A specific example of Nick being a moral hero would be how he organises Gatsby’s funeral despite not having known Gatsby for that long. He rings round and fruitlessly tries to get people to attend. He also proves that he is able to recognise his own flaws, because he writes, “that was my fault… I should have known better than to call him,” when he rings someone who refuses to attend the funeral and instead believes that Gatsby got what he deserved. The ability to recognise his own faults is a key characteristic of a moral hero, and it sets him apart from the other characters who refuse to acknowledge their own flaws, such as Gatsby himself. It would seem obvious that the real hero of The Great Gatsby is not Gatsby but the narrator Nick Carraway.
Finally, it could be argued that Nick is the true hero rather than Gatsby because he is the only character that recognises that the American Dream is flawed and he has the courage to move away from the East. In the closing chapter of the novel, Nick writes, “After Gatsby’s death the East was haunted for me like that, distorted beyond my eyes’ power of correction. So… I decided to come back home.” Nick claims that the Middle West is his true home, illustrating his nostalgia for home. The East, where he has been associated with for a while, represents materialism, corruption, and superficiality. However, this isn’t who Nick is and doesn’t want to be about this way of living. He claims the Midwest because it’s wholesome, innocent, and pure, all things Nick wants to be associated with. This ability to leave behind his job, his relationship with Jordan and everything he had become part of in the East in order to seek a more wholesome existence exhibits remarkable courage from Nick, and of course courage is a key heroic trait. This is further evidence that the real hero of The Great Gatsby is not Gatsby but the narrator Nick Carraway.
Nick does not grow or change as a character during the novel -- because the growth has already occurred before he sat down to tell the tale. He tells the tale from the position of someone who has already examined his role and reaction, and come to forgone conclusions. "Gatsby turned out all right at the end" - this and other conclusions outlined by Nick in the first pages are borne out his telling of the story. Nick is in many ways a changed man since his time in the East. In light of this, it perplexes me that anyone could claim that Nick is not the true hero of The Great Gatsby
On the other hand, those that oppose my view suggest that Gatsby is indeed both the hero and protagonist of The Great Gatsby, and that Nick is little more than a passive flaneur for most of the novel. There may be some merit to this opinion, especially if we consider that Gatsby is the quintessential caricature of the tragic hero. In tragedy, the hero’s downfall is due to combination of external circumstances and internal flaws. We certainly see this with Gatsby, more so than Nick. Gatsby’s tragic flaw, his hamartia, is his incessant desire to attain a dream that is unreachable. He has certain hubristic qualities that tragic heroes often have due to the pride he has in his wealth, to the point that he rejects his own family: “His parents were shiftless and unsuccessful farm people - his imagination had never really accepted them as his parents at all.” This paints him as the classic, prideful tragic hero and could suggest that the real hero of The Great Gatsby is Gatsby after all.
Furthermore, another way in which Gatsby displays the hallmarks of a tragic hero is through his experience of anagnorisis, the moment he realises that he is wrong and the dream crumbles around him. For Gatsby, the moment of anagnorisis is when Daisy reveals that she did, in fact, love Tom: “I did love him once — but I loved you too.” In his Poetics, Aristotle defined anagnorisis as "a change from ignorance to knowledge, producing love or hate between the persons destined by the poet for good or bad fortune." This is possibly what Gatsby experiences, confirming that Gatsby would is a tragic hero and therefore that the real hero of The Great Gatsby is indeed Gatsby. However, we must bear in mind that he still expects a phone call from Daisy right until the end – this could suggest that his anagnorisis was only partial and he was still able to cling onto the remains of his dream.
The claim that Nick is the true hero could be contested when we consider that Gatsby has the traits of a romantic hero. The Romantic hero is a literary archetype referring to a character that rejects established norms and conventions, has been rejected by society, and has themselves as the centre of his or her own existence. This describes Gatsby in many ways. He is withdrawn from society, rarely making himself known at his parties, and never seems to fit in with 1920s society. In light of this parallel it may make more sense to describe Gatsby as the true, romantic hero, rather than Nick.
Furthermore, Fitzgerald describes Gatsby’s desire for Daisy as, “he found that he had committed himself to the following of a grail.” The reference to a grail draws an interesting comparison between Gatsby and another key romantic hero, Sir Lancelot. The highly sought after Holy Grail was the chalice used by Jesus and it symbolises a long journey of devotion and patience, and is an extended metaphor to represent Gatsby’s heroic longing for Daisy. Another similarity between the two romantic heroes is their relationships with women. In true romantic style, both men believe it is their chivalric duty to protect women. Lancelot is, “bound by oath to protect ladies.” Likewise, Gatsby cares deeply for Daisy: “I want to wait here till Daisy goes to bed.” Gatsby is also willing to sacrifice his own reputation for Daisy’s sake after the car accident: “but of course, I’ll say that I was [driving].” In comparison, Nick’s love affairs are brief and devoid of true romance, revealing that the real hero of The Great Gatsby is Gatsby.
Finally, it could be argued that Gatsby, not Nick, is the true moral hero of The Great Gatsby. A moral hero is a character of good moral values that believes in the dignity and value of humanity. Of course Gatsby has his moral flaws, but the moral hero does not necessarily have to be perfect in every regard. Gatsby is certainly a good deal more moral than many of the characters that surround him. To quote Nick: ““They're a rotten crowd,” I shouted across the lawn. “You're worth the whole damn bunch put together.”” The "rotten crowd" to whom Nick is referring are the rich characters such as the Buchanans, Tom and Daisy, who run away from their problems and hide behind their money. Nick points out that even a liar and criminal like Gatsby is better than the other liars and criminals because of his boyish romantic dreams. His desires are focused on ideals (like love) instead of materialism, and he did the honourable thing in waiting and sacrificing himself for Daisy, his holy grail. This sliver of morality is enough to claim that Gatsby could be the real hero of The Great Gatsby, instead of the narrator Nick Carraway.
In conclusion, it seems reasonable to believe that the real hero of The Great Gatsby is not Gatsby but the narrator Nick Carraway. However, it is a stretch to call any of the characters a hero in the traditional sense. It could be argued that Fitzgerald has written a novel where there are no heroes, only anti-heroes. The opposing arguments have some merit but ultimately they fail to realise the true implications and context of The Great Gatsby.
by
erinruth99gmailcom (student)
