Scrimgeour claims that Nick's actions 'have as their motive no nobler desire…to let sleeping dogs lie.' Therefore implying that Nick is calculatedly lazy and selfishly unconfrontational. Why would Nick have sought confrontation with Tom here if Scrimgeour's view were the case?
' I aim to explain effectively my opinion that Fitzgerald's use of Nick as the narrator of The Great Gatsby is a very successful literary technique.
I shall do this by the analysis of the two contrasting pieces of criticism, as well as of the novel itself.
There was one thing to be done before I left, an awkward, unpleasant thing that perhaps had better have been let alone.
But I wanted to leave things in order…' Here, Nick does not abstain from but consciously performs performing a morality driven action.
He has come East to be an Easterner…but his moral roots remain in the West.
' The strength of these Western 'moral roots' are shown by their continuing existence after Nick having experienced/subsumed in/surrounded by the immorality of the East.
In most novels, it is imperative for the reader to feel they can trust the narrator or as Scrimgeour writes, '(Nick's) honesty…provides the basis of the reader's reaction to the novel'.
Honesty is considered an essential element of a basic moral code (' Honesty (is) based on some kind of powerful drive…') that is generally accepted and subsequently adhered to in civilised society.
This drive is an individual's personal moral code.
If Nick's honesty is deemed questionable, it follows that his morality is also questionable.