself character just like every other character. According to Tyson, "...Daisy is not merely an innocent victim of her husband's commodification." (Pg. 71). Therefore, looking at Daisy through a Marxist lens makes her seem not nearly as innocent and taken advantage of as she did before, when reading "The Great Gatsby" unbiased. This essay also points out that the fanciful, sought-after affair between Daisy and Gatsby is also a lie. "...and when she learns the truth during the confrontation scene in the hotel suite, her interest in him quickly fades." (Pg. 72). And the quote that had the biggest effect on me because it proved once and for all that Daisy isn't the sweet, turn-the-other-cheek girl that Fitzgerald made her out to be; she is more like Tom. "The apparently ease with hich she lets Gatsby take the blame for Myrtle's death, while she beats a hasty retreat wth Tom, indicates that her commodification of people, like that of her husband, facilitates the cold-blooded sacrifice of others to her convenience." (Pg. 72). If this is the case, then why is she perceived as an innocent, non-threatening girl? Why does the Marxist lens make Daisy seem more and more like her cold-blooded husband?

Textual Evidence - Lex

Lois Tyson's "What's Love Got to Do with It?" draws many valid conclusions about "The Great Gatsby," but some of her generalizations are sub-par. First, Tyson suggests that Daisy has hidden "psychological motives" (41) that cause her to love Tom because he cheats on her. While the depths of psychology are something on which I have limited knowledge, I find it nearly impossible to believe that someone can have such intuition that their body makes its own, independent choices in such a was as Tyson describes. Next, Tyson states that "(f)or both Tom and Daisy, fear of intimacy is related to low self-esteem" (42). Clearly, Tom has few issues with self esteem, as seen when he says that he belongs to the "dominant race" (17). Similarly, Tyson concludes that Daisy's fear of intimacy can be seen in her "artificial behavior toward (her) child" (43), but the behavior that Tyson describes, "'Bles-sed precious,' she crooned, holding out her arms. 'Come to your own mother that loves you'" (122-23) is certainly dramatic, but not fake. Daisy's affection for her child is simply portrayed in a different way than Tyson, for instance, would show love for her own child. Finally, Tyson generalizes that "(Daisy's) extramarital affair, like her earlier romance with her lover, would not have occurred had she knows that Gatsby does not belong to her social class" (45), and she backs this by saying that "Tom's revelation of Gatsby's social origin... results in Daisy's immediate withdrawal" (45). This is incorrect and inconclusive. Why couldn't it have been that Daisy was withdrawn notbecause she learned that Gatsby was of a poor heritage, but because he had been lying to her about how he had earned his money? Daisy was in a situation where it had been revealed to her that the love of her life wasn't completely honest with her, and that to me seems like a valid enough excuse to pull away from him, rather than Tyson's speculations that Daisy withdrew from Gatsby because he was no longer at the same status as she was. Tyson makes many broad accusations and conclusions from evidence that does not altogether support her points, and this significantly decreases her credibility. Was Tyson wrong to manipulate the facts her way, or is that something that every writer must do?

Leslie: What's Love Got to Do with It? Nothing!

Lois Tyson takes a classic "love" story and looks at it through a psychoanalytical lens, explaining once and for all, what makes these characters act the way they do. For example, she perceives Daisy's flightiness as her fear of intimacy, "...the history of Tom and Daisy's relationship suggests psychological motives that point to a different interpretation of Daisy's 'delight' in her husband." (p. 41). Also, "Daisy's low self-esteem, like her fear of intimacy, is indicated in large part by her relationship with Tom." (p.42). The seemingly innocen and whimsical ways of Daisy's actions can be explained psychoanalytically, as can Tom's actions. We all seem to think Tom is just a jerk that cheats on his wife to gratify himself. But Tyson explains that it isn't emotional intimacy or physical gratification Tom is after, but ego gratification, proving to himself and others that he is just as much of a man as the next guy. "...Tom's relationships with women, including his wife, reveal his desire for ego gratification rather than for emotional intimacy." (p. 40). Lois Tyson shows that despite one take on a classic, if you look at it from another perspective, the plot and character's motives can change completely.

Gatsby and Myrtle.. ehhhh?

As we are seeing more and more through out the Novel Gatsby is a man of impulse, and one of no excuses. Although he has a history with Daisy it would be quite the plot twist for Gatsby to end up with his crush's husband's mistress. Myrtle, the whimsical and impulsive girl would almost fit in seamlessly with Gatsby and his own crazy habits. If Daisy and Tom find that flame or what ever, leaving both Gatsby and Myrtle out of the picture it would make sense that they some how find each other in the tangled mess that is the love square created by the four characters.

East Egg VS. West Egg

The difference between East Egg and West Egg is similar to the East and West of America. The people from the East seem to be more uptight and stricter than those of the West. In my opinion, the most significant from this chapter was the view on women. Tom, a person of the East, frowned upon "Daisy's running around alone" (p.103). On the opposite side, people of the East show up to parties they aren't invited to, and drink like there is no tomorrow. "'When she's had five or six cocktails she always starts screaming like that.'" (p.106). Another example of the West being looser than the East is Gatsby: marriage is a thing to be respected. Tom and Daisy don't get a divorce even though Daisy knows about the affair, and Tom wants to be with Myrtle, but marriage is too sacred to end it: a typical, Eastern, strict belief. But from a Western, looser, Gatsby perspective, he is planning to end the marriage between Daisy and Tom; a marriage isn't as important to him as it is to Easterners. A question I pose is, where does Daisy fit into the East VS. West? She doesn't seem opposed to being with Gatsby, but she hasn't divorced Tom, so where does that leave her?

Chapter V, A Glimpse into Gatsby

In chapter V of The Great Gatsby, Fitzgerald shows us a glimpse inside Gatsby’s vulnerable side. Up until this point in the novel, Fitzgerald has kept Gatsby mysterious, and in the dark. Just a chapter before, Nick says “My eyes fell on Gatsby, standing alone on the marble steps and looking from one group to another with approving eyes.” This quote keeps Gatsby at a distanced, almost an unattainable entity with a slight air of arrogance about him. However, in chapter V, this cover is shattered when Daisy renters Gatsby’s life. He turns into a child-like figure, unsure of how to act, something the reader has never seen before. My question is why has Fitzgerald chosen to keep us a secret to Gatsby’s life up until this point? Would it have changed the book if we were able to see more of Gatsby’s real personality? Personally it would make Gatsby more relatable if we had seen this side of him earlier in the book. Any other ideas?

What is it about Daisy?

What is it about Daisy Buchanan that makes people act they way they do? Tom Buchanan finds their relationship boring enough that he won't remain faithful to her. Jordan Baker idolizes her. Jay Gatsby set up a whole scheme just so he would get the chance to talk to her. Jay Gatsby moves next door to Nick Carraway, in hopes that after he throws multiple parties, he'll casually invite Nick to one. Gatsby hopes the two will bond, and the topic of Daisy will casually come up, and Nick will offer to invite her over, and Gatsby and Daisy will converse once again, and their spark will be re-ignited. So what is it about Daisy that makes her such a commodity to Gatsby, but Tom is so willing to throw her away for Myrtle? What is it that caused Jordan to idolize her? What is it about Daisy that makes the characters act the way they do around her?

Fire vs. Water - Lex Jackson

In chapter 5 of The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald compares Gatsby and Daisy to fire and water, respectively, to emphasize how they have grown apart. The chapter opens with a description of Gatsby's house as 'blazing.' (p.81-83). However, starting with Daisy's arrival, and continuing throughout the duration of her stay, there is 'increasing rain.' (p.86-96). Similarly, at the exact moment when Gatsby first sees Daisy, he is 'standing in a puddle of water,' (p.85), a metaphor for his being in her company. The juxtaposition continues in descriptions of the two characters. Gatsby is described as 'glowing' (p.89) and 'radiating,' (p.89), with a smile of 'recurrent light' (p.89) and a voice containing 'feverish warmth,' (p.96), all images of fire. Inversely, Daisy has a 'damp streak of hair' (p.85) and 'wet hands,' (p.85), as well as a voice that 'ripples,' (p.85), a face 'smeared with tears,' (p.89), and a tendency to cry 'stormily,' (p.92), all images of water. The differences between these two characters tell the reader that Gatsby and Daisy have lived in two separate worlds for too long, and cannot coexist as fluidly as they used to. Regarding their future together, do you believe that these opposing lifestyles will hinder their relationship, pushing Gatsby and Daisy apart, or that the saying 'opposites attract' will hold strong, and their differences will unite these two long lost lovers? 

Fading Façade

Mr. Gatsby, up to this point, seems like a cool, collected figure of power, manipulating and persuading everyone he meets (or at least Nick) to do whatever he wants. however, upon Daisy's arrival to the Tea Party, he very uncharacteristically becomes shy, clumsy, and incredibly awkward. He mumbles around Daisy until he is told that Daisy is just as embarrassed as he is. Gatsby then puts on his mask of cool, "old-sport" personality, and the the visit turns for the better.
So which is the real Gatsby? do we really know who he is? what if Gatsby reverts to awkwardness again? will Daisy leave him?