Comparison of the indifference of Chinese and American

23级5班圈圈

Comparison of Indifference in Chapter 2 of The Great Gatsby and That in My Country and My People

Core Differences: The Nature and Root Causes of Indifference

Indifference in Chapter 2 of The Great Gatsby: Active Contempt Driven by Class Superiority

The indifference in Chapter 2 of the novel is an active exclusion and dignity violation of the lower class by the privileged class, rooted in the superiority and moral decay brought about by class solidification. When Tom flew into a rage and beat Myrtle for mentioning Daisy’s name at the party, none of the onlookers such as Catherine and the McKee couple tried to stop him; they watched numbly throughout. As the narrator, Nick, although uncomfortable with Tom’s brutality, chose to “stay out of it.” He described himself as “I was within and without, simultaneously enchanted and repelled by the inexhaustible variety of life,” which reveals the essence of the onlooker’s indifference. This “silent observation” is typical of the indifference in the upper-class social circles of the Jazz Age. More symbolically, the novel uses “A tin of large, hard dog-biscuits—one of which decomposed apathetically in the saucer of milk all afternoon” to metaphorize this indifference—it is not passive self-protection, but a spiritual desolation caused by the active loss of empathy. As the scene reveals, this indifference stems from the absolute dominance of the “old money” class over the lower class. They regard the lower class as disposable vassals, whose pain and dignity are worthless. Essentially, it is the alienation of human nature under the class division of capitalist society.

Indifference in My Country and My People: Passive Self-Protection Driven by Survival Wisdom

The indifference of the Chinese people analyzed by Lin Yutang in My Country and My People is a survival strategy evolved in a turbulent society, with the core of “passive self-protection” rather than active malice. He clearly points out: “Living in such a society where individuals’ rights are not protected by law, only an ambiguous, indifferent and passive attitude is the safest and most secure. This is its appeal, a subtlety that is not easily understood by Westerners,” and this indifference is a philosophy of life with obvious “adaptive value.” Its deep root lies in the collapse of social order and the lack of law—when “speaking the wrong word costs one’s life” and public interests cannot be guaranteed, people can only choose the indifference of “sweeping the snow in front of one’s own door” to avoid risks. Lin Yutang further supplements that this indifference is not an inherent national trait but forced by the environment: “The Chinese people’s passion for their country cannot be ignored, but in turbulent times, survival is the most basic need, while politics and others are superstructures.” He also notes that “Taoist philosophy, both in theory and practice, is a witty and smooth indifference, a profound and corrupt skepticism… The origin of this lack of faith is not so much due to a lack of perseverance as to a lack of trust,” which has become the philosophical support for this survival wisdom, essentially a passive compromise to an unjust society. Meanwhile, he mentions, “The Chinese people often show incredible cohesion and patriotism in the face of strong enemies, but prefer to adhere to the principle of ‘sweeping the snow in front of one’s own door’ when dealing with strangers in daily life,” which confirms that this indifference is a selective life attitude under specific social environments rather than an inherent nature.

Common Ground and Insights: Social Dilemmas Behind Indifference

The common ground between the two is that indifference is not an isolated moral flaw of individuals, but a collective choice under a specific social structure. In The Great Gatsby, the wealth carnival of the Jazz Age masks a moral vacuum, and the class gap makes empathy an “useless emotion”; in My Country and My People, the turbulent social environment makes “enthusiasm” a “risk,” and the lack of law makes self-protection the primary principle. However, the differences are more revealing: the indifference in the novel is “active evil,” rooted in the greed and arrogance of the privileged class, which ultimately exacerbates social division; while the indifference described by Lin Yutang is “passive avoidance of harm,” rooted in helpless adaptation to an unjust environment, implying a hidden desire for order and justice. This reminds us: when society lacks fair channels for class mobility or individual rights are not protected, indifference will breed—the former is the active degradation of human nature, and the latter is the passive compromise of survival, but both will ultimately lead to the disappearance of social warmth.