In the grand, chaotic theater of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, minor characters often reflect the novel’s core themes with startling clarity.
Catherine, Myrtle Wilson’s sister, is one such figure.
Although she appears only briefly in a cramped New York apartment, her performance of worldliness and her final act of loyalty offer a powerful lens through which to understand the complex dynamics of class, gender, and deception in the Jazz Age.
Our Ageless Investing character analysis of Catherine argues that she’s far more than a simple plot device; she’s Jordan Baker’s foil, representing a distinct, working-class model of feminine performance and aspirational dishonesty.
By comparing Catherine’s overt social climbing and loyalty-driven perjury with Jordan’s cool, privileged cynicism and self-serving deception, Fitzgerald offers a nuanced commentary on how class dictates the strategies women employ for survival, advancement, and the protection of their reputation.
By examining her pivotal moments, we can illuminate her understated yet significant role. For essential plot context, please consult our chapter 2 summary of The Great Gatsby.
Note: Our analysis delves into Catherine’s appearances and symbolic role in The Great Gatsby, and will necessarily discuss plot developments related to the party in Chapter 2 and the inquest following Myrtle’s death. Reader discretion is advised if you have not yet completed the book.
The “Worldly Girl”: Catherine’s Performance of Class and Sophistication
When Catherine enters the cramped apartment, she brings an air of practiced, somewhat brittle sophistication. In this section, we analyze how Fitzgerald uses her physical description, mannerisms, and conversational topics to portray a woman actively performing a higher social status than her own.
A Portrait in Artifice: “Rakiish” Eyebrows and Pottery Bracelets
Fitzgerald introduces Catherine through Nick Carraway’s observant and slightly critical gaze, immediately establishing her as a figure of deliberate self-construction.
Nick describes her as “a slender, worldly girl of about thirty with a solid sticky bob of red hair and a complexion powdered milky white.” He notes, “Her eyebrows had been plucked and then drawn on again at a more rakish angle,” and that there was an “incessant clicking as innumerable pottery bracelets jingled up and down upon her arms” [Chapter 2, Page 30].
These details are not incidental; they paint a portrait of artifice. The drawn-on eyebrows and noisy, inexpensive jewelry suggest a conscious effort to appear fashionable and modern, but contrast with the effortless, inherited elegance of a character like Daisy Buchanan.
Catherine’s appearance is a performance, a carefully assembled costume designed to project an image of sophistication that her working-class origins do not naturally afford her.
The Monte Carlo Story: Aspirational Lying as Social Currency
Catherine’s performance extends beyond her appearance to her conversation, where she uses what could be seen as dishonest aspirations to enhance her social status.
She casually tells Nick, “‘I just got back from Monte Carlo,’” launching into a story about losing over twelve hundred dollars in the gambling rooms [Chapter 2, Page 34]. The veracity of this story is questionable, but its purpose is clear: to position herself as a woman of means and worldly experience who belongs in sophisticated European settings.
In her social circle, such stories are a form of currency that can signal belonging and generate intrigue. This type of lie, designed to inflate one’s importance and experience, is a key part of her strategy for navigating a world where she feels she must constantly prove her worth.
The Gossip Network: Spreading Rumors as a Form of Knowledge
Catherine also demonstrates her “worldly” nature as a purveyor of gossip, treating rumors as a form of insider knowledge.
She confidently informs Nick about the state of her sister’s and Tom’s marriages: “‘Neither of them can stand the person they’re married to.’” [Chapter 2, Page 33]. More significantly, she spreads the false rumor that Daisy’s Catholicism is the only thing preventing a divorce [Chapter 2, Page 33], a lie likely concocted by Tom and Myrtle to give their affair a veneer of legitimacy.
She also shares a popular, baseless rumor about Gatsby’s origins, claiming “‘he’s a nephew or a cousin of Kaiser Wilhelm’s’” [Chapter 2, Page 32].
For Catherine, participating in this gossip network is a way to assert her place within the social dynamic, showing that she’s “in the know,” even if the information she shares is unsubstantiated. She broadcasts rumors to build social bonds and create a shared, flawed understanding of their world.
A Tale of Two “Modern” Women: Catherine vs. Jordan as a Study in Class
Fitzgerald presents two “modern,” worldly women who operate with a degree of independence and cynicism: Catherine and Jordan Baker. But a direct comparison reveals how their class backgrounds dictate their entire approach to gender performance, social navigation, and dishonesty. They provide a nuanced critique of female survival strategies in the Jazz Age.
Gender Performance: Overt Femininity vs. Androgynous Privilege
Catherine and Jordan both represent departures from traditional notions of womanhood, but their class backgrounds shape their expressions of femininity.
Catherine’s performance is overtly ornamental; her “solid sticky bob of red hair,” powdered complexion, and jingling bracelets are all conscious efforts to project a fashionable, somewhat loud femininity. This reflects a working-class aspiration towards a certain visible ideal of glamour.
In contrast, Jordan Baker expresses her modernity through an androgynous, athletic confidence. Nick describes her as having an “erect carriage…like a young cadet” [Chapter 1, Page 11], a posture born of upper-class privilege and leisure. She doesn’t need to perform glamour with noisy bracelets; her status gives her a cool, understated, and almost masculine self-possession.
This distinction suggests that class dictates the very tools available for feminine performance, a key difference explored in our full analysis of Jordan Baker.
A Taxonomy of Dishonesty: Aspirational Lies vs. Entitled Deception
Although both women are dishonest, their lies serve different purposes, reflecting their distinct class positions.
Catherine’s dishonesty is fundamentally aspirational and protective. Her Monte Carlo story is a lie designed to elevate her social status, to make her seem more interesting and experienced than she is. Her later perjury at the inquest is a lie designed to protect her sister’s reputation.
Jordan Baker’s deceptions arise from a position of privilege and entitlement. She allegedly cheated in a golf tournament to secure a win, an act of convenience to maintain her advantage [Chapter 3, Page 57]. Her philosophy on driving,”‘It takes two to make an accident’” [Chapter 3, Page 58], is a form of intellectual dishonesty that absolves her of personal responsibility.
Catherine lies to climb up or protect her own; Jordan lies because she believes the world will accommodate her. This distinction is a sharp critique of how class shapes behavior and the very nature of one’s moral compromises.
The Final Lie: Catherine’s Perjury and Thematic Significance
Catherine’s most significant action occurs off-stage, after Myrtle’s death. Her testimony at the inquest, a complete fabrication designed to protect her sister’s reputation, is a final, powerful act that raises complex questions about loyalty, truth, and morality.
“She was completely happy with her husband”: Perjury as an Act of Familial Loyalty
In the aftermath of the tragedy, Catherine demonstrates a fierce, legally corrupt sense of familial loyalty.
Nick reports that at the inquest, she “showed a surprising amount of character” and “swore that her sister had never seen Gatsby, that her sister was completely happy with her husband, that her sister had been into no mischief whatever” [Chapter 9, Pages 163, 64].
This testimony is a complete fabrication, a direct contradiction of everything she witnessed and discussed at the apartment party. Yet, Nick notes that she “convinced herself of it and cried into her handkerchief as if the very suggestion was more than she could endure” [Chapter 9, Page 164].
This act transcends simple lying; she attempts to rewrite her sister’s narrative, to protect her memory from the sordid reality of her affair and tragic death. In a novel filled with self-serving actions, Catherine’s perjury stands out as a courageous act performed entirely for the sake of another, however misguided.
The Unspoken Contrast: A Final Foil to the “Careless” Elite
Catherine’s final act of protective dishonesty is an unspoken contrast to the behavior of the novel’s wealthy elite.
While Catherine lies to protect the reputation of her deceased sister, Tom and Daisy Buchanan engage in their deceptions purely for self-preservation. Tom lies to George Wilson, directing him towards Gatsby to save himself. Both Tom and Daisy then “retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness” [Chapter 9, Page 179], abandoning Gatsby, the man who took the blame for Daisy’s actions, without a second thought.
Catherine’s lie, born of a fierce, perhaps misguided, loyalty to her working-class family, stands in moral opposition to the Buchanans’ cold, class-based self-interest. This final contrast suggests that despite her affectations and superficiality, Catherine possesses a code of loyalty that the privileged and “careless” Tom and Daisy utterly lack. It’s a final, cutting critique from Fitzgerald on the moral bankruptcy of the upper class.
A Worldly Woman on the Margins
Catherine, though easily overlooked in The Great Gatsby, is an insightful figure in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s social tapestry.
As Myrtle Wilson’s sister, she provides a window into the aspirations and moral codes of a class desperate to emulate the wealthy elite. Her performative sophistication and aspirational lies reveal the immense pressure to project an image of success and worldliness in the Jazz Age.
More significantly, her character is a powerful foil to the more privileged Jordan Baker and demonstrates how class dictates the very nature of female independence and dishonesty.
Catherine’s most defining act, her perjury at the inquest, reveals a complicated and surprisingly steadfast loyalty that counters the self-serving carelessness of the novel’s central wealthy characters. She’s a testament to how even minor voices can illuminate major themes, and her brief appearances enrich Fitzgerald’s subtle critique of class, gender, and the desperate pursuit of a better life in a world of profound inequality.
To understand the world Catherine aspired to, see our analysis of her sister, Myrtle Wilson.
A Note on Page Numbers & Edition:
We carefully sourced textual references for this analysis from The Great Gatsby: The Only Authorized Edition (Scribner, November 17, 2020), ISBN-13: 978-1982149482. Just as Catherine presented a carefully constructed story to the world, page numbers for specific events can differ across various printings. Always double-check against your copy to ensure accuracy for essays or citations.
Jeremy Mortis, founder of Ageless Investing, applies a rigorous analytical approach (the AAM framework) to distill timeless wisdom and contextualized quotes from classic literature, saving you time while deepening understanding. Learn more about Jeremy’s unique background and methodology on his author bio page.