Okay, I realize that the title of this blog just offended the Great Fitzgerald, err... rather it would if he were still alive, but I must say that what irks me about this work so far is one the same lines as the bone I picked when reading Henry James' "The Beast in the Jungle." The verbosity! Come on and say what you wanna say much quicker and remove the beating-around-the-bush lines such as "I'm inclined to reserve all judgments, a habit that has opened up many curious natures to me and also made the victim of not a few veteran bores." Or how about this beauty, "Frequently I have feigned sleep, preoccupation, or a hostile levity when I realized by some unmistakable sign that an intimate revelation was quivering on the horizon; for the intimate revelations of young men, or at least the terms in which they express them, are usually plagiaristic and marred by obvious suppressions." Wow, what a mouth full. Perhaps, if the loquacious Fitzgerald had got a copy editor from contemporary time, we would have met the Great Gatsby a little earlier in the book! More in class...
I am in total agreement with you. I don't understand as to why Gatsby came into the novel so far in. I understand that Fitzgerald was trying to set up the story and why Nick was telling it, but come on! That could have been done in a chapter or two.
Can't wait to hear what you have to say in class!
Posted by: Tiffany at February 9, 2005 12:17 AMI must say that i totally disagree. In some points of the story i like how he builds up to his scene. It is somewhat tedious to read, but i feel that it gave much more importance to the scenes and the events that were taking place. There were a few points where i found myself lost in all of his rambling but for the most part i think it helped the novel.
Posted by: MaggiQuinlan at February 10, 2005 12:07 AMYou see Maggi, I am a straight-to-the-point kind of person. I have issues that deal with dancing around the subject. I would much rather have enjoyed reading about Gatsby in his natural state than having someone descirbe for four chapters how he came to be aquainted with Gatsby. That is something that could have been done quite nicely in about two.
Hah...you think that's a mouthful? Try reading Faulkner. Darned if you didn't run out of breath by the second line. One sentence of his runs for pages - how 'bout them editors?
Posted by: Neha at February 10, 2005 04:17 PMMaggi, I think the fact that you call Fitzgerald's writing "rambling," emphasizes my point about his wordiness. Do we really need so much of it? I think not. I'm with Tiff; I'd like him to get the point a little sooner.
Posted by: John Haddad at February 10, 2005 05:01 PMMy lord you would hate Gulliver's Travels! I hated that story, but that's because it was dry, bland language. I love Fitzgerald's style, I think without the colorful diction the story would be boring. I like to picture the story's setting and characters in my head when I'm reading, and Fitzgeral really makes an effort to create the image for the reader. To each is own, I suppose!
Posted by: storm at February 13, 2005 09:59 PMStormy, oh, don't get me wrong, I love imagery, and Fitzgerald tells the story in a way that you can definitely feel and imagine with ease. That said, the buildup to meeting Gatsby himself shows a style of rabbit trails that can get a little old. I love the rich descriptions, I just don't care for the round about way of getting to the action.
Posted by: John Haddad at February 14, 2005 03:08 PM