Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

chicagotribune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#31

Post by criddell »

elliekelly wrote: post #25
jihadjihad wrote: post #5

I was lucky not to have The Great Gatsby ruined for me by having to read it in high school. I borrowed it from the library a couple years ago, and wondered if it could live up to the massive hype around it. I have to say that it does. Mencken's critique seems to be that for all the craftsmanship Fitzgerald displays on the page, the story itself is rather thin and contrived. I don't think I'd disagree with that, thoug…

As an adult it’s quite fun to re-read all of the books I “hated” in high school. They’re so much more enjoyable!

I hated Gatsby in high school and when I re-read it as an adult, I still didn't like it. None of the characters were interesting to me and when you don't care what happens to them, it's a chore to keep reading.

There were some books in high school that I really enjoyed that I'm afraid to reread because maybe they wouldn't stand up for me. I'm thinking about Lost Horizon, The Chrysalids, Brave New World, Canticle for Leibowitz, On the Beach, and Grapes of Wrath.

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#32

Post by floren »

criddell wrote: post #31
elliekelly wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an adult it’s quite fun to re-read all of the books I “hated” in high school. They’re so much more enjoyable!

I hated Gatsby in high school and when I re-read it as an adult, I still didn't like it. None of the characters were interesting to me and when you don't care what happens to them, it's a chore to keep reading. There were some books in high school that I really enjoyed that I'm afraid to reread because maybe they wouldn't stand up for me. I'm thinking about Lost Horizon, The Chrysalids, Brave New World, Canticle for…

I didn't read Grapes of Wrath until I was an adult, but I certainly found it worthwhile. Same for Canticle.

I did read Brave New World in high school, but it didn't do anything for me until I re-read it a couple years ago.

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#33

Post by ghaff »

criddell wrote: post #31
elliekelly wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an adult it’s quite fun to re-read all of the books I “hated” in high school. They’re so much more enjoyable!

I hated Gatsby in high school and when I re-read it as an adult, I still didn't like it. None of the characters were interesting to me and when you don't care what happens to them, it's a chore to keep reading. There were some books in high school that I really enjoyed that I'm afraid to reread because maybe they wouldn't stand up for me. I'm thinking about Lost Horizon, The Chrysalids, Brave New World, Canticle for…

I've read all of those except for On the Beach. I probably wouldn't reread Grapes of Wrath but not because of any dislike--in fact the opposite for both book and film. I'd reread any of the others though I would probably be more inclined to rewatch the 1937 Lost Horizon film. It's a marvelous story but there's nothing particularly exceptional about Hilton's prose as I recall from reading a few of his books decades ago.

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#34

Post by ghaff »

yamtaddle wrote: post #27
elhudy wrote: post #15

I’ve never quite been able to put into words why The Great Gatsby falls short of my expectations for a “classic” novel, but Mencken nails it. This was a fascinating review and i look forward to exploring more of Mencken’s writings. Thank you for sharing.

Length is probably a factor. It packs a lot of nice prose in a slim little volume. Its simple story and characters are, at least, more complex than your average pulp adventure tale—combine that and the length and it's just about an ideal Baby's First Real Literary Novel, which is probably why it's assigned so much in high school and 100-level undergrad literature courses. I also take a bit more depth from between the…

There is a great deal about modernism and the possibilities associated with it that can taken from The Great Gatsby. The Living Moment by Jeff Hart who used to be on the English faculty at Dartmouth College and was an expert on 1920s American authors among other things is probably the best read on this.

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#35

Post by mjevans »

deeg wrote: post #19
jihadjihad wrote: post #5

I was lucky not to have The Great Gatsby ruined for me by having to read it in high school. I borrowed it from the library a couple years ago, and wondered if it could live up to the massive hype around it. I have to say that it does. Mencken's critique seems to be that for all the craftsmanship Fitzgerald displays on the page, the story itself is rather thin and contrived. I don't think I'd disagree with that, thoug…

The BBC's In Our Time discussed Gatsby last year. The guests had a great comment: at the time the story in Gatsby was considered trashy and not worthy of a great novel. It would be as if a great modern author wrote a novel about the Kardashians. Today's readers don't have that problem and can enjoy the great writing. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000r4tq

I care more about the content of the story than any quality of writing. Beautifully captured footage of an automated waste treatment facility in the middle of nowhere is far less compelling than, E.G. low quality traffic cam views that happen to capture timely or educationally useful content.

There's more than enough books vying to be classics; do future readers a favor and select one that fulfills BOTH criteria; Well Written and Interesting to Read.

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#36

Post by yamtaddle »

criddell wrote: post #31
elliekelly wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an adult it’s quite fun to re-read all of the books I “hated” in high school. They’re so much more enjoyable!

I hated Gatsby in high school and when I re-read it as an adult, I still didn't like it. None of the characters were interesting to me and when you don't care what happens to them, it's a chore to keep reading. There were some books in high school that I really enjoyed that I'm afraid to reread because maybe they wouldn't stand up for me. I'm thinking about Lost Horizon, The Chrysalids, Brave New World, Canticle for…

> Lost Horizon

I liked this one when I read it years ago, but when I tried to re-read it aloud to one of my kids[1] I discovered that most of Hilton's characters' dialog read exactly the same—they have no voice—plus the prose was really clunky to read—uniquely so among the oddball books I read aloud to my young kids, and I read them some a lot older than that, plus a couple contemporary to Hilton's book, so it's not an age-of-the-writing problem. It was so unpleasant to read aloud that I didn't make it past the first chapter. Really soured me on the book.

[1] Hey, when they're young enough, it hardly matters what you're reading to them, may as well be something you want to read, unless you're reading them a picture book.

[EDIT] LOL, actually, now that I think about it, Gatsby was another one I read aloud to one of my kids. No problems with that one.

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#37

Post by Nomentatus »

seanhunter wrote: post #26

I have always been genuinely baffled by the admiration people have for The Great Gatsby. It’s not the best F Scott Fitzgerald book. It’s not even the best novel of that year (Mrs Dalloway is so much better it pains me to mention it in the same sentence).

You don't think the bandage is quite perfectly made; I adore that he put it on just the right place of just the right wound.

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#38

Post by AlbertCory »

deeg wrote: post #19
jihadjihad wrote: post #5

I was lucky not to have The Great Gatsby ruined for me by having to read it in high school. I borrowed it from the library a couple years ago, and wondered if it could live up to the massive hype around it. I have to say that it does. Mencken's critique seems to be that for all the craftsmanship Fitzgerald displays on the page, the story itself is rather thin and contrived. I don't think I'd disagree with that, thoug…

The BBC's In Our Time discussed Gatsby last year. The guests had a great comment: at the time the story in Gatsby was considered trashy and not worthy of a great novel. It would be as if a great modern author wrote a novel about the Kardashians. Today's readers don't have that problem and can enjoy the great writing. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000r4tq

Interestingly, the same thing was said about Madame Bovary.

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#39

Post by ghaff »

yamtaddle wrote: post #36
criddell wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hated Gatsby in high school and when I re-read it as an adult, I still didn't like it. None of the characters were interesting to me and when you don't care what happens to them, it's a chore to keep reading. There were some books in high school that I really enjoyed that I'm afraid to reread because maybe they wouldn't stand up for me. I'm thinking about Lost Horizon, The Chrysalids, Brave New World, Canticle for…

> Lost Horizon I liked this one when I read it years ago, but when I tried to re-read it aloud to one of my kids[1] I discovered that most of Hilton's characters' dialog read exactly the same—they have no voice—plus the prose was really clunky to read—uniquely so among the oddball books I read aloud to my young kids, and I read them some a lot older than that, plus a couple contemporary to Hilton's book, so it's not…

There is/was about an 8 hour staged reading of The Great Gatsby called Gatz that may sound like the strangest thing ever to some but I loved it (and so did the person I dragged to it).

https://www.elevator.org/shows/gatz/

Re: H.L. Mencken Reviews the Great Gatsby (1925)

#40

Post by AlbertCory »

What great writing (Mencken, I mean).

The silly criticism of the story itself is the first paragraph, true, but then he goes on, beautifully, about Fitzgerald's writing, in a way that you'd rarely see today.

As for the characters: he's right, the author doesn't go inside their heads. In that way, it's more like a play or a movie, where we can only see them from the outside. I think that's perfectly fine. "Third person omniscient" is not the only voice a novelist can have.

Post reply on HN