"We've got to beat them down," whispered Daisy, winking ferociously toward the fervent sun.
"You ought to live in California - " began Miss Baker but Tom interrupted her by shifting heavily in his chair.
"This idea is that we're the Nordics. I am and you are and you are and -" After an infinitesimal hesitation he included daisy with a slight nod and she winked at me again, "- and we've produced all the things that go to make civilization-oh, science and art and all that. Do you see?"
The man talking is Tom Buchanan.
This is the man that is so wealthy and successful that he has enough money to buy a "string of polo ponies from Lake Forest". This is the man that lives in a "Georgian Colonial mansion overlooking the bay, [with a lawn that] started at the beach and ran toward the front door for a quarter of a mile." And men like Tom Buchanan, they are the people that inhabit the wealthiest and most fashionable community in the nation.
What does it say about society when the best among us, as judged by wealth and possessions, are the worst among us, as judged by moral values. Fitzgerald portrays Tom as prosperous, powerful, and successful. But this admirable outward personality is contrasted with a deplorable moral character. Tom cheats on his wife openly, breaks his mistresses nose, and professes the natural superiority of the white race. How can these two opposing personalities be inhabited by the same man? Tom, Daisy, and the rest of East Egg are walking contradictions. Their financial success does not match their moral failure.
Thus it is only rational to come to the conclusion that this combination of characters is not an accident. It is too early in the novel to conclude the correct order of causation, but there is definitely a correlation between financial success and moral failure. Is Fitzgerald trying to send the message that financial success leads to corrupt morals or that corrupt morals are necessary for financial success or both?
I think you're hitting upon an idea that will undoubtedly be a huge part of the novel, that being some sort of corruption going along with power or wealth. This post really got me thinking about the role Gatsby will play in the book, when you mentioned it being too early in the novel to see how things are really playing out.
ReplyDeleteLooking back on mentions of Gatsby I hoped to find something positive as I personally don't believe lack of morals comes with wealth but the two most telling mentions in the book so far are, "Gatsby who represented everything which I have unaffected scorn" (6), and Catherine saying she's scared of him. To address the second reference, it may fit into "order of causation" you mentioned since someone related to money is afraid of him. Could he be less moral then anyone else we've met so far? The first reference may be able to instill more trust in Nick if he is referring to moral corruption than it gives us the idea that Nick being an outsider will preserve his virtues.
Although Nick's view on Gatsby could be related to something else I think he will play into the wealth/ success vs. morals idea that you started exploring here.