I love the Great Gatsby, but I don’t understand how anyone could misunderstand the book. It’s quite a straightforward story.

▲

roenxi 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

When has straightforwardness ever been a defence against misunderstanding? It is common for people to just not get something the first time they encounter it, understanding is usually a process that involves time and a bit of repetition.

I remember some questions Stallman once fielded after a talk he gave on Free Software that made me rethink the principle of "no stupid questions" - some people just don't get things. Doesn't matter how clearly it was laid out. Being beings made of meat does not promote comprehension.

▲

normie3000 4 days ago | parent [-]

How did Stallman handle the questions?

	▲	roenxi 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		He answered them without fuss. I got the impression it was a standard part of the show and he was used to it. I remember the feeling more than the questions themselves but they were probably of the "what if someone wants to use the software in a way you don't like/without paying" variety. They would have been fair questions ignoring the 30 minute lecture that had just been held on the detail of that exact topic.

▲

ehutch79 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If my high school English is to be believed, there isn’t a sentence that isn’t metaphor, and if you think it’s straightforward, you’re getting an F.

▲

Sprotch 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Indeed. And I see no evidence for the premise or the article. I read the book at school, and we all understood the not very subtle point about the illusion of money and how it does not bring happiness. The hopeless romantic aspect does get more touching as one ages though.

▲

gleenn 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Um, last I remember, my English teacher's cooy was absolutely full of underlined and also colored words due to a significant amount of color symbolism. The words maybe be within reach but it's the metaphors and deeper meanings which add great depth. I would hardly consider it "straightforward".

	▲	rayiner 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The prose is beautiful and satisfyingly layered. But the deeper meaning is consistent with the meaning of the words and is pretty accessible to anyone familiar with American culture and literary themes. It’s not 100 Years of Solitude, where you need a degree in Latin American studies to figure out the deeper meaning.
	▲	KPGv2 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Metaphors and beautiful language don't change the plot. The Great Gatsby can be summed up rather easily: A man named Nick moves to town and is fascinated by his wealthy neighbor, Jay Gatsby. As they get to know each other, he discovers that Gatsby is enamored with his cousin Daisy Buchanan, who is married to a complete asshole. Over time, Nick and Tom both discover that Jay is not old money but rather most likely a man who amassed wealth by participating in fraud. Tom Buchanan and Jay fight over Daisy, and Tom's side chick is overcome with emotion and is hit by a car. Tom couldn't give a fuck about what happened bc he's a total monster who only cares about money and power. Gatsby takes the blame for the woman's death, and her widower tracks down Gatsby and murders him in revenge. Long story short: pre-Crash capitalism was an orphan-crushing machine. Gatsby got money to pursue love and ended up dead. Buchanan had money and has little positive emotion toward anyone else in the world. Daisy is also concerned with wealth and prestige and allows herself to be mistreated by her husband and thought about leaving him for a richer man. The narrator is also wealthy, and we see him do the same bad acts he criticizes others for, making him ultimately a hypocrite.

▲

SirSavary 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Very likely a result of said anyone not having read the book in the first place.

▲

shermantanktop 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

It’s a short, easy read for high schoolers. They won’t be reaching for a dictionary and can probably pass the test based on study guides.

No work = no retention and no growth.

▲

SirSavary 4 days ago | parent [-]

I'm well aware, I had the opportunity to read it in high school, though that was because of my grade stream; students in a 'lower' stream didn't get the same material.

Our prom theme the year I graduated was "The roaring 20s". The 2013 film had released months prior, and I remember discussing with friends how misleading it was--making the parties look incredible, while missing the book's subtler commentary. People who only glanced at the book, or only saw the film, can easily walk away thinking the Roaring Twenties were all glamour and fun, which is exactly the gap I was (poorly) pointing out in my earlier comment.

▲

hunter-gatherer 4 days ago | parent [-]

Yeah, I remember reading it in highschool and all we talked about eas the love story and parties. I re-read it in my early thirties for some reason and quickly realized the story was about temporal and moral tragedy. Daisy and Gatsby aren't romantics; they are morally shallow and selfish. I felt like the book was more about how we created a world were we train ourselves to chase glamor, but are punished for it in the process.

Funny enough a while back my wife and her friends were talking about having a "Gatsby" themed party. I think that is exactly what woukd have Fitzgerald rolling in the grave. Haha

	▲	stavros 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Maybe the Gatsby-themed party was meant to be one where nobody was having fun but kept taking posed photos to post on Instagram.

▲

4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

stevenwoo 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Based on the photos I’ve seen of the Epstein sexual trafficking case - he and everyone in his circle saw Lolita’s protagonist Humbert Humbert as a role model for behavior - they openly call the female kids they abused variations of terms of endearment used for Dolly, the twelve to thirteen year old victim in Lolita and use quotes from the book in captions and notes. It’s a very short book and possibly because it is entirely IIRC from the pedophile’s POV these fans project their own values onto it.

▲

ceejayoz 4 days ago | parent [-]

See also: Musk’s naming things after Culture ships, Trump’s music picks like “Fortunate Son”, or complaints that Star Trek recently went “woke”.

	▲	stevenwoo 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		On the one hand I can understand a little of the admiration for The Culture since it’s a post scarcity humanity and since Musk doesn’t lack for anything he cannot understand how that is different from reality for most of us but the fluidity of gender and sex is so in your face in most of the Culture books he could not have read them and liked them so much.

▲

piker 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I read the whole article for some big reveal about how I had missed the point, but, yeah, it was all clear even in high school.