the grapes of wrath. john steinbeck. (144)

 

i follow the penguin truck online and was excited to discover that it was coming to bakersfield!  it would be joining a group of people that will be retracing the route taken by the joad family from john steinbeck's classic, the grapes of wrath.  i am so excited to be able to purchase books from the penguin truck, we know my love of food trucks, now imagine the bookstore equivalent of one!  since the truck would be in bakersfield for an event for the grapes of wrath, i decided i should read it.

as i mentioned in my post for of mice and men, since steinbeck writes about okies, i perceive his book as being lowbrow, in addition to that i figured it might be tedious and boring at times due to its discussion of the dust bowl but how i misjudged.  the grapes of wrath is a beautifully written novel and well deserving of the pulitzer prize.  i was thoroughly surprised how much i enjoyed it but then again steinbeck is an excellent storyteller.

the thing that surprised me was how much truth was in this book.  there were a handful of topics that steinbeck discussed and shed an interesting light on.  i will discuss each topic as they appeared in the book.

first, since tom joad was an ex-con, steinbeck discussed prisons.  growing up in delano and being a frequent rider of the greyhound (they send prisoners home on it), i have very solid opinions on the prison system.  in a nutshell, i think prisoners have too many rights and luxuries.  furthermore, i believe prisons have become a cesspool of corruption and promotes the same immoral lifestyle the prisoners are supposed to be rehabilitated for.  it is often discussed that prisoners become accustomed to prison life and are therefore unable to function in the "real" world.  steinbeck expressed this same idea and i found it interesting that 50 years ago prisons were considered too comfortable for prisoners and that there has been no call for reform.  about 20 pages later, joad explained that he wasn't rehabilitated in prison but would commit the crime just the same if he situation arouse again.  (he killed a man who had started a right with him, the killing was done as self-defense.)

but again a critique of the US prison for not rehabilitating people.  and before you say, but wait tom joad was an honest man but he had that heart the whole time, he didn't gain it in prison.

another character with a heart of gold was pastor casy, he was filled with wisdom and truth.  i valued what he said about sin in a discussion with uncle john.  uncle john wanted to know if it was a sin that he let his wife die.  casy said "well, for anyone else it was mistake but if you think it was a sin--then it's a sin.  a fella builds his own sins right up from the groun'."  this is true, we can not judge our neighbor and label their wrongdoings as sin.  we can only be responsible for ourselves, and we are the only ones who truly know what our sins are and are the only ones that can ask for forgiveness for them.

there was also a great point steinbeck made about bad mouthing parents.  in today's world, there are some many single parents and one thing that happens is the bad mouthing of the other parent.  i have talked with friends about the negative effects of it on kids.  steinbeck wrote that "it ain't good for a baby to grow up with folks a-sayin his pa ain't no good".  if kids do they will internalize what they hear and think themselves to be no-good as well.

another thing that steinbeck wanted to make clear was the fact that when people are in need it's poor people who will help them out.  ma joad told the store owner, 

"i'm learning one good thing.  learning it all the time, ever'day.  if you 're in trouble or hurt or need--got to poor people.  they're the only ones that'll help--the only ones."  

the reason for this is that poor people understand the need.   they have been down and out with no alternatives so when they see others in that situations they try to help.  my mom was homeless for a while because our house went into foreclosure, and she always tries to help others because of that situation.  Steinbeck further demonstrated this by the story of the family and their little boy that died while traveling.  the family did not have enough money to bury him, but the other poor families that were travelling gave what they could to help bury the little boy.  poor people are often seen being needy but in fact they are usually the most charitable. 

in addition to discussing class, steinbeck also discussed gender roles as well.  towards the end of the novel, ma begins to tell pa what needs to happen in order for the family to be safe.  upset by being told what to do, pa said

funny! woman takin' over the fambly.  woman sayin' we'll do this here, an' we'll gothere.  an'i don't even care. 

to which ma responded

'women can change better'n a man . . . woman go all her life in her arms.  man got it all in his head.

later on in their talk she explained, after pa said that life was over and done:

it ain't, pa.  an' that's one more thing a woman knows.  i noticed that.  man, he lives in jerks--baby born an' a man dies, an' that's a jerk--gets a farm an' loses his farm, an' that's a jerk.  woman, it's all one flow, like a stream, little eddies, little waterfalls, but the river, it goes right on.  woman looks at it like that.  we ain't gonna die out.  people is goin' on --changin' a little, maybe, but goin' right on."

maybe i'm must biased because i am woman but we are more flexible than men.  we are more easily adapt to adjust to a new situation than men.  i am not sure why this is and will save that analysis for another day.  and of course our ability to go with the flow, i'm going to say has to do with our period.  if you can endure that once a month, that you have the ability to get on life filled with hope!

perhaps the most famous quote of the grapes of wrath, was tom's joad's speech, he gave when he left his family.  he said,

then, i'll be aroun' in the dark.  i'll be ever'where--wherever you look  wherever they's a fight so hungry people can eat, i'll be there.  wherever they's a cop beatin' up a guy.  i'll be there.   if casy knowed, why, i'll be in the way guys yell when they're mad an'--i'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry an' they know supper's ready.  an' when folks eat the stuff they raise an' live in the houses they build--while, i'll be there.  see? god i'm talkin' like casy.  comes of thinkin' about him so much.  seems like I see him sometimes.   

in my high school history class, my teacher was so excited when he shared the rage against the machine song, the ghost of tom joad*.  at the time i loved me some rage against the machine, i even had a band shirt with thequote, "who controls the past now, controls the future . . ." (which i learned found out was actually from 1984, god i was such a tool in high school, lol)  but even then i didn't get the hype.  i mean i thought it was cool that rage decided to be literary in their songs but didn't see why mr. myovich was so excited about sharing it to us, to be honest, i don't recall studying the dust bowl, when he presented the song to us.  however, now as an adult and having read the grapes of wrath, i see how interesting it is that a rap rock band from the 90s decided to have such a politically charged message. 

but back to tom joad's speech, that small speech embodies the greatness of steinbeck.  his words are so simple just they speak volumes (i apologize for being so cliché but it is the best way to define his writing!)  his words are so simple but provoke profound thoughts.  if you look back through the quotes i shared, it reads like hicks talking but there is so much more to the words.

this book is truly a masterpiece and truly deserved the pulitzer.  not only is it a beautiful tale of a family and what they endure to survive, but it works on a whole other level politically about how we treat the lower classes.  this work can applied to all farm workers.  as i read, i was reminded of my grandfather and what he had to endure, not only being a farm worker but also one of color.  the migrant farmers from the midwest had to endure so much hatred that i can't imagine what the mexican and filipino farm workers had to endure since they had to deal with addition of racial prejudices.  i also tried to contextualize it for myself right now.  growing up in delano, which is a migrant farmer worker community, i can admit that i do discriminate against migrant farm workers.  not so much for taking my jobs, this may sound horrible but i always say that my grandfather toiled in the fields so that we didn't have to (meaning we should have a better life because that is what he wanted.)  but for abusing the systems that are in place to help those in need.  being in the school systems i see the amount of aid there is now for the poor and there needs to be reform.  when steinbeck wrote the grapes of wrath, there was nothing to help those in need, however, everyone now just gets a free ride from the government.  if he were to rewrite this today, it would be a different story.  yes, the joads utilized a government camp, which we saw, but we also read how they wanted to be able to make it on their own without the help the government.  if the joads were around today, they still hold tight to their morals and use government assistance to help them get on their feet as opposed to making it their lifestyle and means of income.  there is nothing wrong with working in the fields there is something wrong with abusing government assistance.  my grandfather worked kn the fields and both my grandparents worked to help support my mother and her siblings without any government hand-outs.  aide is fine as long as it is helping those that need it.  the grapes of wrath was not a call to take complete care of the lower classes but rather not to discriminate against them and allow them the opportunity to achieve their american dream. now that i think about it if steinbeck were to write this today it would be a tale of the 99 percent against the 1 percent.  

but politics aside, this is a truly wonderful book and if you have not read it, make sure to pick it up!!!

also it's banned book, for god knows why?  maybe the call to stand against a unjust government and unfair economy?  not sure, but it should not be banned but read and studied as a part of american history.  

*i just now, thanks to wikipedia discovered that this song is actually by bruce springsteen

1984. george orwell. (99)

george orwell's "1984" is on flavorpill's "30 to read before 30" and since i am two months away, i decided i need to crack down on my reading. so i picked up a copy of "1984" at the library. and before i go on, how great is this cover?!?! there was a paperback version i could have checked out but after i saw this cover, i had to read this one.

i guess i should clarify, this was my first reading of "1984". i never read it in high school, it wasn't assigned to us. my sister read it in college and i remember borrowing her copy to read but could never get into it. i tried twice. and thanks to apple and cbs, i knew about "big brother is watching" so was okay on the pop culture front. but in order to get its literary significance i needed to read it.

this book is always noted as a revolutionary novel and it is especially considering the time it was published. i remember checking the publishing year and surprised to find it was 1949. to question and portray governments in such a manner had to be shocking. however, as interesting as the concept of this novel is, i still became bored with it, there were points were i was like, get on with the story already.

let me clarify, i was not bored by the segments on oceania but by some of the story plots. i loved learning about the society of "1984" and how it worked. being a history major, it was interesting to see how the world we know could develop into oceania. for example, i believe that war has become more of a means of economic growth than anything else. just like in the novel, the boundaries for our countries are set, which is why we now fight for concepts like democracy and freedom and against terrorism and islam, fighting wars that truly do not have a means. i know we captured osama bin laden, but are we still at war with afghanistan? honestly, i do not know. can someone clarify this for me? my confusion is also an example of how majority of the united states is now like the "proles" when it comes to being informed about the war. we know nothing other than we need to support it and we have an enemy. also the switching back and forth between the enemies in the novel, foreshadowed what happen with the us and 9/11. i was always confused as to who our patriotism and nationalism was supposed to be directed against because i thought it was al-queida and then all of sudden, saddam hussein and iraq were targeted as enemies. another thing from the novel that reminded me of 9/11 was the labelling of things like "victory" gin or "victory" cigarettes, just like we had our "freedom" fries. and though we did not have "hate week" or "two minute hate" after 9/11, i did feel this odd peer pressure to demonstrated my patriotism via a flag. remember how everyone had flags on their cars and it was unamerican not to have one? it's scary to think of how simlilar the world was post-9/11 to "1984".

another way our world is similar to "1984" is the news and stastistics. part of winston's job was to change the figures that big brother had projected in terms of production so that production was recorded as over what bb had predicted. in the novel, winston pondered how these numbers were all arbitrary. first of all, a prediction is a prediction so if it was not accurate that is fine. why go through the point of lying especially since people know that production is low because whatever was being produced was scarce. this reminded me of our news and the stastiscs it spews at us especially in terms of health. there is always some study that shows this or that but in real life, disease strikes whoever. there is j real means of preventing things. i mean explain ozzy osborne, with how he treated his body, yet he is still alive and kicking. stastiscs are just a means of manipulating society.

last but not least, i am worried that history would be lost like in "1984". not so much because it is being rewritten but because it is not being taught. i recently subbed for a fifth grade class and they only worked on social studies for 15 minutes. i worry that the youth today do not understand the importance of history. because as orwell wrote and zach de la rocha from rage against the machine sang "who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past", so if they learn nothing, they will control nothing.

this is all praise but there were also aspects of the story that i did not enjoy. for one thing i did not like julia. it just seemed so random that her character feel in love with winston. i thought she was part of the thought police and was going to betray him. (also the fact that the shopkeeper was a thought police totally took me by surprise though in the back of my mind, i wondered how his shop was still in existence). once i figured out she wasn't, i didn't care for her character. she wasn't a rebel because of any inner longing for a better life like winston, she was a rebel just to be against the system. i hate to get all women's lib but i felt julia was an unjustly portrayal of women in revolutionary movements. julia was not fully committed to the ideologies against the party and her primary act of resistance was sex. and i am all for women gaining liberation via fulfilling their sexual appetites versus following societies virtues. however, julia demonstrated no intelligence or knowledge when it came to protest against the current system, she often became bored by what winston had to share. she even feel asleep during his reading of the book. it just seemed like a copout to make her so shallow once the real revolting started especially since she was smart enough to get goods like real coffee and sugar and had came up with routes for them to meet. and sadly throughout history women's roles in revolutions sadly get reduced down to their sexual experiences.

since we are on the topic of sex, i was shocked by how much sex was discussed in the novel. and wonder how high schools that teach this present this. or is "1984" one of those banned books? and the sex is why "1984" is banned. anyway, i found it interesting how sex is a means of control. the party takes away the sensuality of sex and turns it into a duty. i know i have discussed it before but i really feel that being raised mormon, the emphasis on purity and chastity resulted in my obedience as teen. i was so focused on being pure, i didn't date in high school. i am not saying that as a teen one should have sex. i am just saying that for me, my abstinence from sex may have been a reason for my obedience as a teen.

also i did not buy that winston was so naive about o'brien. i thought it was too convenient how it all came together. it seemed too easy to become apart of the brotherhood and felt like a trap. but i guess winston was so hopefully that he was too gullible.

last but not least i did not like the ending. i was hoping the human spirit would have prevailed. i didn't expect winston to spark a revolution but i didn't want him to give in. it was also pathetic that he gave in because of rats. i would hope that the human spirit would have been stronger. it was heartbreaking to see all hope lost. i would have been happier with winston committing suicide versus loving big brother.

i enjoyed the appendix on newspeak. it is interesting to think of how important vocabulary is in terms of expressing our views. it is also interesting to think
how lack of a vocabulary restricts our thinking. the focus on language also demonstrated how important it is to read and expand our vocabulary. it is true with my recent reading of classics, i have been about to better expressed my view of the world by using literary examples. so let this be a lesson!

after reading all of that analysis, you are probably wondering, but you said you got bored. i did simply because though
"1984" raises important questions about politics, war, government, and history for someone that is already skeptical about their government it doesn't present anything new. i was a history major and so many of the trends discussed were not new for me. however if i had read this book while in high school or during college, it would have blown my mind. so i guess instead of being a book one reads before they are 30, it actually before 25.

last but not least at the lacma, while looking at the bcam elevator, i was able to imagine what it would like to have big brother watching: