In Tom Burnam essay The Eyes of Dr. Eckleburg: A Re-examination The Great Gatsby, he puts frontward his reading of the text. He believes that though the “ Great Gatsby ” was a great work of literature it is a blemished 1. As it “ lacks something ” , he believes that the writer, F. Scott Fitzgerald made the error of puting to much of himself, as the writer and of his life into the characters. Tom Burnam, in his essay, besides put frontward a point about the novel being more about carelessness than “ semblance and unity ” . Tom Burnam posits that there is small distinction between the writer and the character as he believes that non even the most adept novelist could do us, the readers accept Nick Carrarway as to the full responsible for “ composing the fantastic description in chapter three ” . In his essay “ The Eyes of Dr. Eckleburg: A Re-examination “ The Great Gatsby ” , he believes that deficiency lies within roots from Fitzgerald puting himself in the novel, nevertheless inadvertently, saying that:

“ The book, great as it is, still falls short of its possibilities because its energies are spent in two waies. If The Great Gatsby revealed to us merely its supporter, it would be uncomparable. Uncovering, as it does, possibly a small excessively much of the individual who created it, it becomes slightly less crisp, less pointed, more diffused in its consequence. ”

Tom Burnam stated in his essay that “ The Great Gatsby ” was besides a commentary on the “ nature and values, or deficiency of them, of the foolhardy 1s ” , the “ foolhardy 1s ” being the rich. My ain reading of the text is in short, a commentary on the coevals and society left after the First World War. This reading follows from F. Scott Fitzgerald ‘s other novels and short narratives as they all follow a similar subject. As I will demo, there are multiple readings of the book nevertheless some are more logical than others. During the First World War 1000s of Americans died, despite fall ining the conflicting April 1917 and this, rather intelligibly, created inharmoniousness in society and besides lead those returning from war to seek to come to footings with their experiences. Although Fitzgerald himself ne’er really went to war he was called up to contend but the war ended before he was called upon to do the trip to Europe. This is in contrast to Gatsby who we are told “ tested really hard to decease ” during the war and for that earned great awards from “ every Allied governmentaˆ¦- even Montenegro, small Montenegro down on the Adriatic Sea. ” This romanticized look of Montenegro is one of the things described as enchanted throughout – including Gatsby ‘s life and Daisy. It is here in chapter IV that we get the first feeling that Nick does non entirely trust Gatsby and although it does n’t last long, it is grounds adequate to propose that there is something non rather right about Gatsby and the manner in which Nick reveres him. Fitzgerald deliberately threads uncertainty into every history of Gatsby ‘s yesteryear and Nick begins to inquire “ if there was n’t something a small sinister about him, after all. ” This deficiency of unity is a running subject of the novel and although attention is given as the ground for Jordan wishing Nick earlier in the chapter she is described by Nick as “ incurably dishonest ” and although this is written in hindsight we, as readers, ca n’t assist but oppugn everything she has said up to this point, until Fitzgerald reassures us by stating us “ [ Nick is ] one of the few honorable people [ he ] has of all time known. ” This excuse that the reader is non wholly certain of is similar to that of Stevens in remains of the Day, when we suspect him of eavesdropping ; he attempts to reassure us by stating “ I could non assist but acquire the effect of what was being said. ” As we can see, there is a distinguishable difference between the writer ‘s voice and purposes and the storyteller ‘s voice. Undoubtedly Fitzgerald intended us to be leery of Gatsby throughout the novel until we begin to experience truly regretful for him. After the atrociousnesss that happened during the war it is easy to sympathise with those who lost their religion. It has been suggested the oculus of Dr T.J Eckleburg were put in after the screen illustration had been finished and Fitzgerald added them in court to it, nevertheless I feel that the symbolism is far excessively affecting for this to hold been a mere after-thought. For me, these eyes are straight stand foring the eyes of God, a God that has been abandoned and left to disintegrate such as “ his eyes, dimmed a small by many painless yearss, under Sun and rain, [ brooded ] on over the grave dumping land. ” Burnam uses the illustrations of careless drive in support for his claim to the cardinal subject of the text being the calamity that this has brought to all affected by it and merely ” [ Gatsby ] and he entirely, excluding Caraway – survives sound and whole in character. ” I can non accept that Fitzgerald wrote Gatsby in the exclusive intent to set across the jeopardies of bad drive ; I can, hence, merely theorize that this is a smaller issue than Burnam makes it out to be and alternatively would propose that the mentions to driving are at that place merely as arrows or symbols of boding the accidents that occur subsequently in the novel. The transition with the “ amputated wheel ” gives those who return to the book a arrow as to the stoping, with the line: “ You do n’t understandaˆ¦I was n’t driving. ” Afterwards, as a solution to the job, the “ condemnable ” suggests “ [ seting ] her in contrary ” to which the response is “ but the wheels off ” In a really abstract manner this episode is a gustatory sensation of things to come as Gatsby tries to “ crush onaˆ¦against the current ” and repossess the yesteryear which poorness and war robbed him of. While Burnam ‘s essay merely puts frontward his alternate position of “ The Great Gatsby ” I ca n’t assist but experience he has taken the symbols at excessively deep-a-level. Burnam says the ground he does this is due to the “ confusion of subjects and dichotomy of the symbol-structure, of which Fitzgerald seems to hold been incognizant. The bookaˆ¦falls short of its possibilities because its energies are spent in two waies ” uncovering both the supporter and writer in great item doing it “ slightly less crisp, less pointed, more diffused in its consequence. ” By this, Burnam is merely stating he thinks Fitzgerald should hold been more careful in leting himself to come through in his work and lodge to stating the narrative of Jay Gatsby. Sometimes we must take a text at face value and non look excessively deep as non all novels have such unfathomable deepnesss