- Metonymy: "Chicago was calling [Gatsby]" (Fitzgerald
48)
When Fitzgerald writes that Chicago, the large American city, is calling
Gatsby, instead of just a man from the city, it increases his image of power in both the reader’s and Nick’s eyes.
Fitzgerald employs this device to add to Gatsby's appearance and create his
theme of disillusionment throughout the novel by exaggerating how powerful a
few men were. His critique of the 1920’s lost generation is solidified
when Fitzgerald employs this metonymy to illustrate Gatsby’s apparent power.
- Simile: "men and girls came and
went like moths" (33)
Fitzgerald’s comparison of Gatsby's party attendees to
moths tells the reader of their vacuous and frivolous existence. Moths are
attracted to bright, shiny things and are usually hurt by the illusion of
beauty. The comparison of the people of the 1920s to silly and stupid insects
illustrates Fitzgerald's beliefs on how petty the lost generation truly was. His
tone of disapproval towards this shallow generation is established with this
simile.
- Allusion: “a dozen volumes…promis[ed]
to unfold the shining secrets that only Midas and Morgan and Mæcenas knew”
(4).
When Nick talks about his books on banking he says they
were to reveal wealth only these three historical figures knew. These refer to
very rich people that Fitzgerald assumes the reader is familiar with. This
allusion emphasizes how rich Nick thinks he can become with the help of these precious
books. Fitzgerald uses the allusion to establish his belief that the people of
the 1920s only cared for becoming rich and obtaining the most material wealth
that they could.
I thought your analysis for the metonymy and simile were very thorough and well worded. The explanation of the attendees being compared to moths was very unexpected, and you explained it perfectly. While those two were good, I thought the analysis on your allusion was limited. It might have helped if you added some more historical connections involving the self-made man philosophy, which was very prominent during this time period. Other than that, I thought your commentary was thorough enough while still sticking straight to the point.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed your first two analysis, they really helped to show the quote for what is was, and thoroughly explained them. The only bummer for me was the allusion was somewhat lacking. It was one of my favorite quotes from the book, and it needed more elaboration on the analysis, it is only scratching the surface of the whole thing. With that being said however, the first two were really good, and it helped bring new connections into the book for me.
ReplyDelete