unread, fiction, novels, classics

This was an intriguing read, but overall a very uneven novel; the three books feel very different in tone and theme, almost as if Fitzgerald were juggling so many issues without the ability to bring them fully into a narrative cohesion. There's a lot going on here: evocations of Freud and how the modern complexes are at variance with classical philosophy and aesthetic values; a fascinating portrayal of love and pain in Anthony and Gloria's relationship which plays out Fitzgerald's preoccupation with Hegel and Freud both; there is even some interesting dialogue that is very unique for blending different genres (e.g. screenplay, interior monologues, Greek tragedy, etc.).

What is perhaps most compelling in the novel is Fitzgerald's very overt pacifism, as well as his condemnation of the bourgeois class and the values associated with capital, money, and status -- values that run counter to art. Indeed, there is a nice tension between Anthony and his writer friend, Dick, about different kinds of art, how an artist can be bought and sold, how art can be catered to fit the needs of the masses and turn a profit instead of for the sake of art in and of itself. But all of these aspects, while compelling and beautifully drawn out, fail to speak to one another in a nice dialogue; the result is a very fragmented and scattered novel where many of the main characters aren't fleshed out enough, forcing the reader to view them as "types" and nothing more.

One brilliantly written chapter toward the end of book two, the longest one which takes place in the middle of the night and begins with Gloria's perspective and meanders through much of the philosophical and aesthetic debates above is Fitzgerald at his finest in this novel, I though, and the section might well stand on its own to illustrate his central concerns in the text and in his work more generally. ( )

I liked this novel, but at the same time I didn't like this novel. Maybe the weakest out of the three Fitzgerald books I have read. It's not really the story that bothered me, but it's more the fact this book was too long for Fitzgerald's style. In my opinion he works better if his novels don't go on for 400 pages. There were parts that could have been cut out or shortened.

I did like the story though. It was very different then Paradise and Gatsby, which is good. Noticing all of his works aren't the same tone or style. The other two I read were more upbeat, while this one was more slow and melancholy. With this book it's important to take the title literally.

This also shows a more realistic view on the Fitzgerald's marriage. If you know about Zelda's life, it's kind of obvious who she is in the book. It shows that they both loved each other, but that their marriage was perfect nor romantic I would say. Zelda had to put up with his drinking and Scott had to put up with her ambitions. They do make a great literary couple throughout Fitzgerald's novels.

I'm still on a Fitzgerald/1920s lit-kick. I guess I' reading Tender is the Night next. Hoping that one is a little better. Should be interesting since that one is mostly in Paris unlike his other that focus on New York. ( )

There is no doubt that F. Scott Fitzgerald can handle language. He writes in such a delicious manner that he can keep you going for a long time on that alone, no substance required. That is exactly what he does for the first half of The Beautiful and the Damned. I fully admit that I became weary of this novel by the halfway point, then, in that manner that is also so very Fitzgerald, he began to focus the story and I was lured to go forward to the end.

If any author can invent characters that are unappealing in themselves, Fitzgerald is the guy. I found absolutely nothing redeeming in either Anthony Patch or his wife, Gloria. The two of them are pretty much the epitome of spoiled, selfish, wasteful lives, people who contribute nothing and suck up everything around them. If we are meant at any point to feel sorry for them, it was a miss for me. We watch them deteriorate from a point that might have seemed itself to be rock bottom.

Gloria is a woman who depends 100% on her looks, her beauty, to carry her through life. Anthony is a man who feels no need to accomplish anything in life because he believes he is going to inherit millions from his grandfather. As a result, they live lives devoid of any meaning or purpose. Gloria is too selfish to want children, Anthony is too self-centered to stoop to work. You can’t help thinking that society and their families have set these two up for failure, and failure in a worse form than mere financial failure.

I read this too quickly on the heels of Tender is the Night. I have Fitzgerald burnout. I’m glad he wrote Gatsby, otherwise I think I would not be able to regard him as a great writer, but only a sufficient one. I always hate closing a book and saying to myself, “glad that is behind me.”
( )

I confuse this book in my memory with This Side of Paradise, both of which I read once ever in 2007. In retrospect, I see no meaningful distinction between their subject matter, styles of writing, or the experienceof reading them.

I don't say that to fault them though. I enjoyed them both like low end arrested development episodes - worth far more than contemporary equivalents but, at best, stepping stones to something greater. ( )