Galloway
English 101 (1A)
8 November 2013
The Moral Declination of the American Dream as Portrayed in The Great Gatsby The American dream has long been defined as the notion that anyone, regardless of age or race, can succeed in America due to the country’s social, economic, and political systems. In the early days of the United Sates, the American Dream ensured that people would have the chance to work their way up in business and society through their own labor and ingenuity. In the novel, The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald addresses the shift that American dream undertook as a result of the ten-year party that ensued after the end of World War I in 1918. That party was the 1920’s. A time in which there was unprecedented …show more content…
affluence and material excess. Fitzgerald told of this decade in the novel. He told of how it was the societal separation of the old money and new money that directly led to the materialism and elitism which gave way to the disintegration of the American Dream, which is still present in modern-day America. The societal change began in the 1920’s when a rift between the old money and new money societies became apparent. It began in 1918 with the conclusion of World War I. The young men who had fought overseas returned to America with disrupted religious beliefs, as they did not understand why the war had happened in the first place. They had lived their lives purely, and had still been punished with the war. This younger generation now realized that, no matter what they do, bad things can still happen. They decided at this point that they should throw caution to the wind and begin living their lives however they pleased. Their noble life goals went out the window, and there was not much else to do then just have fun. People began spending vast amounts of money as a way of defying conventional wisdom, which led to a steady rise in the stock market in the early 1920’s, which also contributed to the changes in society. It led to an increase in wealth amongst almost everybody in America, which meant that now, anybody in the country could, theoretically make a fortune and become a member of the elite upper class. The already established upper class, or old money families did not appreciate this new breed of industrialists, and preferred to stick to themselves. They rudely separated themselves both geographically and socially from the new money members of the upper class, and continued to think of themselves through the entire decade, and long afterwards as, the best of the best. And although they may have been better in some ways, this was exactly the problem back then.
The old money families did not just believe that they were better off financially, but that they were better people in general than the new money and the lower and middle classes. Nick explains how pretentious this makes those who believed that sound in chapter one when he says, “I am still a little afraid of missing something if I forget that, as my father snobbishly suggested, and I snobbishly repeat, a sense of the fundamental decencies is parceled out unequally at birth” (Fitzgerald, 2). By this, Nick is saying that he believes that it is not just money that is distributed unequally at birth, but that there are other things that can be dispersed unequally, too. He thinks that there are people who are born nicer than others. The members of the old money society believed that you had to be born with money to also possess these fundamental decencies, and if you didn’t, then you deserved to be looked down upon. In chapter one, Fitzgerald writes about Tom; “His speaking voice, a gruff husky tenor, added to the impression of fractiousness he conveyed. There was a touch of paternal contempt in it, even toward people he liked-- and there were men at New Haven who had hated his guts” (Fitzgerald, 7). This is Fitzgerald’s way of showing Tom’s arrogance. Tom believes that since he was born to a rich family, he can act as though he is a “father figure” towards others, telling them what to do, even though he has done literally nothing to earn any of his wealth and power. Tom thinks that he can look down on others just for that, but Nick was of the notion that money isn’t what gives you social power, and that it is indeed entirely up to the individual whether or not they possess the fundamental decencies that could make anybody at all a nice person. This disagreement between the two sub-societies of the upper class led to more hard feelings between them. The old money families were unwilling to allow the new money people, like Gatsby close to them, which ends up playing a huge part in the story, as Gatsby tries to prove to Daisy that he is indeed worthy of her love.
Gatsby, along with other members of the new money lifestyle spent the entire novel trying to manipulate their way into the old money society, though they were unsuccessful, as all of the people living the old money life were very protective of their lifestyles, and they did not believe that any of the up and coming social climbers and the ambitious members of the new money society should be allowed into their lives. This led to, not only societal separation between the two, but also geographic isolation, at the hands of the old money families. East Egg was representative of the established aristocratic society that the old money families had been working to establish over many, many generations. West Egg, where all the new money citizens lived, represented the ideals of the new generation in the decade, and all of the people who had to have made their money all own their own, taking part in wild and crazy scramble for money and success in the 1920’s. The refusal of the East Eggers to accept the new money people into their society ended up playing a huge role in the moral deterioration of the notion of the American Dream.
Fitzgerald saw the American dream as an idea which could change over time to fit whatever standards that people wished.
Back in the day, the American Dream focused on discovery, individualism, and the pursuit of happiness. But this dream took a serious turn in the 1920’s when the social values began to change as a result of the easy money and material excess that overtook American society. Americans no longer wanted the things that they used to. The desire for discovery and happiness was no longer important in the 1920’s, only because people didn’t think it was anymore. Wealth corrupted the notion of the American Dream, just as it corrupted the purity of dreams all over America in the 1920’s. The only character in the novel whose dream didn’t change, was Gatsby’s, but that wasn’t necessarily a good thing, because his dream was not attainable for him. Gatsby’s views on the green light on the end of Daisy’s dock was compared to by Nick as the old American views of outstretched land back during American’s westward expansion. Gatsby gave the green light at the end of Daisy’s dock, and Daisy herself, special meaning in his mind just as Americans back in the day gave special meaning to the land that they saw. The light had meaning, only because Gatsby gave it meaning. Before the 1920’s, discovery and individualism had meaning, because people had given it meaning. And then, as quickly as it had been given, the special meaning of the American Dream had been stripped away from those noble ideals, and had been placed upon less important things. Things such as money, material items, and the flamboyant lifestyles that many people lived in the
1920’s.
F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote The Great Gatsby as a way to show how the 1920’s, and the internal battle of the upper class was the beginning of the moral deterioration of the American Dream, which used to be a sacred, special thing, but is now nothing more than the want for material items, and a chase for money. He told of how it was the relaxed social and moral values after World War I that gave way to the materialism and elitism which directly led to the declination of the American Dream, which is still present in modern-day America, and probably always will be.
Works Cited
Fitzgerald, Francis Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York City: Scribner, 2004.