For readers and writers alike, books are transformative, but in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s, The Great Gatsby, the books the characters read (or neglect to read) are entirely transactional. At the very beginning of the novel, Nick mentions that his summer reading consists of “a dozen volumes on banking and credit and investment securities, and they stood on my shelf…”(Fitzgerald 4). Since Nick is one of the most analytical characters in the book, it would make sense for him to read for intellectual pleasure; however, Nick's unopened books function simply to gain money and power, not to become a better person or a writer as he once aspired to be. Throughout the novel, Nick judges all of the other characters for their reckless wealth, but his reading material shows that he aspires to be a part of the “rotten crowd.” Although Nick reads simply to gain wealth, Tom recruiting people to read his racist book, ‘The Rise of the Coloured Empire,’ is even worse: “Well, it’s a fine book, and everybody ought to read it. The idea is if we don’t look out the white race will be—will be utterly submerged. It’s all scientific and stuff; it’s been proved”(Fitzgerald 13-14). The only time that Tom's reading is mentioned is when his racist book is. His books are merely educating him on white supremacy, and are filled with conspiracy theories. Tom's reading is a more extreme example of a transactional relationship to books. He is looking for ways to keep his power and wealth, whereas Nick is looking for ways to gain it. Due to this, if Tom’s books did change him whatsoever, they would be for the worse, rather than the better. In the end, Tom did read his books, which is one thing Gatsby could not truthfully say about himself, because after all, Gatsby “didn’t cut the pages” (Fitzgerald 46). By Gatsby not cutting the pages of the books, it means that he has not read them. In the novel, there were never even hints towards Gatsby having read them or planning to read them, meaning he has the books purely to maintain appearance. Ultimately, the inauthenticity and superficiality of all the characters stop them from having the depth in their lives to read and be transformed by great literature.

 

Lord of the Flies 

​

In William Golding’s Lord of the Flies, the island is a microcosm of the outside world in that just as the world of the grownups is in a state of destruction, the democratic order collapses on the island because of both the adults’ and the boys’ innate and inescapable evil. For example, at the beginning of the novel, Piggy proclaims that the adults are “all dead” (14) from “the atom bomb” (14). Although the boys admire the grown-ups’ “civilized” ways, their reassurance is misleading because the adults are in a nuclear war. Ironically, the grown-ups cannot maintain order any better than the children on the island, which is why, according to Piggy, they are “all dead” from warfare. Moreover, the Lord of the Flies later explains that the “darkness of man's heart” (202) is the reason “why things are the way they are” (143) and civilization “[is] in ruins” (62). In other words, the evil that resides within every human causes the boys to fall into anarchy and chaos and kill Simon and Piggy. Since this “beast” or “evil” is “close, close, close” (143) to everyone, including the adults, it is also the reason why the grown-ups are destroying each other through atomic warfare. Because the grownups are at war, at the end of the novel when a naval officer arrives at the island, the boys are not exactly rescued because they will only return to “a civilization that kn[o]w[s] nothing of [them] and [is] in ruins” (62). The ending is not a deus ex machina because mankind’s evil is ubiquitous, and therefore the boys cannot escape humanity’s atrocities by leaving the island. Although the boys believe that now “things [will] be all right” (94) since they are rescued, they will only return to a much more destructive environment. Ultimately, just as the boys end up “scorch[ing] [the island] like deadwood” (202), the grown-ups will inevitably do the same to the entire world.

​

A Midsummer night's dream

​

At the end of the play, Helena and Hermia get to marry the men they love, despite the rigid Athenian laws. Even though “the sharp Athenian law” (1.1.164), in which Egeus “may dispose” (1.1.43) of Hermia however he pleases, will not allow Hermia to marry Lysander, the two run away and end up getting their way. At the beginning of the play, Hermia is told that she can either marry Demetrius, become a nun, or die; however, because she defies the sexist and patriarchal rule, she gets to marry the man she really loves. Similarly, Helena would not have ended up with Demetrius had she not gone against gender stereotypes and chased after him into the woods. At the end of the play, Theseus “overbear[s] [Egeus’s] will” (4.1.186) and plans a group wedding: “For in the temple by and by, with us,/ These couples shall eternally be knit” (4.1.187-188). Had the two female protagonists not broken the rules and stood up for what they wanted, the play would not have ended so happily. Because Hermia and Helena defied the patriarchy at the end of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, love overpowers the law. 

​

To Kill a Mockingbird

  

In conclusion, the chapter about the First Purchase Church is unlike the other chapters in that it does not characterize the African American community as just one stereotype. ​​​​​​​​​​​​​The message Lee wants to get across through her novel is the importance of breaking out of a single story. However, throughout the rest of the novel, Lee fails to break her African American characters out of their single stories. This is one reason the novel is highly criticized. Some could argue that Aaron Sorkin’s Broadway adaptation of the novel is better than the original because characters such as Tom Robinson and Calpurnia are given more depth and complexity as people. In Sorkin’s play, Tom Robinson is more developed and jumps out as one of the main characters in the performance. This makes sense, as the entire novel is focused on Tom Robinson’s trial and racist inequality in the South. When compared to the play, the African American characters in the novel seem to be dulled down. The importance of chapter 12 in the novel is that black erasure is not quite as prevalent, and the African American people are represented in their own skin, rather than having their identities erased and obscured by the white characters.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ In the end, while her intention was to demonstrate the importance of breaking away from stereotypes, Harper Lee failed to do so through the majority of her African American characters.