In relation to the archetypal American Dream, compare and contrast the main characters in The Great Gatsby and Gone with the Wind: to what extent can Jay Gatsby and Rhett Butler be considered heroes?

Perhaps the best way to assess a hero is through how they affect other characters. One reader said:

‘That is why Gatsby is so “great” and could even be considered somewhat of a hero. He opens Nick up, even after his death, to who and what he should, and should not become, and changes his way of thought and living in ways that will reverberate in him for the rest of his life.’

I agree with this because I think it displays accurately the meaning of Fitzgerald’s character and why he chooses to place Gatsby in the positions he does; to develop Nick’s character. Butler also affects many characters in the novel, most drastically Scarlett O’Hara of course. Perhaps his attitude to people (which Scarlett calls ungentlemanly) makes him loveable and humble. Here is someone who is not pretending to be something he is not. I believe it is how he shakes up Atlanta, and how a gentleman like Ashley Wilkes can agree with him that makes him such a reputable hero. Is loving Scarlett however, jeopardising his pursuit of happiness since she does not love him? And Gatsby is a tragic hero, linking to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s saying ‘Show me a hero and I will write you a tragedy’. It is slightly presumptuous of Fitzgerald to say this, but he doesn’t mean to be. Perhaps due to his own relationship with his wife Zara, Fitzgerald tends to believe that love can ruin any character, which is presumably why any of Fitzgerald’s stories follow a similar pattern. Gatsby’s love for Daisy could be seen as heroic, yet his love links to the context, a time where the land of opportunity was open, yet ironically alcohol was prohibited, shadowing Gatsby and Daisy’s love, beautiful yet forbidden. Hence this love for Daisy makes us question how ‘great’ his judgement is, and being a tragic hero does not fit well with the image of a man trying to achieve the American dream. On what terms can Gatsby be considered a hero?

Sarah Ellen said: To consider Gatsby to be a hero is really subjective. It is subjective upon which definition of heroism we use. Were his actions courageous and noble enough, or was the man just driven crazy over love? To consider Butler to be a hero is subjective based on the same factors as Gatsby and also depends on what is held in high regard as qualities determining a hero. If it is nobility and bravery, maybe these two are not the best examples of a hero, but if being an American hero is about the pursuit of happiness (and the American Dream) is there a possibility that these figures have more resemblance to heroes? The concept of ‘The American Dream’ is one that many people have attempted to define over the years, and its link with heroism is tenuous. The most successful definition I have read is James Evans’:

That dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which man and woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position.

Both Jay Gatsby and Rhett Butler are rich, corresponding to this definition, but being rich does not necessarily make life better and fuller. Also, is wealth necessarily richness, or is richness about how fulfilled your life is? If they are rich, but they are not fulfilled, I do not think this corresponds to the American Dream, because according to the American Dream, ‘life should be better’. In America, opportunity is not really given according to ability or achievements although both Gatsby and Butler do have attributes to add to society. Rhett is a blockade-runner and is a strong man who does not avoid physical labour; he is a good fighter. Gatsby in many ways is a weaker character than Butler, but still he throws parties for his community and he is generally liked. He is also good at making money, but lets his audience believe he was born into wealth: ‘Well, they say he’s a nephew or a cousin of Kaiser Willhelm’s. That’s where all his money comes from.’

Does a ‘dream of social order’ suggest that Rhett Butler and Jay Gatsby should not aspire to be more than they are? Is it possible that both the authors decided their characters should be punished for defying ‘social order’? I think it is highly unlikely and is just a coincidence, but it is possible that their societies should exert more influence over them than they do. Gatsby rises to fortune despite his lower class, but it is not clear whether he ever truly escapes it; and is his heroism to fit the social order, or to escape it? He is bound to his past as he struggles to find his way among a neighbourhood that is never quite open to him, and without ever finding anyone who he truly trusts; ‘concealing his incorruptible dream’ . Rhett Butler has gone against his respectable family but manages to make his fortune on his own. He loses all his reputation (‘Sir, you are no gentleman!’ ) - Butler wants to be a renegade, it protects him from his feelings and with the return of his past; he is vulnerable, in particular exposed to his love for Scarlett. Butler tries to escape his past like Gatsby, but ends up respected like his ancestors, so like Gatsby, ends up with his past coming back to haunt him.

The American Dream helps us assess the characters as heroes because we can assess them according to American objectives. A hero could be someone who is strong and powerful (like Butler), or someone who leads other characters to self discovery (like Gatsby and Butler to a degree). Opinions depend on the way Gatsby is read to a certain extent, and where our empathy lies. It also depends on the viewpoint of the character – in both ‘The Great Gatsby’, and ‘Gone with the Wind’, the character whose voice we hear is fairly sympathetic to the ‘hero’. Carraway’s father taught him to ‘remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had…’  and this is a lesson that persuades Nick to find the good in Gatsby.

Accepting these men as heroes alters each of these stories. Without disdain for these characters, we can see their tales in a different light, as moral and principled fables. If Rhett is a hero, we can see that the people of the South are fighting an impossible battle; if Gatsby is a hero, we can see that he helps the people around him feel stronger. If a character is less respected, it only helps us to relate to them because their status is not too high above us. I think this means they are more of a hero because in a wider context, they have more impact on the outside world. These heroes are also different in modern day society. Gatsby would be treated with less disdain than he was in his story – with television programmes such as ‘Paris Hilton’s British Best Friend’ it is becoming more evident that people today can be bought. Love and friendship is more and more changed by money. However, with growing support for peace and knowledge of wars, Rhett would be a bigger hero than ever, because he would not support any side. I think that if Rhett was considered a hero it would not be a disaster, but Fitzgerald’s Gatsby is a weaker role-model and would surely contribute to the down-turn of society.

---