New Criticism Of Daisy Miller

Society looks at daisy as if she is weak and deserves to only serve her husband. They believe she should do what she is told and obey her husband and family’s wishes. Daisy is the ideal woman of wealth through society's eyes in

Daisy’s sudden, simple respect for the truth is startling to the reader because Nick’s perceptions of her throughout the novel are so very limited to her superficial manner … her stubborn honesty … is a logical outgrowth of her inner struggle to resolve conflicting needs. It is a brief, futile attempt to declare emotional independence (Fryer 54).

Self and others – Winterbourne is a character while at times could be very judgmental and opinionated, seems to view himself as part of a larger community. He is only judgmental because he is aware of what society deems as inappropriate when it comes to what Daisy Miller is doing. Winterbourne often thinks about others and typically not himself. For example, in the beginning, Randolph was pestering him for sugar lumps. Winterbourne told Randolph, “If you eat three lumps of sugar, your mother will certainly slap you.” While people may interpret Winterbourne differently, I see many cases of him being thoughtful of others and caring towards other people. Daisy Miller is a character that is rather self-centered focusing on herself and what she

“He hadn't once ceased looking at Daisy, and I think he revalued everything in his house according to the measure of response it drew from her well-loved eyes. Sometimes, too, he stared around at his possessions in a dazed way, as though in her actual and astounding presence none of it was any longer real. Once he nearly

Morals and virtues are the basic principles of living a happy life. But those alone can not satisfy the human desire of wanting something bigger and better. The evilness within Daisy creates a cycle of problems that she can’t escape. Daisy’s greed and corruption leads her to take shortcuts and break the principles of a human being by cheating on her husband, neglecting her daughter, and betraying Gatsby.

Daisy puts up with her husband’s infidelity because of the benefits he provides, his background, his “old money”, and his reputation. When I talk to Daisy she’s always quite cheerful and peppy, but there are moments when I see how sad and lonely she is, “'All right,' I said, 'I'm glad it's a girl. And I hope she'll be a fool – that's the best thing a girl can be in this world, a beautiful little fool… you see I think everything’s terrible anyhow… I’ve been everywhere and seen everything.” (17) In a society corrupted by greed and scandal, the best thing that one can hope for is to be too stupid to realize what’s actually going on and therefore not get hurt.

Fitzgerald indicates that wealthy people are not always happy. At Tom and Daisy’s dinner party, Nick says that Daisy’s face “was sad and lovely” (13). The description of Daisy’s attitude and appearance shows the reader that her beauty intends to mask her despair. Many

Daisy, like her husband, is a girl of material and class at heart, and Gatsby being her escape from a hierarchist world. Daisy has just grown up knowing wealth, so in her greedy pursuit of happiness and the “American Dream” Myrtle Wilson died, Gatsby's heart and life were compromised, without claiming responsibility on her part. Daisy was “by far the most popular of all the young girls in Louisville...” (116) Jordan says, describing early affections between Daisy and Gatsby. She goes on to say, “...all day long the telephone rang in her house and excited young officers from Camp Taylor demanded the privilege of monopolizing her that night.” (116) . Daisy was a fancied girl who has Gatsby tied around her finger, Jordan explains that he was looking at Daisy “...in a way that every young girl wants to be looked at some time...” (117). Daisy, abusing Gatsby’s love for her uses it to create security and protection, greedily and selfishly allowing him to take the fault. While Daisy’s beautiful, alluring traits turn her into an innocent, naive flower, she plays the ultimate villain.

Daisy illustrates the typical women of high social standing; her life is moulded by society’s expectations. She is dependent and subservient to her husband. She is powerless in her marriage.

The nineteenth century is popularly known for its traditional view of gender roles, especially regarding women. The term “True Woman” refers to what society at that time thought to be the ideal woman, carrying qualities of “modesty, submissiveness, physical weakness, limited education, and complete devotion to husband and home” (White, 2009, p. 1). Women were restrained in terms of sexuality, dress, language, and economic decisions. In Amy Gilman Srebnick’s The Mysterious Death of Mary Rogers, Mary rebels against these standards by being a single women that is also sexually active, however, her actions are what seemingly lead to her demise. Similarly, Fanny Fern’s Ruth Hall also goes against gender norms. In her case, she earns her own economic independence through her writing and lives a more unconventional life as a mother, but faces repercussions from her family. Through the novels Ruth Hall and The Mysterious Death of Mary Rogers, the main female characters revolt against being “True Women” through their daily actions and behaviors, however they’re each punished with consequences for trying to deviate from society’s path.

Daisy as a character and Daisy's choices are symbolized in the novel through her house. Nick, our narrator,

James' manipulation of appearances in Daisy Miller as well as other character's notions of these appearances provides us with a novella of enigmatic and fascinating characters. Daisy, the most complicated of these ambiguities, is as mysterious as she is flirtatious. James gives her a carefully constructed enigmatic quality that leaves the reader wondering what her motivations were and who she truly was. He structures the novella in such a way as to stress the insights that the supporting characters provide into Daisy's character, weather accurate or erroneous. Despite their questionable reliability, they allow James to make commentary on both European and American cultures and social class.

Taking Daisy with appreciation and without alarm, we also re-read her character and re-evaluate her moral status. We (the readers) seem to meet James’ sophistication with out own, by agreeing on a mixed interpretation of Daisy: she is literally innocent, but she is also ignorant and incautious. (1)

Fitzgerald presents his audience with Daisy, a married “girl” who eventually reunited with the lost love of her life, Jay Gatsby. While breaking rules and being adventurous, Daisy ultimately brings Gatsby to his death. Although she explores her sexuality and runs off behind her husband Tom’s back, Daisy continues to be oppressed. Tom’s aggressiveness and wealth force Daisy to depend on him, making her a slave of her husband. Because of this, she can not leave him to be with Gatsby, the one she loves. Doing so would mean losing economic support and losing a stable life. In this way, her husband defines her life. There is an evident contrast however with Tom’s role. Tom keeps an apartment away from home for his mistress and gets away with it. Because he is the man, society would not dare punish him for exploring his liberties. Daisy on the other hand is inferior to Tom and, as a social norm, is not allowed to indulge in such freedoms because doing so would bring shame to her honor.

When Winterbourne first meets Daisy, he is willing to accept her for the vivacious young American girl she is. Although Daisy's customs are not what are expected of young girls in European society, Winterbourne is charmed by Daisy and her original ideals. He defends Daisy to the aristocracy, claiming that she is just "uncultivated" and is truly innocent. As the story progresses, Winterbourne finds himself questioning Daisy's true nature in comparison to the standards of European society. Winterbourne's opinion of Daisy changes from acceptance to condemnation as his tolerance of cultural standards is clouded by the prejudices of the European aristocrats.