What makes a novel? Many would say that a novel is comprised of a plot with an exposition, rising action, a climax, falling action, and a resolution. Others, such as F. Scott Fitzgerald, might say that a novel does not necessarily need any of these traditional plot elements. He might say that a novel needs nothing more than to be a reflection of society, a shallow and loosely connected satire. Such novels rely heavily on characters and short sub-plots. This type of work doesn't have to rest so heavily on action and concrete events. It can hold it's own through small encounters and social commentary. An example of such a work might be The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. Although it falls short of the mark on several points, it remains a classic example of this style of writing.

The Great Gatsby is more a "story of the times" than a "story of the man" in that even though the novel revolves loosely around Jay Gatsby, it is more of an inside look at the disgusting lifestyles of the rich. It gives you a pretty brutal depiction of the shallow fleeting whims of the high society. The aimless manner in which the characters conduct themselves gives testament to this. For example, the guests at Gatsby's elaborate parties comment on how they think he is involved in crime, yet they do not seem to care. To them it is just a romantic notion or an intriguing speculation. The way in which the main characters conduct themselves with a strange lofty yet apathetic air that could anger even the kindest person. To what end is this use of irritating characters? With attitudes such as that it takes two to have an automobile accident are simply unattractive to the reader. It is disgusting.

In a novel with no concrete plot, the characters need to be intriguing. When the characters are shallow and undeveloped, it is difficult to react either positively or negatively. A character needs to evoke some sort of a reaction, either to make the reader relate and sympathize with the character's plight or at least bring out some sort of emotion (note: frustration is not a positive emotion to bring out, this results in people not wanting to read the book). Dry and uninteresting characters make for a dry and uninteresting book. Characters that act on a seemingly random whim and with reckless abandon are difficult to sympathize with. It is easier to simply ignore them. Such as how Tom has a mistress in the city and all their friends know about it, yet nothing is done. It is as if it was only a joke. Life to these people is a game and the man with the most money in the end wins. This attitude can make The Great Gatsby a very bothersome novel to read.

The problem with relying on characters is the same with relying solely on any other element; it is too hard to find characters that appeal to everyone. Characters that frustrate or bother the reader tend to have an overall negative effect on the enjoyability of the novel. While characters that insight or inspire the reader have a positive effect. This is where The Great Gatsby takes a pretty hard hit. The characters are detestable. The only reason the reader would want to finish the novel is to see if the characters die in some gruesome yet fulfilling manner. Since most of the excellent social commentary could be condensed to about one or two chapters, the rest of the book simply serves as filler material. As such it needs to be kept interesting. The characters fail to do this in almost every way. The only character that sees any real development at all is Nick. He starts to see Gatsby for the lost soul he is and be more of a truly understanding person. Unfortunately, even Nick is all in all a pretty shallow and uninteresting character.

If you look solely at the social satire though, The Great Gatsby is an excellent piece of writing. It illustrates beautifully the deterioration of American values and the failure of the American Dream. American political ideals conflict heavily with the actual social conditions that exist. It was declared that all men are created equal yet the social hierarchy is ever so clear. Such as when Myrtle is revealed to be of a lower class than Tom by the way she buys a common tabloid instead of a tasteful magazine. This social rift is very apparent in The Great Gatsby but the novel also touches on the "From Rags to Riches" aspect of this period in U.S. history. Moguls like Carnegie, Rockefeller and in this case, Jay Gatsby illustrates this. This showing that though the social rift is there and very prevalent, it is still possible to overcome one's birth status.

It is very easy to say that The Great Gatsby is a terrible novel and yet just as easy to call it a literary masterpiece. Why is this? Well it all depends on how it is approached. As a story or a traditional novel it is a failure. As a characterization novel it is also a failure. As a social commentary it is at least a moderate success. Despite it's obvious flaws it is easy to see why this novel is regarded as definite classic in twentieth-century literature. Whether it is loved or hated it remains as an important glimpse into the world of the "Roaring 20's."