Antigone's Condemnation

Antigone condemns herself to death at the very beginning of the play. She knows the penalty for burying her brother. Her words and actions make me wonder whether she even wants to get away with it. Even when Ismene promises to keep the deed a secret, Antigone tells her to spread the news to everyone. This brings about the question of her motives. I believe that she has deep faith in God and she is eager to move on to the afterlife. This faith also creates her severe desire to bury her brother. Another motive surfaces when she is talking to Ismene at the beginning of the play. After Ismene expresses the importance of obeying civil law, Antigone asks her how she can even stand to live in this world so filled with evil. This shows that she yearns to escape this life and the corruption associated with it. One more possible motive that I observed deals with honor, pride and reputation. Antigone says that if she has to she will die before her time because she does not fear death. By dying young with all of the people on her side, she turns herself into an idol. No woman has ever died the way she was sentenced and her bravery awed all those around her. From the very first lines of the play the audience is able to see that Antigone’s death is eminent and she welcomes this fate.

thier after me lucky charms

When I started reading I had expected Creon to have the same reasonable thinking and wiseness as he had displayed in Oedipus, it didn't really hit me how much of a character change he had undergone until i got to the part when he is charging Antigone with burying the body and accuses her of just being after his throne, (1437). This just shocked me because in Oedipus he had explained why he was more benificial to control the throne as Creon instead of being a king, and now he accuses Antigone and Ismene of attempting to overthrow him, that just seems hypocritical. I think however this is a result of what he had explained to Odepius, when he was being reasonable, as a king, you must always watch out for the persons who will try and stab you in your sleep. Either this new blindness (hmmmm) is due to his new gain to power, or his fear of not being overthrown, but moreso being killed, which in the end he does achieve this because he loses all those that are dear to him and all that are left are the guards, which insure he is safe.
On another note, I enojoyed on the previews page (1436) when Creon calls Antigone "deaf to reason" because (in this story) that seems exactly how he acts.

Same story??

Is it just me or do the two stories of Oedipus and Antigone appear to be very similar? Many of the characters in Antigone seem to resemble those in Oedipus. A few other people have already mentioned Creon becoming eerily similar to the way Oedipus was when he was king. Both become to full of themselves and feel they are by far superior to everyone around them in not only rank but also knowledge. I also believe that Haimon is much like the old Creon as Adam stated. They both honored and respected their king, but when it came down to it they spoke out for what they thought was right. I then felt that Jocasta and Ismene are similar to a point. Both of these characters try and protect the main characters, Oedipus and Antigone, but cannot get them to change their mind. The sequence in both plays also appeared very similar to me. Both start out with a town that recently got a new king who is becoming too full of himself. The towns are also in a crisis at the time, Oedipus trying to figure out how to find the murderer of Laius and Creon proclaiming what he has decided to do with the two brothers who died. Each king begins to gradually lose support of their decision from the city and become very hot-tempered. They have too much pride to admit they are wrong even when the great prophet Teiresias, who is my favorite character, prophesizes the future for them. Both kings doubt him although he is said to have never been wrong. Finally, the plays end with the kind being proved wrong and many lives being taken, many by suicide. In my opinion these plays were very similar and it was easy for me to predict what would happen next and I thought it was very obvious that Eurydice would take her life at the end much in the same way Jocasta did after hearing about all the terrible deaths that had taken place.

Head Strong to Head Case

What happened to Creon from Oedipus to Antigone? In Oedipus, he was the guy who wanted nothing to do with the throne. Was always seeking advice from the Gods, elders, etc., and also giving it to Oedipus or anyone else who needed it. Even when Oedipus loses his temper and falsely accuses Creon, Creon remains calm and attempts to reason with Oedipus. In this first story, he was the guy that everyone liked and was pleased with.
Now we jump to Antigone. In this story Creon appears to be Oedipus 2.0. He goes against the Gods by not allowing Polyneices to be buried or have any type of ceremony for his death. By doing this he is having no respect for the dead. He also refuses to listen to his son Haimon or any of the elders on the issue of Antigone's death sentence. He seems very power hungry, arrogant, and proud, all three characteristics he never showed before taking the throne. Some of the citizens of the state are upset with his actions as ruler because he is at times unjust and disrespectful. Creon has gone from a once level headed, well liked, caring man of royalty to a high tempered, questioned, heartless ruler. This is a change that must have been influenced by the pressure he feels from the responsibility as king. Perhaps he knew this would happen, and this is why he never wanted the throne in the first place.

To much pride

I'm going to have to agree with Andrew in the sense that Creon and Anitgone both created their own downfalls. It is clear by the end of the story that everything would have worked out just fine if the two had not been so stubborn in their own thinking. Although they both did what they believed was right, they left no room for people to tell them otherwise. When Creon's judgment was questioned he became more angry and lashed out at the person who had questioned him. This ultimately led to the death of Antigone, Haimon, and Eurydice (everyone that Creon had cared about). In Antigone's case she did what she thought was right, but pushed her act to far when she practically called Creon blind and ignorant for not seeing that his judgment had been wrong. She became to caught up in proving Creon wrong that she lost track of her main purpose of restoring dignity to her brother, and instead she put the attention on her and her own pride. I think the story teaches the reader that sometimes you need to forget about your own pride and listen to other's advice in order to keep peace and happiness.

Faith of the gods

I see that both Oedipus and Antigone are the same base on fact of what Mary wrote about, “they have no control over their faith.” They both tried to challenge the gods. Oedipus tried to ran away from the killing his father and being with his mother and where did that put him, killing his father and having two daughters with his father (awkward). Creon challenged Teiresias prophecy about burying his brother and releasing Antigone. Both men had power and thought that they do anything. They believe that what ever they said was their way, but the men were under the watch of the gods. What shocks me the most is how Creon, above all people, did not think about his consequences. We know that Creon is very reasonable man and knew better then to face the gods from Oedipus but it goes to show you “power will corrupt the mind.” I think if we read anymore Greek plays that have tragic heroes, we will find someway how the tragic hero will fall at the mercy of the gods.

Creon and Antigone: Excessiveness

Both Creon and Antigone met their downfalls as a result of excessive belief in their own correctness. Anitgone’s defiance of the law to bury her brother was justified, but she took it too far in Scene 2 when she began to question not only the sense of Creon’s decree for Polyneices, but the legitimacy of his reign and the support for him. She said that those around Creon all were against him, but just restrained themselves. Antigone turned her righteous act into an anti-Creon psyche and lost her sense of the original purpose. Whether this resulted from hidden feelings about the relationship between Creon and her father/brother or from other reasons, this flaw caused Antigone to lose the full tragic heroine label because she began to turn the situation into something less noble than the original intent of putting a brother to rest.

Creon had a noble purpose in his actions because he wanted to protect the city and prevent mutiny for the future by using Polyneices as an example. He held to his intent too much and refused to listen to reason. As his son, Haimon, said, “It is not reason never to yield to reason!” (pg. 1441, line 79) Creon used reason to know that traitors must be punished to prevent further incidents, but he refused to acknowledge that his reason was flawed. He spent pages 1439-1440 ranting about how sons should yield to the reason of their fathers and rulers to justify himself. He could not admit that he was wrong and refused to listen to anything other than his own words. His flaw caused him to lose all that was dear to him and presents his situation as a tragic character because his flaw of hubris caused him to lose everything. The complexity lies in that his hubris that made him a tragic character caused the downfall and tragedy of another character, Antigone, resulting in a situation with two tragic heros/heroines. Creon, however, was humbled by his downfall, while Antigone remained steadfast in herself and wallowed in self-pity until death. Therefore, I believe that both Antigone and Creon are tragic characters because their respective flaws of the self-righteousness, which Nick discussed, caused their downfalls. Between the two, Creon was a truer tragedy because he was humbled by the gods to prove the point that several blogs have discussed, which is that the gods control fate and always win.

Creon:: Oh the Perils of Power!

I can definitely see where Elspeth and Adam are coming from with Creon!! That was the first thing I noticed when I started reading the play! Creon reminds me more and more of Oedipus every time he opens his mouth! Once he took the throne he became a completely different person. Out were the cool personality and the fairness (wiseness?) that he once possessed and that we admired and in was a quick tempered, self-conscious and power hungry king. He even accused Oedipus’ daughters/sisters of trying to take his throne. Something that Oedipus accused him of doing in the past. I think the point of the change in the character of Oedipus was to show the effect of power on characters. The wise character was did a 180 turn once he acquire any power what so ever. I also saw a connection between the personalities of Oedipus and Antigone and the comparison of Ismene with the old Creon. I can definitely see some comparison with those pairs. I think that the author did this to accentuate the character of Creon and Antigone and the conflict between them! Well my respect for Creon has now disappeared!

Creon: An Overreaction?

Creon is more like Oedipus than I ever thought possible. Creon’s character completely changed when he took the throne. Creon always appeared to be level-headed and in control of himself but all of that self control appears to be shattered in “Antigone.” I think that Creon’s response to Antigone honoring her deceased brother’s body was a complete and total overreaction. As soon as Creon became king he went on the defense and started passing edicts right and left. He was only doing this to impose control over the people which was really dumb because, as we know from “Oedipus”, the people actually really liked Creon. Creon’s treatment of Antigone was utterly repulsive! He showed her no respect and was only looking out for himself when he basically sentenced her to death. As it turns out, Creon was the one who was punished in the end. Perhaps the gods believed in karma? As you can tell I know virtually nothing about Greek gods or I would go into a long spiel about why “Antigone” ended the way that it did. However, Creon definitely deserved what he got and if he had only looked at how Oedipus’s pride had gotten in the way he might have spared many lives a terrible end, including his own.

The Last Speech of Antigone

V (75-81)

Thebes, you see me now, the last
Unhappy daughter of a line of kings,
Your kings, led away to death. You will remember
What things I suffer, and at what men's hands,
Because I would not transgress the laws of heaven
(To the guards, simply.) Come: Let us wait no longer

With such a separation of human and god in Antigone, I find it interesting that each character seems to have a stance on how they approach the world they live in regarding law and how to follow it. Creon believes in human law, mostly because he can make it himself and control the people of Thebes through his rule (he is against money because he has no control over the free will people have with it). Antigone believes more in god law, claiming that Zeus would have preferred the burial and that Hades could potentially save her from being buried alive. Ismene stands in the middle, seeing both sides while feeling insecure/unsure how to handle the situation to come out with her best interests. In her last speech, Antigone yearns for the Gods to prove to Creon that he is wrong in his ruling/decisions, and that they should approve of Antigone's action. These characters place so much emphasis on who is "right", that they lost sight and three end up dead by suicide. Maybe being right isn't always as important as it seems.

More on the Chorus

I definitely agree with Matt that the third suicide was overkill. I don’t agree, however, that the Chorus is pointless. If you read closely into the chorus parts, you can see how each of the Odes foreshadows the events of the play. Ode I talks about how wonderful man is that he can conquer animals, use his skills to make tools, etc. Although man can conquer many things, he cannot conquer death. Ode II is about how the gods can be terrible to people when they do bad things and that, “Fate words most for woe/ With Folly’s fairest show.” I think this means that the gods determine fate and that fate usually ends up making life terrible for people. Ode III says that nobody can conquer love. Ode VI says more about destiny and gives specific examples of a lot of people who were locked away in stone prisons or killed for various reasons. When you read each of these Odes, you can easily see the foreshadowing that each Ode brings. Ode III foreshadows that somebody (Haimon) will be destroyed because he cannot conquer love. Odes II & IV show the importance of fate in how this play turns out. Ode IV also shows what will happen to Antigone. Although these Odes may seem to reiterate what those of us reading the play already know, they help to foreshadow the events of the play for an audience that is unfamiliar with the story.

As far as the thing about Antigone being the tragic hero, I always thought that was Creon. He is the one left to suffer at the end of the story while the other characters were else relieved of their suffering. It is his hubris that leads to the death of Antigone, Haimon, and Eurydice. I don’t think Antigone had a fault that led to the downfall in this play. She buried her brother, but she was doing that to bring honor to her brother and save Thebes from a plague, not to be arrogant as others have suggested. By not letting Ismene be killed, Antigone was trying to save her innocent sister, not be pitiful. That’s what I think, anyway.

Pawns of the gods

For some reason i can't shake the feeling that Antigone didn't play a very large role in this play that is so aptly titled 'Antigone'. Huh, maybe I'm just weird? I merely felt Oedipus played a bigger role in his play...that's all.

Anyways, onto my only point I want to make about these two plays. I feel that, in a nutshell, both 'Oedipus' and 'Antigone' can be summed up in the final lines of 'Antigone' made by Choragos, "There is no happiness where there is no wisdom; no wisdom but in submission to the gods." Basically, obey the gods, you can't change fate. Has anyone ever seen 'Jason and the Argonauts'? Well, anways, it's about Greek mythology and junk. It's awesome. But the one scene I love in it involves how the gods are toying with Jason and his men as they try to find the Golden Fleece for some reason...I haven't seen it in awhile. Regardless, my interest is in one scene only. In it, the gods are playing some sort of game with a map of the world and pieces that are represntative of people.

Here is the scene:


This is pretty much the basis of these plays. We are all pawns of the gods in this cosmic game called fate. Who are we, mere mortals, to stand before the might and power of the gods? According to these plays, we can't. Oedipus was fated by the gods to slay his father and sleep with his mother. Nothing could change that. Teiresias reveals to Creon that he should ahve burried the body of Polyneices. Disobeying led to his downfall. Basically, I feel that these plays stand to show the Greek ideals of obeying the gods and of always listening to reason (which just so happens to be what the gods say). So in the end, there is 'no wisdom but in submission to the gods.'

Personality Shift?

After reading this play I was shocked to see such a change in Creon's personality. I pretty much was like is this the same guy? What happened to his leval head and reasonable thinking? He seemed to react and respond alot with his emotion especially when he felt he was being diobeyed or people were being unloyal. Like when Antogone didn't deny the accusations and when his servant person did. Another example is when his son threatned him with his own life if he did not spare his fiance's life. I thought it was totally interesting how his mindset and emotion overpowered his leval head and reasonable thinking once he took the crown. He turns to be more like Oedipus than i thought.

Overkill with Eurydice & More

I’m with you Mary, I see the Chorus as nothing more than an unnecessary, annoying break in the action (after awhile, I just skipped over the Chorus parts). It’s my opinion that the Chorus doesn’t tell you anything you don’t already know, and as such, is entirely useless. And I agree with you Adam, all of that kingly power has definitely gone to Creon’s head. He’s acting as stubborn and as irrational as his incestuous predecessor. By the way, did anyone think that adding Eurydice to the play was (dare I say) “overkill”? I mean she enters in the last scene of the play only to hear what’s happened to Antigone and Haimon before immediately proceeding to kill herself. I think two suicides would have been plenty for one play, but apparently Sophocles found some value in adding a third (I certainly didn’t). Perhaps this third suicide was meant to hit a little closer to home for King Creon? One could make the argument, but surely the suicides of his daughter-in-law and son were heart-wrenching enough. Lastly, I was disappointed to again see Sophocles using third person narration for crucial, vital moments. Having a sentry tell us of the three suicides just didn’t do it for me. There’s no suspense or drama when I’m only told of three suicides instead of shown them. The way I see it, it’s already happened and I’ve missed all the action. Where’s the suspense in that?

Creon, what happened?

Ok, so after reading Oedipus I was a pretty big Creon fan. I mean, this guy took a tongue lashing from Oedipus and was publicly humiliated, so I felt pretty bad for him. Beyond all of this was the fact that he was calm throughout and did lash out at Oedipus. He was a subservient man that knew he was in the right and decided to just accept things and let fate handle the rest. After Oedipus' past comes to light, Creon is the first to attempt to hurry Oedipus inside to save him embarrassment, he also wishes to consult the gods and not be rash in exiling Creon. He was a very good guy, and ended up receiving the throne. Message: Good guys will be rewarded in the end.
Now we move on to Antigone. Creon has become the bad guy. Apparently he went against the gods in saying that Polyneices should not be buried. If Greeks should learn anything from these plays, it is that the gods always win. He is quick to anger, first threatening the life of the sentry, and then condemning Antigone. He even went so far as to proclaim a death sentence on Ismene. He was strong-headed and refused to consult others. Haimon tried to talk some sense into him, but he would not have it. Creon has become the "Oedipus", and Haimon is our new "Creon". Creon has all of the hubris of Oedipus, and is quick to anger, rash, and strong-headed just as his predecessor. What has happened to our Creon? Could it be that the responsibilities of the kingship ruins a person? Too much power in the hands of someone that is not fit for the job? Regardless, Creon's mistakes were costly. He lost many loved ones, and had no one to blame but himself. Granted, I don't understand why so much innocent blood had to be shed, but let the gods do their thing. All that I can think about is how drastically Creon has changed.

The Chorus

(Nick your blog was great! I noticed that reference and I wondered about her story. Thanks for clearing it up and since you did so well I’m going to go ahead and talk about something else.) The chorus is something in these plays I do not understand. We talked about how they are the people’s reactions but sometimes they go off into rants. The chorus, after Antigone is taken away and her last lines, begins normal. It references the future tomb of Antigone. Then it turns into these mythical three paragraphs. There are three footnotes in these paragraphs. I do not understand what the meaning of the paragraphs. I could not even relate them to the story. It talks of multiple gods I believe ending with the tomb again. I just think it is very confusing, I could make nothing of it and if anyone else notices it an explanation would be greatly appreciated.

Antigone: self-righteous and pitiable

Like father, like daughter? or is it more like brother, like sister? See how complicated and chaotic things get when incest is involved? Anyway, similariies between Oedipus and Antigone. There are a lot. Mostly, hubris. They've both got a lot of hubris. However, they have different varieties of hubris. Oedipus is full of hubris in his skills: skills at leading, solving riddles etc. Antigone's hubris is wrapped up in self-righteousness. What really struck me is her self-comparison to Niobe. The text has a footnote that explains the Niobe myth, but it misses some things. The reason Niobe's children were killed was that she boasted that she was more of a woman than Leto, a goddess, because she had more children than Leto. The gods killed her kids and had Niobe cry until she turned to stone. Not only does the stone foreshadow Antigone's stone prison, but in some accounts of the myth Niobe hung herself. Either way, Antigone was extremely proud, just like Niobe, but she doesn't mention Niobe's pride. But was it wrong that she knew that she was right? I think the part where her righteousness crossed over from good to bad is when she rebuked Ismene. In that exchange, I got the impression that Antigone wanted to be a sacrifice. She wouldn't let Ismene join her. Antigone had to be the sole victim. She enjoys wallowing in self pity veiled in self-righteousness. You know what I'm talking about- she likes playing the poor victim. We all know people like that. I don't know if I consider Antigone a good character or a bad character. She seems more like a pitiable character. Wait, there's that magic word, pity. So I guess it works out as a tragedy in the end.

Elspeth N.

ch 1 - 4

Taylor, I removed this post. You had it in your comment link already. Mr. V.

Dan H.

Bethany W.

Katie B.

Jenny L.

Tom B.

Andrew F.

Kris G.

James M.

Alex W.

Nick S.

Lauren T.

Mary W.

Adam S.

Matt Haw.

Michelle. P

Emily H.

Austin N.

J.T. Wiech.

Zack S.

Matt Huff.

Nate M.

Taylor P.

Diana W.

Daisy

Many people may see Daisy Buchanan as an innocent young girl who is very kind, but I don’t. I believe Daisy was a very shallow character throughout the novel who did not have her priorities straight. She was once in love with Gatsby at an early age, yet when she found out that he wasn’t rich, she no longer wanted to marry him. She instead went off and married a rich man, Tom, while Gatsby was away at war. Daisy is so in love with money and rich materials that she cries when Gatsby is showing her all of his shirts. Honestly it is bad if you are crying just because a man has some nice shirts. She then toys with Gatsby when they meet and she makes him believe that she truly loves him and that they may one day get married. At this point she is lying to both her husband and Gatsby and is a very unfaithful woman, although said to be quite attractive. To me, Daisy seems to be the one character that had the biggest impact on the lives around her and could have made them better. Instead, she is dishonest throughout the novel and ruins Gatsby’s life and then when he dies, she does not even come to his funeral which portrays her as being even more shallow.

JT's thoughts on the Great Gatsby

The character of Gatsby is what interested me the most about this book. The first thing that jumped out to me about him was that he was the title character of the book, but the book was not in his point of view. Most books I can think of off the top of my head that have a title character are not like this. The book is in the point of view of the title character. Besides that once I got to reading the book Gatsby was by far the most interesting thing to me. At the beginning of the book he seemed very mysterious, but as the book progressed the reader learned more and more about him. It fascinated me that he spent his entire life trying to get Daisy, his American Dream. Daisy seems like a nice girl and all, but I don't think she is worth an entire life of sacrifices to get. There are plenty of other girls out there. I was shocked at the lengths that Gatsby went to in order to get Daisy. He changed his entire life, but it did not work. If I was Gatsby I know that would be a tough thing for me to overcome. I don't think I would ever be able to get over the fact that I could not get her, and this is exactly what Gatsby struggles with. He knows he can't have Daisy but he stills puts everything he has into it. Just about everything he does in life is geared toward this one goal. So basically, it amazes me that a person is willing to give up everything he knows, his family, friends etc..., just to get a girl, but that is just what Gatsby did.

The Successful Failure, "Not just an Apollo mission"

As i finished reading The Great Gatsby i couldn't help but ask myself, why is this Gatsby so great, he failed. I was looking at Gatsby in the sense that he didn't get the girl, and died how could he have succeeded. Page 6 Nick says " Gatsby turned out all right at the end; it is what preyed on Gatsby,what foul dust floating in the wake of his dreams", in this passage two words stand out to me immediatly, preyed, and dust. When i think of dust i think of something that has been neglected for a long time, for example Gatsby left his relationship with Daisy in order to become a successful well to do man like Tom. By doing this dust collected on what was once a love, and when Gatsby tries to cleanse the dust from the past he comes to a harsh reality that the dust, the past is unable to be altered. I saw this as Gatsby's one huge flaw through the entire book, this contributed to many of his other flaws, but he seemed to always be looking for that answer to fix the past and make Daisy fall in love with him again. Yes, Gatsby did live part of the American dream, he went from rags to riches, but he never lived his Dream. When he and Daisy first met it was love, Daisy's marriage to Tom is not out of love but rather of security, in order to counter this Gatsby attempts to offer Daisy the same thing love of money to fill the void of their love that had been lost.

this is kayla's blog... because she forgot her password too

I liked this book just as much as I was told I would. I didn’t really relate it to my life as a whole but certain parts did fit. I tend to do that with books i read to make them more interesting for me as an individual. The connections spice it up a bit. Although Gatsby did not attain what he was striving for his entire life I still see him as a hero. I suppose it would be fair to state that he is a hero that failed, but a hero none the less. He is a romantic hero in the way that he would give anything for Daisy just to be with her and please her. At the expense of his own downfall he aims to make her happy. Gatsby sees Daisy is unfulfilled in her marriage with Tom. There is a quality of love that Gatsby sees in Daisy. However she is unable to see any sign of this in Tom. When I think about Tom it makes me wonder what drew them together. He seems like a man difficult to love, someone who has set up walls almost impossible to be broken down by those who wish to get close to him. Daisy has attempted to bring them down and her constant failure has caused her to give up. In a way it is the same journey in which Gatsby is traveling. Daisy wants Tom to let her in and Gatsby longs to be with Daisy. These are two unattainable things which they noth want. Love. In some parts of my own life I see that there are unattainable things, yet i still long for them. Not only do I long for them but, like Gatsby I work toward them, knowing whole heartedly I may never posess what it is I am fighting for. Some part of me will not allow me to give up on things. I think this is the same quality Gatsy has and now that I think about it I can see why he never gave up. You can't really blame him. If you knew it was one of the only things that would make you happy, wouldn't you do it too?
-kayla

The American Dream

During the time period in which The Great Gatsby was written in, a popular belief of the American Dream was in the minds of everyone. It was a belief that everyone, no matter what background you came from, could become wealthy and have a perfect life. The unfortunate thing about this American Dream was that very few people successfully achieved it in their lifetimes. In the case of The Great Gatsby, the American Dream was looked at from a different point of view. In the novel, Gatsby was shown to have come from rags to riches yet he still was not happy. This was because he had his eyes set not on money, but on a girl named Daisy. As we continued through the book, what seemed like anyones American Dream, was only a step for Gatsby into getting his dream, Daisy. In the end Gatsby never reached his dream and died because of it. This shows the reader just how hard it is to reach the "perfect" American Dream and that you should always have a backup plan to fall back on.

Andy's Gatsby Blog

I don't know how strange it might sound, but I can relate to Gatsby a lot more than most people would think. While I was reading the book I just kept saying over and over to myself that that it is exactly something that I would do for someone I truly loved. I've always been a romantic, and could never figure out how people treated someone they were with like Tom would. Gatsby reminded me of all the times I was a true gentleman, or just a boyish young man trying to win somebody's heart. I admire Gatsby for all the effort he put into one dream, and how he kept his green light of hope right by his side at all times. It takes guts to continually chase one cause, no matter how many times you get knocked down, it will always take an even bigger force to get back up. Gatsby stayed determined on his vision, and I hope that I can always stay focused on my dreams too.

Women - can't live with 'em.. that's all..

The Great Gatsby is filled with various female characters, and these women have a way of destroying the men. Two women that are a prime example of this in The Great Gatsby are Myrtle Wilson and Daisy Buchanan. Myrtle Wilson is/was married to a lower-class hardworking man by the name of George Wilson. Wilson loves Myrtle very much, but she does not return this love. Instead, she goes and finds herself a rich playmate, Tom Buchanan, to satisfy her. Eventually, George Wilson discovers that Myrtle has been cheating on him. This breaks George's heart, but, due to his financial problems, he must keep working, and he becomes physically sick. When Myrtle, the woman who had no love for George, dies, George's love for her is enough to drive him insane, killing not only who believes to be the murderer, but also himself. The second woman that destroys a man in the timeless piece of work is Daisy Buchanan. Daisy is married to Myrtles playmate, Tom Buchanan. However, in her younger years, she had a relationship with one Jay Gatsby. Daisy eventually left Jay because he wasn't wealthy enough. However, Jay's love and lust for Daisy's robust figure and inspiring personality lead Gatsby to commit his life solely to the goal of winning Daisy back. Everything he did in his life was in order to reach his ultimate prize of winning Daisy, however, this essentially stripped him of all the other joys of life. These two men, George Wilson and Jay Gatsby, were destroyed by the women that they loved. If the women in this story hadn't had such an impact on these men's lives, one would think that both men might have lead much more happy and prosperous lives.

JENNY'S BLOG (since she couldn't remember her password)

Every person has thier own "American Dream". In the Great Gatsby, Gatsby's American Dream is represented by a green light that shines on the other side of the lake. The light signifies Daisy, who Gatsby loves. He wants to be with Daisy more than anything and knows she is his soul mate. He wastes away his whole life trying to buy her back and win her from Tom. During this time Gatsby builds Daisy up to this perfect women who she will never live up to be. In the end Gatsby gets close to his Dream but it was unrealistic so it never fell through. When I read this theme it reminded my of my close friend Lauren Thomas. Lauren like many others has her own American Dream. Her Dream is the super cute R & B singer Chris Brown. She believes Chris Brown is her true love. Like Gatsby she wants nothing more then to find Chris Brown and marry him so she can be with him forever. Although she has not and will not waste her life away to find him, she has built him up to be the perfect man. "I don't have to strive for it and base my whole life around it. He will come to me. It will eventually happen. It's just fate!" (Lauren Thomas). Lauren and Gatsby share one common trait in thier American Dreams. Like Gatsby Lauren's Dream is unrealistic. She has a very very slight chance of ever meeting him and even a lesser chance of hooking up with him. In all reality i feel that Lauren's Dream will fall through just like Gastby's Dream. She will just have less to lose since she has not put her life into being with him.

Nick!

One crucial character that isn’t really discussed much in Nick Carraway. Nick moved from the Midwest to the East in order to take part in the thrilling adventures of New York and to make money. Nick wanted to make it selling bonds. He ends up moving into the house next to Jay Gatsby. Nick’s relationships with the other characters in the novel are very important to plot of the story and the point view through which the story is told. Nick is Daisy’s cousin so Gatsby uses this relationship to his advantage. I agree with Mary’s statement that Gatsby used people throughout the novel but I think it was more than that. I think a lot of people used Nick in the novel as well. The reason Gatsby wanted to become close to Nick was so that he could, by chance, come into contact with Daisy. Gatsby invited Nick to the party as a way to make his acquaintance. Later, he prompted Nick to have a tea party and invite Daisy so that they could meet again. Nick, of course, obliged, but for nearly the duration of the party he waited outside so that they could talk. After Daisy and Gatsby became reacquainted, she began using him as a way to see Gatsby. Don’t get me wrong. I’m sure she enjoyed seeing Nick but she really wanted to spend time with Gatsby without her husband suspecting anything.
Now this may be a stretch but I think that Tom used Nick as a way to make himself feel less guilty about cheating on Daisy. Tom trusted Nick and so he brought him to the apartment he shared with Myrtle. I think that Tom thought by exposing his relationship with Myrtle to someone other than a neutral party that it might rationalize it in some way and make it seem less appalling. Nick was sort of used by everyone in this way. To everyone, Nick was like the ice breaker. When Daisy, Tom, and Jay were all together Nick was what kept the peace and kept everything formal. None of the three imagined that Nick had a confidence with all three of them. This is why Nick is such a good narrator for this novel. He sees and finds out about everything because everyone trusts him.
Eventually, Nick gets fed up with living in the east. He knows he isn’t suited for the way of life there. He is honest and respectable. He doesn’t play any angles. Nick’s relationship with Jordan helps convince him that he doesn’t belong there. Nick likes her free spirit and her vivacity but he shocked by her dishonesty. She is not considerate of other people and this completely contrasts Nick because Nick has been caring for other people the entire novel. I am glad that Nick ended up moving back to the Midwest. Nick seemed to be the only character who understood the purpose of life. He realized that selling bonds in the East was not his dream. It was other men’s dreams and he knew that he needed to start over and actually do something that he wanted to do. I think that he was too good for the East and he was definitely my favorite character in the novel!

Impact of Fake Images on Commitment Between Characters

The lack of attendance at Gatsby’s funeral drew my attention to a theme that was present throughout the book and between most characters. That idea was that the characters lacked commitment to each other. The first example of this was Tom and Daisy. They were married and professed love for each other, but each had affairs. Tom passionately fought Gatsby for Daisy, but he was still involved with Myrtle. When Myrtle showed apparent disrespect for Daisy, Tom punched her and broke her nose even though Tom was showing disrespect for his marriage with Daisy. After Gatsby died, Tom showed no grief for the loss and continued to show the casual nature of all his relationships. Even Jordan became engaged to another man while still seeing Nick. Similarly, everyone professed to being Gatsby’s friends when he held parties and invited everyone to his house, but when the parties ended and hard times came, they were all gone. Even Wolfshiem, the man who led Gatsby up the social ladder and was a close associate with Gatsby, did not show up when there was nothing to be gained. Most people in this story failed to show commitment to Gatsby or anyone else that was close to them because very few of them truly knew the people around them. The main people who showed up at the funeral (Nick, Gatsby’s father, Owl Eyes) knew the true Gatsby and were able to establish commitment as a result. Few commitments were able to form in this society of fake images and selfish behaviors because few were able to let down their masks and be themselves for fear of falling from social grace, thereby forming this problem as a main theme of the novel.

The American People

The Great Gatsby had many characters representing the different American people after World World One. Gatsby was representing the people with “new money” whom came up from their hard work. Tom represented the “old money” that were looking on people who were coming up to their level like Gatsby (new money). Daisy represented the light “go with the wind" gang who clings on to others to support themselves, maybe like the "flappers" during the 20ths who were crazy women going out parting every night. Mrs. Wilson represented the people who want more in life, to be higher in an upper class then stay in lower class that they dread so much. These people do not do hard work to get to the upper class but take anyway that is shorter then working to achieve upper class. Mr. Wilson is the poor class who has to work everyday to have enough money to survive. Even though he wants to be higher in society, this will never happen do to his position as a lonely gas station owner. Jordan represented the people who were in the middle who are torn apart from helping the lower class or not. Eventually, like when she “dumps” Nick, they turn their backs on the lower class do to reasons of not wanting them to get better lives or not caring for them anymore. Meyer Wolfshiem represented the business of America who only cared for helping out those people who in return can help them out. Once the people are no more use to the people like Wolfshiem then these people (Wolfshiem) do not care anymore for those people anymore. Now the finally one, the one that for some reason we always forget in the story but he is always there, just “floating around like a ghost”, Nick. Nick Carraway, I don’t know what to think of him. He might represent those who don’t know what they are looking for in life. They think they have an idea what they want to do in life, but for a certain reason they change their goals in life. This is especially shown with Gatsby. Nick came to the East to get money but after seeing what happen to Gatsby from money, he didn’t want the money anymore. Even when Gatsby offer him a job, Nick didn’t want. Nick knew what type of crappy lifestyle Gatsby was living. Nick just wanted an easy life.

(Now, this my interpretation of the “The Great Gatsby. I may be wrong, it may be right. I think it is right. I’m just thrown out ideas about the character. That is all.)

"What a Grotesque Thing a Rose is"

I found the second full paragraph on page 169 to be very interesting. I really like the analogy of a rose to a single dream. A rose is a pretty flower to look at, but if you hold on to it too tightly you’re obviously going to get pricked by the thorns. I thought that the sunlight upon the grass was like to reality, so Gatsby was realizing that his dream was no longer possible. Similarly, dreams are good to have; they give you a goal and motivate you to get through difficult situations. But if you get so absorbed in a single “either/or” dream that you are completely unaware of reality, you have a problem. You’ll start to make rash decisions that you can’t undo, and when you finally understand that your dream is impossible, you’ll be greatly let down. Gatsby did just this. His only desire was to win back Daisy’s affection, which was a dream that had only two possible outcomes: either he’d succeed and get her, or fail and lose her; there was no middle ground. He lost, and only then did he realize “What a grotesque thing a rose is.” That’s why I feel that dreams are necessary, but to a certain extent need to be practical. In my opinion, you have to set goals that you can pursue knowing that in the end you can say to yourself, “Hey, I may not have gotten to exactly where I wanted to be, but I’m better off now than I was when I started.” I feel that if you cling to an “either/or” dream, you will only be setting yourself up for failure and disappointment.

An unread book might as well be made of cardboard, Diana.

Well Diana, although I missed your tangent during class, I am definitely going to have to go ahead and disagree with your blog, there. My main beef here is that I don't feel owl eyes viewed Gatsby as “Old Money”. Why would someone with a long heritage of wealth in their family masquerade as a well-read intellectual? “Old Money” would no doubt have a library full of real books. So, no, I think Owl Eyes saw Gatsby as yet another “New Money” impersonator. An impersonator would have had cardboard books because they are cheap and easy to own, especially if they are just for show. This is why Owl Eyes is delightfully surprised. He is caught off-guard by the fact that this “New Money” punk has a library full of real books. However, I agree with your statement that Gatsby outwardly portrays himself as something completely different than what he is inside. You see, he appears to others as a money-burning playboy, when in all actuality he is just putting on a show for one person, and one person only. That person is Daisy. Inside of that mysterious, nonchalant playboy is a heartbroken romantic. The books are included in this show of Gatsby's. Though they are real books (which catches Owl Eyes by surprise), they still are just a show piece. Gatsby's library, much like his life, is full and real, but it is meaningless all the same. It was all done for Daisy, and her interpretation of his extravagant lifestyle was the only one that mattered to him in the end. I feel Owl Eyes attended the funeral out of reverence for the man with real books, not for the man that was Gatsby.

"Did I tell you about the books? They're real."

So, in class I kind of went off on a tangent about some stuff and I want to clear it up. At the end of this book I finally think I figured out why the library scene is so significant and in a way that we didn't really discuss in class. Owl Eyes looked at those books and assumed that they were cardboard. His impression of Gatsby was “old money” because that was the way that Gatsby portrayed himself. “Old money” people would pretend to look smart by putting fake cardboard books in their libraries. Owl Eyes could have just assumed that the books were cardboard because every other rich person had cardboard books. However, he took the initiative to open up one of the books and see that it was real. Although this is cliché, he literally encompasses the saying “don’t judge a book by its cover.” Owl Eyes found that the books were real; they weren’t what he expected. That’s exactly how Gatsby is; both the books and Gatsby appear to be one thing but truly, deep inside, they are something else. Owl Eyes also says that if you take one book out of its place for too long, the whole library will collapse. Gatsby’s life and his lie are like that library because his scheme is very nice and organized but fake. If one little detail of Gatsby’s plan were out of order for too long, he would be destroyed, just like the library would be if a book was messed with. Owl Eyes’ revelation in the library describes Gatsby’s life. By looking at the books, Owl Eyes is able to understand that there is much more to Gatsby than meets the eye, just like there is more to the books. This is why I think that Owl Eyes knows all about Gatsby; he came to the funeral when nobody else did and he was able to figure out that the books were real.

The Great American Hero

Gatsby is pretty much the American hero. There, I said it. Now bear with me please while I try to explain myself splatter paint style, i.e. throw out a bunch of crap and hope it sticks. Gatsby is a firm believer in the American Dream, and, from Nick's early perspective, appears to be the ultimate American success story. He was a rags to riches guy who pulled himself up by his own bootstraps. However, by the beginning of the story Gatsby already has his success, so there is no dramatic action in the story for him to gain his success. This means that he cannot be a hero of the American dream because he supposedly already accomplished all of the components of the dream. The beginning of The Great Gatsby could have easily been the end of a typical dimestore novel of the era. But it's not. It's just the beginning. Gatsby actually turns out to be a tragic hero. At the end of the novel he is lying dead in his swimming pool, a symbol of his success. It is a tragedy. Gatsby is a great man, whose unyielding drive has seemingly allowed him to conquer the world. However, Gatsby has one flaw. He cannot let go of the past, and, not only that, he never gives up his belief that he can get back to his past and make his world perfect. This inability to let go and accept that there are things in the world beyond human control is what eventually destroys him. My thesis, and yes I have a thesis, is that Gatsby is the Great American Hero not because he is the embodiment of the American Dream, but rather because he is destruction of it. America is, and always has been, a Christian nation. We were founded with a Puritan mentality, and even though religion has been overtaken by secularism in the recent years, we have never given up our cultural idea of a saviour who sacrifices himself. Gatsby's death is a "holocaust." Gatsby believes in the American Dream more than any character we have encountered all year including the founding father Ben Franklin. More than anything else, the American Dream is the belief that you can make your world exactly the way you like it as long as you try hard enough. Gatsby has tried really hard to get his American Dream, so hard that it destroys him. He had worked hard and created an amazing life, but he was so focused on Daisy that he could never be happy. The Dream, like the light, was always out of his grasp, but yet always appeared close enough that with a little more push he could grab it. Gatsby literally died in his pursuit of the American Dream. Part of the American Spirit is never giving up and always having faith that you will eventually triumph and that you can do anything, so a hero would be someone who never gives up that hope and keeps trying even though it destorys him. Don't you see the (apparent) nobility in that? I do. I have been too immersed in American culture since my birth not to root for the lone guy who never gives up hope against all odds. It is a sad thing, but sometimes you need to learn to accept that somethings really are hopeless. You need to give up on them and settle. Like I said, its sad, it seems a lot less heroic, but it seems much more mature. This immaturity and coming to maturity is another thing that Gatsby shares with his country. America was the known as the land of oppurtunity. America, against all odds, had made itself a world power, just as Gatsby had made himself a powerful man, and like Gatsby, America in the 1920s was coming to terms with the fact that it could not get everything that it wanted. It was aware of the emptiness of its existance. It too tried to fill the void with unreachable dreams. It is a sad fact, but wanting something is a lot of the times more exciting than actually having it. America lived in a dream and people were starting to wake up to it. You can see then, in this context, a man like Gatsby who won't stop trying even to his own death, is horribly tragic, but also, really heroic.

The Eyes of Eckleberg

Owl Eye was always been that character that seems suspicious and as a reader you are constantly questioning. I wasn’t really sure who he was at first and just saw him for whom he was, a man who was interested in Gatsby’s life. After finishing the novel and discussing it in class I begin to agree with the interpretations that we have made about him. I think that he could be the only person that understands who Gatsby was deep down, the only one who didn’t buy into all the rumors that were being spread about Gatsby. However the explanation that made more sense to me was that he was the actual TJ Eckleberg, the man who was there “god”. It makes sense to me that Fitzgerald would want to hide the actual Eckleberg yet allow the readers with a little thought to determine that he really was present in the novel. The name Owl Eyes is a very discrete way to spark attention to the fact that he might be TJ since Eckleberg was an eye doctor and was known to watch them at all times. It really allowed me to finish the novel off with closure and success in understanding the meaning of everything.

As a walk through the Valley of Ashes...

I want to talk about the Valley of Ashes, because it is one of my favorite symbols in the entire book. For one thing, I see it as a symbol for the moral degradation that society is going through. All of the characters travel through the valley, which shows that they all feel its effect, and yet they also all helped to cause it. The description of faceless men shoveling the ashes is a testimony to how all of society has taken a turn for the worst. People are becoming more and more sinful and dark. Also, the Valley of Ashes is a sort of passage between New York and the “new rich” West Egg. I interpreted this as Fitzgerald’s criticism of what it takes to move up the social ladder. In other words, to get from the commonplace New York to the extravagant rich West Egg, you must pass through this sinful dark place. It is a symbol for how evil people can be when trying to move up a class. People are all too willing to ruin others for their own personal gain. Lastly, when talking of the Valley of Ashes, how can you not talk about Eckleburg? They are always there staring down at this morally decayed place. I immediately recognized the large eyes as a symbol for God. It is a reminder that God is always watching us, and he is even aware of all of our evils. Although the billboard and God have long-since been forgotten, the fact remains that they are still there standing guard and watching. I loved how the only mention of religion in the entire novel was related to Eckleburg. I could talk for ages on the topic of this simple advertisement and all of its possible meanings. Finally, I feel obligated to make a quick mention of Wilson. He is a poor victim of all of the world’s horrors, and he lives in the Valley of Ashes to symbolize this.

The Green Light

The symbolism of the green light interested me greatly. I looked at it for a simple symbol of Daisy but when Emily brought up jealousy, I began to agree. That green light shown from the dock Daisy had with another man, Tom. Gatsby would give anything to be Tom and with Daisy. The light could easily be an example of the jealousy Gatsby had for Tom because of Daisy. Also, money which is green could be embodied by the light. Daisy and Tom are very wealthy with alot of "old" money while Gatsby is "new" money. The light could be enforcing the contrast between the two. Also, in class the light was brouhgt up to symbolize a goal, something to strive for. This for Gatsby makes perfect since. For the last years of his life, he put every effort and movement in to obtaining Daisy. The green light shining from her dock every night reminded him of this goal in his life.

One Short Day in The Emerald City

Every book that we read seems to stress importance on certain colors. This book is no exception. The color that stood out to me and the rest of the class was the color green. We first experience this color with the green light at the end of Daisy's dock. I believe that this color represents the wants and desires of ordinary people. The light represented Daisy and that was Gatsby's main goal was to please Daisy. The green color was also used to express the "green breast" of the new country when the pilgrims came and first saw America layed out in front of them. This land was untouched and seemed to them percect. What intrested me the most was the fact that the author used green, the color of money. Money in this book is what Gatsby tries to use to make Daisy happy. He thinks that money is perfect and is the sure fire way to win Daisy's heart. We all know that money like all things is not perfect and the perfection in money quickly fades and we are forced to return to our realities. Spring also comes to us in the shade of green. We also know from Robert Frost that this color does not stay and that even the perfection of spring eventually fades. Green, for me, represents the illusion of perfection in the world and represents what we want. This perfection can never. Green is springs first gold and "Nothing Gold Can Stay."