THEME POEM 1 POEM 2 LINKS TO GATSBY unrequited love Non Sum Who So List to Hount - Unrequited love in Who So List to Hount portrays a female who doesn’t return the male speaker’s affections similarly to Daisy’s ultimate rejection of Gatsby’s passionate love for her. In the same way Daisy chooses to stay with Tom for financial security/social status the woman in the poem (inspired by Anne Boleyn, wife of Henry VIII) cannot have a relationship with the speaker because she is already the property of another man of high status, as inferred by the “diamonds” around her neck. This perhaps also suggests the love between the speaker and the woman and between Gatsby and Daisy is forbidden because a) both females are already in a relationship and b) society acts as a barrier to love as the differing social statuses prevent them from being together (like Gatsby and Daisy initially in the novel, “she only married you because I was poor!”). forbidden love jealousy - The suffering of the male speaker in Non Sum is comparable to Myrtle and George’s relationship in the novel, in which Myrtle has an affair with another man (Tom) leaving George crazed with sadness and jealousy as demonstrated when he locks Myrtle in a room in their house. obsession - Both poems suggest the destructive impact of unrequited love on the male admirers (‘lovesickness’) much like Gatsby’s unhealthy physical/mental state when reuniting with Daisy at Nick’s house, “pale as death”, and of course Gatsby’s death – ultimately due to his unrequited love for Daisy – suggests Fitzgerald is offering the reader a warning about the destructive nature of shallow (Daisy) and overly passionate/obsessive love (Gatsby). - Jealousy and unrequited love appear interlinked in both the poems and the novel: the male rivalry presented using the hunting metaphor in Who So List to Hount can be compared to Tom and Gatsby’s rivalry/jealousy when competing for Daisy’s love (e.g. Gatsby’s demand, “say you never loved him”). - In both poems it could also be argued that the male speakers’ love is obsessive as they describe the turmoil of their unrequited love: in Who So List to Hount the speaker depicts love as a fruitless chase in which his affections are not returned even after many attempts, and in Non Sum the speaker remains infatuated with “Cynara” even after a considerable amount of time has passed. This can be likened to Gatsby’s obsession with Daisy and the love they once had (as shown by his collection of “a lot of [newspaper] clippings – about [Daisy]”), and equally the presentation of the women in both Who So List to Hount and the novel as a possession/prize (the “deer” in the hunt and Gatsby’s obsession with obtaining Daisy as his own). - It could be argued that the lack of female perspective and the distance created by Byron in She Walks in Beauty means that the love the speaker declares for the unnamed women is unrequited. Perhaps her perfection makes the speaker feel unworthy of her affections which is why he does not appear to approach her, true to Byron’s lack of romantic pursuit after the woman the poem is based on. - Although the knight’s sickliness in La Belle Dame Sans Merci suggests he is the one impacted by the destructive nature of unrequited, Gatsby’s unrequited love for Daisy can alternatively be compared to the woman’s love for the knight in the poem (for example when she “weeps” for him). enduring love (Time) Sonnet 116 Non Sum - Both poems present love as timeless or powerful enough to endure long periods of time which can be compared to Gatsby’s obsession with the past and his ignorant belief that his and Daisy’s relationship can return to the way it was before, “Can’t repeat the past...of course you can!” In this way Fitzgerald perhaps suggests it is not love but obsession that can overcome time, as it appears Daisy does not return Gatsby’s love in the same way. obsession - Gatsby’s love for Daisy is presented as enduring as his affections do not waver, however this is arguably undermined by what Daisy represents to Gatsby: wealth/success (“her voice was full of money”). Therefore, it may be interpreted that the ideal love presented in Sonnet 116 is absent in the novel - Tom & Myrtle’s relationship appears purely physical, Jordan & Nick’s “fling” is only infatuation/ curiosity, and both marriages in the novel are presented as unsuccessful as one spouse is unfaithful/ love is unrequited. - The male speaker’s faithful infidelity in Non Sum can perhaps be likened to Tom’s physical infidelity but emotional commitment in the novel, he states “I always come back, and in my heart I love her all the time.” Thus, Fitzgerald may be suggesting physical infidelity in a relationship is not a definite barrier to love as shown by Daisy and Tom’s decision to move away and stay married at the end of the novel (although arguably this is not a choice controlled by love but rather influenced by money and reputation). physical love (sex/desire) forbidden love To His Coy Mistress The Flea - Donne presents the influence of a society ruled by religion in The Flea as a main factor for the female’s refusal to have sex, which is in stark contrast to the lack of religion Fitzgerald presents in the 1920s setting of the novel (the multiple affairs/acts of adultery such as that between Tom & Myrtle seem to be accepted in a society lacking morals, “everybody kn[ows]…Tom’s got some woman in New York”). This is perhaps also symbolic of the changing perception of women and their freedoms in the 1920s, including increased sexual liberty as represented by Myrtle’s character – “she carried her surplus flesh sensuously” – in contrast to the presentation of physical love as forbidden, in particular for the female, in The Flea (implied consequences of being shunned by her parents/society as sex outside marriage was not accepted in the 17th century). - In both poems male desire for sex can be interpreted as a barrier to love as the forceful seduction techniques that make up both poems present love/desire as one-sided, and unsuccessful in the case of The Flea (in which the female symbolically crushes the flea). This is similar to the destruction Tom’s desire causes in his relationship with Daisy as it leads to him committing adultery, making Daisy feel “pretty cynical about everything”. However, oppositely the lack of physical action/sex between Gatsby and Daisy demonstrates that Gatsby’s love for her is deeper than physical, although this doesn’t seem to matter in the end as Daisy chooses Tom over Gatsby perhaps suggesting, like in Non Sum, that male physical infidelity is not necessarily a deciding factor of the breakdown of a relationship/love. - The manipulation both male speaker’s use in order to seduce is perhaps comparable to Tom’s aggressive character and the forceful way he approaches Myrtle when they first meet (Myrtle describes, “his white shirtfront pressed against my arm”). However, whereas both female listeners in the poems appear reluctant, Fitzgerald presents Myrtle as a more openly sexual and promiscuous character (as shown by her reaction, “I was so excited”), which is contrary to the idea presented in To His Coy Mistress that time impacts lust/love because Myrtle is a sexual older woman. Note also the comparability of the “coy mistress” and innocent presentation of Daisy (inferred by the repeated “white” colour imagery related to her) in comparison the promiscuity of Myrtle and Jordan who represent the ‘new women’ of the Jazz Age. destructive love (dangers of love) La Belle Dame Sans Merci Non Sum unrequited love - As Fitzgerald emphasises the destructive nature of love through the resultant deaths of Gatsby, Wilson and Myrtle (“the holocaust”), Keats presents love as physically damaging for the knight in the poem (repetition of “pale”) at the cause of a femme fatale character - who arguably represents evolving female stereotypes that challenge the patriarchy. Daisy can perhaps also be likened to the femme fatale character in La Belle Dame Sans Merci as her choice to leave with Tom and not even attend Gatsby’s funeral at the end of the novel presents her character as deceptive/manipulative (dangerous). - Both Non Sum and the novel present the dangers of unrequited/ lost love, which leave the male lover physically or emotionally damaged (‘lovesick’ Nick describes Gatsby as “pale as death” and the speaker’s mental torment in the poem). Fitzgerald also emphasises the destructive effect of unrequited love through Gatsby’s death in the novel which is ultimately a result of his love for Daisy (as he lies about who was driving the car to protect her). - The dangerous/destructive nature of passionate and often lustful love presented in the poems is portrayed in the novel through the multiple character deaths which Fitzgerald suggests represent the questionable morals and decadent living of 1920s society (note also that all the characters that die are of lower social status through which Fitzgerald is perhaps highlighting the unattainability of the American dream). This could be linked to the influence of the Decadent movement in Dowson’s poem (e.g. the “feast” and “wine” which cannot ease the speaker’s pain). idealised love She Walks in Beauty To His Coy Mistress - Gatsby’s idealisation of Daisy is arguably what allows his love for her to overcome time in contrast to the speaker’s suggestion in To His Coy Mistress that love/lust will fade over time. Equally, the split structure of the poem into an idealised hypothetical situation and reality (Volta – “and yet”) is in contrast to Gatsby’s idealisation of Daisy and denial of reality (“Can’t repeat the past...of course you can!”). - Gatsby’s idealisation/admiration of Daisy from a distance – “just across the bay” – for many years (and equally Nick’s idealisation/infatuation with Gatsby) is similar to the speaker’s admiration of the woman from a distance in She Walks in Beauty. Arguably, in both texts the speaker and Gatsby/Nick are infatuated or in love with their own idea of the person and not the reality (the exaggerated perfection of the woman in the poem is perhaps unrealistic and Nick undermines Gatsby’s devotion to “charming” Daisy by labelling her as “careless”), suggesting perhaps that without idealisation love is unattainable. The woman in the poem is also similar to Daisy in her physical beauty/perfection (“sunshine fell with romantic affection upon her glowing face”) but not spiritually (Daisy is “careless” and “cynical”). - Gatsby's blind obsession with Daisy and winning her back from Tom will not allow him to see that he has created an idealistic version of her which she cannot live up to (“There must have been moments…when Daisy tumbled short of his dreams…because of the colossal vitality of his illusion”) which is perhaps comparable to the speaker’s idealisation in She Walks in Beauty as he seems unaware of the woman in reality but rather only his idealised version of her. Fitzgerald also warns of the dangers of idealised love as Gatsby and George’s idealised love for women who are in love with Tom leads to their demise at the end of the novel. unattainable love (futility of love) The Ruined Maid Who So List to Hount - Arguably, Nick presents true love as unattainable in the novel because of the societal barriers of power and status (reflective of the hierarchical social structure of 1920s society) which leave all the main characters of lower class dead (Gatsby, Myrtle and George). In this way Gatsby and Melia’s characters can be linked in that both cannot achieve love due to social class/status (note the complete lack of romantic love in the poem where Melia is barriers to love (gender, society) forced to choose between virtue/destitution and prostitution/comfort, whereas Gatsby cannot marry Daisy initially because he was too “poor”). - Myrtle’s use of her body/sex to gain social status is comparable to the actions of Victorian women which Melia represents in The Ruined Maid (turning to prostitution or becoming mistress in order to live a more comfortable life). Furthermore, the judgement both characters receive from society (Nick defines Myrtle by her sexuality in his initial description of her – “she carried her surplus flesh sensuously” – and the satirical nature of the poem which emphasises the harsh reality for women) suggest gender inequality may also be a barrier to love. Fitzgerald also presents the inferior position of women in romantic relationships through Tom’s abuse of both his wife and his mistress symbolic of his power as the superior (Daisy calls him a “brute” for hurting her finger and Tom “broke [Myrtle’s] nose”). The unequal gender power dynamic in Who So List to Hount (through female objectification) may also be interpreted as Wyatt presenting gender inequality as a barrier to love, or oppositely the female character’s independence may be seen as the barrier to love (in which case Wyatt is enforcing sexist attitudes of the 16th century). - The presentation of love as unattainable and a fruitless chase in Who So List to Hount (through the extended hunting metaphor) is similar to Fitzgerald’s presentation of Gatsby’s love for Daisy as a fruitless chase (Daisy leaves Gatsby for Tom at the end of the novel). The unattainability of a successful relationship between Gatsby and Daisy is presented as due to their differing social backgrounds and Daisy’s marriage to Tom; similarly in the poem the speaker cannot be with the woman he loves because she is already in a relationship with a man of higher status (presumably King Henry VIII due to the influence of Wyatt’s affair with Anne Boleyn in the poem). - The speaker’s admiration of the female in She Walks in Beauty yet lack of action to pursue a romantic relationship with her perhaps also presents love as unattainable. marriage (& infidelity) Sonnet 116 A Song (Absent From Thee) - In A Song the speaker appears to manipulate the addressee so he can act unfaithfully but still feel secure in keeping her as a wife. Equally, Gatsby draws the reader’s attention to Daisy’s use of her marriage to Tom for financial security, “she only married you because I was poor.” Fitzgerald further presents marriage as a symbol of wealth in the novel, suggesting it has lost its value as an expression of genuine love in 1920s America, through the multiple affairs in the novel – e.g. between Tom and Myrtle, “Neither of them can stand the person they’re married to.” in which Myrtle uses Tom for his wealth/social status because she “thought [George] was a gentleman” but he turned out to be poor. In this way Fitzgerald is perhaps commenting on the common and accepted nature of infidelity within marriage in modern times, and in particular in the 1920s society lacking religion and morality. - The presentation of infidelity within marriage in both A Song and the novel is in stark contrast to the presentation of faithful love within marriage in Sonnet 116. It could be argued that the love presented in Shakespeare’s poem is idealised and unrealistic in comparison to the more cynical yet believable presentation of love in the novel. - Male infidelity in A Song is comparable to Tom’s sporadic unfaithfulness to Daisy but his claim that, “in my heart I love her all the time”, which suggests male infidelity is not a definitive barrier to love. Similarly, in the poem the speaker suggests he can “return” to his lover (presumably wife) after having sex with other women. Both texts emphasise the patriarchal nature of the societies in which the poem and novel are set (17 th century England and 1920s America) through the presentation of male infidelity as acceptable (“everybody knew” about Tom’s affair in contrast to Daisy’s discretion in her affair with Gatsby, and Tom’s hypocritical outrage at Daisy’s unfaithfulness highlights his misogynistic character, through which Fitzgerald perhaps criticises the double standards for men and women in society).
