F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby (1925) has long been interpreted as a profound indictment of the American Dream – the national ethos that, through hard work and moral integrity, anyone can achieve prosperity and social mobility. However, the novel’s critique is neither absolute nor one‑dimensional. Fitzgerald simultaneously exposes the dream’s illusory nature and mourns its corruption by wealth, class, and materialism. This essay will argue that, while Fitzgerald presents a devastating critique of the American Dream as it existed in the Jazz Age, he stops short of entirely rejecting the ideal itself, instead revealing the tragic gap between the dream and its perversion.
The Illusion of Self‑Made Success
The quintessential American Dream is embodied in Jay Gatsby, a self‑made man who rises from humble origins to immense wealth. Yet Fitzgerald systematically undermines this narrative. Gatsby’s fortune is not earned through honest labour but through organised crime and bootlegging (Fitzgerald, 1925, p. 78). His lavish parties are not celebrations of success but desperate attempts to attract Daisy Buchanan – a symbol of the old‑money aristocracy that Gatsby can never truly join. As critic Lionel Trilling observed, Gatsby’s “extraordinary gift for hope” is tragically misdirected, and his wealth becomes a hollow shell (Trilling, 1950, p. 15). Fitzgerald thus critiques the notion that economic success equates to moral or spiritual fulfilment.
Moreover, Gatsby’s origins are deliberately obscured. His transformation from James Gatz to Jay Gatsby is presented as a conscious self‑reinvention, but it is built on lies – including the infamous “Oxford man” claim (Fitzgerald, 1925, p. 55). This deception highlights the American Dream’s demand that individuals erase their past to be accepted. Fitzgerald implies that the dream is not about becoming one’s best self but about becoming someone else entirely, a process that inevitably leads to alienation.
Class, Capitalism, and the Valley of Ashes
Fitzgerald uses the novel’s geography to expose the structural inequalities that the American Dream supposedly overcomes. The “valley of ashes” – a desolate industrial wasteland between West Egg and New York – represents those left behind by the capitalist system. The eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg looming over this landscape serve as a symbol of a morally blind society (Fitzgerald, 1925, p. 26). The dream, Fitzgerald argues, is not accessible to all; it is a privilege reserved for those already born into wealth or willing to operate outside the law.
The stark contrast between East Egg (old money) and West Egg (new money) further dismantles the myth of meritocracy. Tom Buchanan, born into immense privilege, treats Gatsby’s wealth with contempt, asserting that “they’re a rotten crowd” (Fitzgerald, 1925, p. 115). Fitzgerald reveals that class boundaries are far more rigid than the American Dream admits. Even Gatsby’s mansion, for all its opulence, cannot erase the “new money” label, and his pursuit of Daisy is doomed from the start. As historian James L. W. West III notes, Fitzgerald “saw the American Dream as a destructive force when corrupted by materialism” (West, 1998, p. 22).
The Corruption of Love and Morality
Daisy Buchanan is the ultimate prize in Gatsby’s dream, but she is also its most damning symbol. She is shallow, indecisive, and ultimately chooses wealth and social position over love. Fitzgerald critiques the American Dream’s tendency to commodify relationships: Gatsby believes he can buy back the past, and Daisy is reduced to a “golden girl” (Fitzgerald, 1925, p. 102). Their romance, like the dream itself, is an illusion sustained by money.
The novel’s tragic climax – Myrtle Wilson’s death, Gatsby’s murder, and the Buchanans’ retreat into their privilege – reinforces the critique. Tom and Daisy, Fitzgerald writes, “smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness” (Fitzgerald, 1925, p. 144). The American Dream, in this formulation, is not a pathway to happiness but a justification for moral irresponsibility. Those who succeed do so by trampling others, and those who fail are erased.
The Limits of the Critique
Despite this scathing portrayal, Fitzgerald does not entirely dismiss the ideal behind the American Dream. The novel’s famous closing lines – “Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us” (Fitzgerald, 1925, p. 150) – contain a note of longing. The green light at Daisy’s dock symbolises hope, aspiration, and the human capacity for wonder. Nick Carraway, the narrator, initially despises the East Coast’s cynicism but ends by admiring Gatsby’s “extraordinary gift for hope” (p. 6). Fitzgerald suggests that the dream’s power lies not in its achievability but in its ability to inspire – even if that inspiration leads to destruction.
Furthermore, Fitzgerald himself was deeply ambivalent about wealth. He both criticised the excesses of the Jazz Age and embedded himself within it. The critique in The Great Gatsby is therefore not a wholesale rejection of the American Dream but a warning against its corruption. As critic F. H. Matthiessen argues, Fitzgerald “mourns the loss of the dream even as he exposes its falseness” (Matthiessen, 1949, p. 67).
Conclusion: To What Extent?
To a very large extent, Fitzgerald presents The Great Gatsby as a critique of the American Dream. He exposes its foundational myths – self‑made success, meritocracy, moral progress – as hollow fictions that mask systemic inequality and moral decay. The novel’s characters, setting, and symbolic structure all conspire to show that the dream, in its Jazz Age incarnation, is not only unattainable but actively destructive.
However, Fitzgerald’s critique is not absolute. He retains a sense of pathos for Gatsby’s hope, and the final paragraphs elevate the dream to a universal human longing. The novel thus functions as a eulogy for an ideal that, while corrupted, still holds a tragic beauty. For A Level students analysing this text, it is crucial to recognise this duality: Fitzgerald criticises the American Dream’s perversion, not its core aspiration. As you craft your own essays, resources such as Mastering the 5-Paragraph Essay can help structure your arguments effectively.
Similarly, Writing Effective Essays: A Guide To College‑Level Writing offers practical tips for developing sophisticated literary analysis.
For further exploration of related themes, consider comparing Fitzgerald’s critique with How Does Williams Present the Conflict Between Reality and Illusion in ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’? or examining How Is the Theme of Social Class Explored in ‘An Inspector Calls’?. Both texts engage with similar issues of class, materialism, and illusion.
Reference List
Fitzgerald, F. S. (1925). The Great Gatsby. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Matthiessen, F. H. (1949). The American Renaissance: Art and Expression in the Age of Emerson and Whitman. New York: Oxford University Press.
Trilling, L. (1950). The Liberal Imagination: Essays on Literature and Society. New York: Viking Press.
West, J. L. W. (1998). The Perfect Hour: The Romance of F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ginevra King. New York: Random House.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: How does Fitzgerald use symbolism to critique the American Dream?
A: Key symbols include the green light (unattainable hope), the valley of ashes (inequality), and the eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg (moral blindness). Each reinforces the gap between the dream’s promise and its reality.
Q: Is Gatsby a sympathetic character despite his corruption?
A: Yes. Fitzgerald portrays Gatsby as a tragic figure whose dream is pure even if his methods are not. Nick’s admiration for Gatsby’s “extraordinary gift for hope” suggests that the dream itself remains worthy, even when corrupted.
Q: What is the role of Nick Carraway in the critique?
A: Nick serves as the moral compass. His gradual disillusionment with the East Coast mirrors the reader’s growing awareness of the dream’s failures. Yet his final reflection on the green light shows that he also retains a measure of hope.
