Global Issue: Power, Politics and Justice

How does the manifestation of power influence the lives of the characters in The Great Gatsby and The Human Acts?

A concept with the ability to change entirely the lives of people, power manifests in societies in various ways. This manifestation may be systemic, with groups that have been influential traditionally, maintaining control over multiple generations or it may be the result of the actions of an individual over the course of their life. Whatever its source may be, this abstract idea is an important determinant of the way an individual acts and is perceived. In Human Acts, a polyphonic novel about the experiences of those present during and after the Gwangju massacre, power rests in the hands of those that support the tyrannical government that oppresses its own citizens. Here, characters with power decide who lives and how they live. In the Great Gatsby however, power belongs to those who have had it in their family for generations. The novel, set in the jazz age in New York, depicts how this community serves to preserve itself by oppressing others, which ultimately leads to the death of the titular character: Jay Gatsby. Both texts illustrate the consequences of the unequal distribution of power prevalent in society, by delving into the lives of those that are most affected by it, whether it be victims of the massacre or Jay Gatsby.

In the Human Acts, Han Kang illustrates a world that functions on the caprices of soldiers, by focusing on the distortion of the lives of their victims. By focusing on their mental as well as physical agony, Kang emphasises on the multifaceted manifestations of trauma that remain with the victims long after the physical violence ends. Meanwhile, the people that inflict this pain are left with no guilt nor are they held accountable for their actions. In this manner, Kang illustrates the breakdown of society as children are shot in the head, the youth are left to die in rotting conditions and dead bodies flood public places, as soldiers realise the extent of their power and the vulnerability of the citizens. The portrayal of the prisoners with disparaged hopes and dreams in the chapter which entails the physical torture that the youth undergo in prison cells defines this dystopian world, where whoever goes against the establishment, is reduced to an animalistic state. Perhaps the extract that most exemplifies this idea is the one where all the prisoners are forced to share morsels of food amongst themselves while they are beaten for being “violent elements” who rebelled against the establishment.  

Being rendered voiceless, they become nobodies in a country that they call their own, ironically because they stood up to a government that they had deemed would be too powerful for anyone’s good. The physical distress that they undergo in these prisons shakes the ideologies of many, with the narrator believing that the soldiers wanted to “make (them) realise how ridiculous it was, the lot of (them) waving the national flag and singing the national anthem”. Here, Kang highlights the fact that these prisoners were all patriots and wanted the best for their country, despite the soldiers labelling them otherwise, which brings forward the point that the nation is different from the government and in a world with such an intense imbalance of power, it doesn’t matter whether the prisoners shared the same values about the nation, as the soldiers. All that mattered was that they had dared to speak against the government, for which the establishment had duly punished them. In this very extract, Kang also presents the magnitude of the  implications of such punishments whereby people were left with little memories of who they were before all of this happened. As Kim Yong Chae recalled what his favourite food was with tears in his eyes, while his “eyes stayed dry while he told the story of his dead cousin”. This instance depicts how desensitized they all became to deaths around them but past happiness seemed unattainable, therefore painful.

In the Great Gatsby, F Scott Fitzgerald constructs a world with clear distinctions between those who have the ability to influence society’s proceedings and those who do not. Even though the novel was set in a time when consumerism was at its peak and those who had money had access to absolutely everything that was accessible, true power rested in the hands of those who belonged to the group that had never known what it was like to not have money. As the novel progresses, we see Gatsby’s futile attempts to achieve his idea of the American Dream, which is to be seen as a pivotal member of society which would then enable him to be reunited with Daisy, by throwing regular larger than life parties at his mansion. However, what comes out of these parties is a general suspicion as to who Gatsby really is. As Gatsby’s meetings with Daisy become frequent, he believes that he will be able to recreate his past relationship with her. However, just as Tom restricts him from climbing the social ladder, his relationship with Daisy becomes a hurdle in Gatsby’s path. As Gatsby revels in the realisation that he is incredibly close to achieving his dream, things take a different turn.

Fitzgerald reinstates the idea that the upper class all had an alliance which protected their power from being taken away by people like Gatsby, by showing how Daisy remains with Tom so as to not lose the place she occupies in society. This is characterised by Tom’s statement that“there are things between Daisy and me that you’ll never know, things that neither of us can ever forget.”. In this manner, Fitzgerald tells the readers that power has always belonged to a select group of people historically and this group would never give it up, even if it had to do certain things to preserve itself. Lastly, even as Daisy tells Tom that she would be leaving him for Gatsby, his statement that she wouldn’t leave him and “Certainly not for a common swindler who’d have to steal the ring he put on her finger” reinforces the concept that Tom and Daisy were both very fond of how they were perceived by society. This fondness would never enable them to leave each other, even if that meant they were to remain unhappy, showing how power can sometimes lead to a person ensuring their own unhappiness.

To conclude, both Han Kang and  Fitzgerald illustrated the unequal distribution of power in society across different time periods by focusing on the behaviour showcased by people possessing power. Even though the source of power was different in both cases, there was always a sense of oppression, whether it be explicit as in Human Acts or implicit as in The Great Gatsby, showing how power corrupts people and leads them on a path of self preservation through oppression.