Tera, I can agree wholeheartedly with your statement on choice, above. But I am left feeling so wanting in this novel. To whom am I to relate? Lee, and perhaps Samuel Hamilton, are more realistic, at least inso far as a more complete character development, than any other of the characters. Both men. I am nearly finished - another 30 pages. I must be the only personon the planet who doesn't like this.

I agree with your comment about what Steinbeck wanted to say with choice Tera.

What is the groups take on Adam and Charles choices? Specifically when Adam lies to Cal about his mother. Why does he do it? and what effect will it have on Adam and Cal individually and in their father son relationship?

Meg wrote: "AND QUESTION NUMBER 2

During the naming of the twins, Lee, Sam, and Adam have a long conversation about a sentence from Genesis, disagreeing over whether God has said an act is ordered or predet..."

I think this is the central theme of the entire book. The choice we have or do not have when it comes to chosing the good or evil paths that we can take, truly the choices we have in every aspect of our life. The debate of destiny vs decision - nature vs nurture. Lee and I believe Steinbeck are saying you have a choice. What you become and who you are isn't a result of where you come from, how you were raised or even the desires that boil up in you. All of that can be over come if you so choose to.
Guilt and forgiveness two sides of the same coin. Do you allow guilt to dictate your choices or do you forgive yourself and others in order to make the choice that is best.

Meg wrote: " Lee is one of the most remarkable characters in American literature, a philosopher trapped by the racial expectations of his time. He is the essence of compassion, erudition, and calm, serving the..."

Hi Meg, I hope it's okay to join in even though I'm not currently reading East of Eden. It is my all time favorite, as I told you before, and Lee is my most beloved character. I can't resist.

Lee speaks pidgin and wears a queue(sp?) because it's what is expected of him in the white mans world he lives in. It's easier to blend in, be who everyone expects him to be...this enables him to be virtually invisible to everyone save Sam. If he put his true self out there it would be threatening to that society. He would then, at best, not be left in peace to pursue his spirituality, and at worst would become a danger in their eyes hence...who knows what threatened white men would do to him!!!!

I believe Cathy keeps her true self hidden for the same reasons albiet with a different agenda.

You said Lee is one of the most remarkable characters in american literature. That's why I love Steinbeck. He's a master philosopher. How could he create such a wonderful, complex, inspirational character otherwise?

AND QUESTION NUMBER 2

During the naming of the twins, Lee, Sam, and Adam have a long conversation about a sentence from Genesis, disagreeing over whether God has said an act is ordered or predetermined. Lee continues to think about this conversation and enlists the help of a group of Chinese philosophers to come to a conclusion: that God has given humans choice by saying that they may (the Hebrew word for "may," timshel, becomes a key trope in the novel), that people can choose for themselves. What is Steinbeck trying to say about guilt and forgiveness? About family inheritance versus free will? Think of instances where this distinction is important in the novel, and in your own life.

Lee is one of the most remarkable characters in American literature, a philosopher trapped by the racial expectations of his time. He is the essence of compassion, erudition, and calm, serving the Trasks while retaining a complex interior and emotional life. Do you understand why he speaks in pidgin, as he explains it to Sam Hamilton? How does his character change-in dress, speech, and action-over the course of the book? And why do you think Lee stays with the Trasks, instead of living on his own in San Francisco and pursuing his dream?

I do believe that people handle grief differently.

In Liza's case, I think she is a very staunch type of person and follows routines without feelings. I think this is an example of that. I might be wrong, but as far as I have read this is my opinion.

what do others think?

Is there an explanation for the grief diffrence in Samuel and Liza? Are people less affected by the verities of life and death than others? for the latter of the question why or why not?

You are more than welcome to join us!

Hi Everyone. Wish I had gotten in on this from the beginning. I would have read it again along with you, even though I've read it three times already! East of Eden is (so far) my favorite book of all time. For me, a great author has to be a great philosopher. I think Steinbeck nailed it!

I agree with you Rebecca, Chapter 22 was a very powerful chapter.

I'm a bit behind. I know we are on the next set of chapters but Chapter 22 was impressive to me. It really gave me alot to question and think about. Samuel sure has alot to say and I am finding many good quotes in this chapter.

Well I think that is how it was in those days. I believe men ruled the roost -- the farm, the family and the money. I don't think there was much more time for anything else unless a church was within the community. Remember that they had moved to CA and lived there for a short time.

To me, it is without thought because he was concerned only with his single-minded purpose. He gave no thought to what anyone else, especially his wife who he purported to love, might want. Do I think Cathy would have responded to any inquiry as to what she wanted? No, but that's not really the point. This household was not involved in the greater community in any way. Heck, the men hadn't ever seen Cathy - no one had seen her, else she would have been recognized at Faye's. People didn't much know Adam either, and no one, except Samuel Hamilton, looked in on Adam. How uninteresting!

I find your observation on Adam very intresting Elizabeth. I do not share your opinion that Adam never has a thought about anything. I think Adam concern is for work and the farm is very much a normal obssesion and concern in those days and was for men. He wants to make a garden of eden for Cathy and his children Sorry I just dont see how that is without thought.

Finished chapter 23 last night so I'm caught up for the week.

I am finding the story facinating, and find the characters facinating. I don't see them as flat at all, and find it very interesting to see what they do in different situations. Makes me think about what might be going on inside their heads, and I like being made to think. Is Cathy really a sociopath? Hmm. Is Adam really that naive to what Cathy may be like? Being left to wonder what may really be going on inside these characters heads makes me want to continue reading the story that much more. To find out what is going to happen next!

Meg, I love that quote too. Very interesting that he put the whole Cain and Abel story into chapter 22.

I think you see what they feel by what they do as with most people. I think that makes for a much more interesting story than if the author were to tell us so much detail it left no room for interpertation.

Take Adam and Cathy when married. No strife. Adam was completely selfless, saw nothing but Cathy in this world. There was nothing to show that he was in the least interested in becoming a father, never had a concern for anything, including how his wife was enduring her pregnancy. Does he think about what it will feel like to get that ranch all fixed up for Cathy and what their life will be like? In fact, I don't see that Adam ever has a thought for anything, even when I've read beyond the shooting. Cathy, too, has no concern for anything. Do we have any idea what she is thinking, other than doing harm to others? Has she no concern for herself? Does she like anything? I think the characters are flat because we only see what they do not what they think and/or feel.

Elizabeth in what way are the characters flat? I don't seem them as that at all. Are some just more developed throughout the story more than others?

So much of this book goes against what I've come to believe. The good vs evil that Tera and I talked about before. I finished this week's reading assignment that is scheduled to begin discussion tomorrow. This is the part that reads the Cain and Abel story from the Bible. Samuel proffers that all of us feel guilt because we descend from Cain. I don't believe that - there were other people, else Cain wouldn't have had a wife. But as to the book, have we seen the last of Charles? The last of Cathy? Why is Cathy in here? Cathy starts with a C. I'm having a hard time caring what happens to any of these people, except maybe Samuel Hamilton and Lee. None of the rest of them seem to care enough about themselves to improve their lives. Why would I care about them?

Meg, that's a great quote. I certainly think it's true. Nobody wants to be rejected. Especially from our parents. I think it plays such a huge role in this book.

Okay I'm going to respond and hope not to give anything away.
There are definate lines drawn between cain and able and both sets of brothers. I think however, that Steinbeck wanted to provoke a bit more out of his reader. I think it kinda goes back to the discussion Elizabeth and I were having with the good vs evil but more about the choice to be good or to be evil.
Between charles and adam it almost seems like their early choices were taken away from them. What else was Charles going to be but bitter angry and thus make horrible choices. Yes, they were his fault because he knew better but can part of that be attributed to his father and his upbringing?
I think with with Caleb and Aaron it is another example of experience, leading to choice leading to good or evil.
Is that clear as mud?
Charles had experiences as a child be them good or mostly tough.
Later in life he had choices to make. He lets his experiences determine his choice more than his knowledge of right and wrong.
Consequently he chose bad or 'evil' paths.
Without giving anything away I think this theme is futher explored with Caleb and Aaron.

Meg, GREAT quote!
I think it applies to people in general though. The greatest terror we all face is not to be loved (by someone somewhere at sometime) and that rejection (or fear or being alone) is the hell we fear.

Greater in children maybe. Certainly a force that guides many or our choices through all ages.

One particular quote struck me: The greatest terror a child can have is that he is not loved and that rejection is the hell he fears.

Comments?

When reading Chapter 22, the last half of the Chapter specifically talks about Cain and Abel. Steinbeck refers to it as the story of the original sin (Eden) and the story of Cain and Able, specifically brother murder. Is this foreshadowing?

I am wondering two things here as well. Cain is the evil one and Abel. If we look at initials here C (charles) a (adam). This analogy works. IT is also stated that God (their father) accepted Abel (Adam) and rejected Cain (Charles)

Now let's look at the initials of the twins c (Caleb) and a (Aaron). Will this be the same with the twins?
Prediction?

I am also wondering about more foreshadowing when Lee is talking about Cain and Abel speaking of crime as though it is happening in King City?

I have a confession. I prefer characterization over plot, and this book is plot over characterization. It is a good plot, though somewhat predictable. I'm just wanting a lot more characterization - these people feel very flat to me. I couldn't ask more for the writing, however, and wouldn't be ashamed to read it forever.

I'm putting it down from week to week because we have a schedule for discussion. If I read straight through, I wouldn't be able to remember whether an event happened in Chapter 16 or Chapter 20. What if I mentioned something the rest of you had not read and spoiled it for you? I wouldn't want that to happen to me, so I won't do it to someone else.

I did read some biographical information about Steinbeck. Again, this was written at the time of the McCarthy hearings. One of the things I read is that he wasn't called before the committee, but that he was as popular in the Soviet Union as he was here, due in large part to Grapes of Wrath. Interesting, I thought.

I didn't want to look at Oprah's information for that reason. I was going to wait until I finished.

What a great review Renee to love a book that much that you couldn't put it down. The only reason I am putting it down is my eyes close and I start snoring!!!

I am really loving it too.

I would. There are some spoilers on there. Some sections give a little bit of information about Salinas. There was also some autographical information about the Hamilton family.

Renee. Congrats. Do you recommend us reading the info at Oprah after we finish the book?

Okay, I couldn't help it. I finished the book today. I couldn't fight it. I couldn't put it down. It really grabbed me from the beginning. It was one of the best books I've ever read.

I promise, I won't spill anything. I can't wait to hear what everyone thinks.

I remembered that this book was one of Oprah's selections. So I checked out the website and it had some great stuff about the book. Sorry if anyone linked this already...

http://www.oprah.com/article/oprahsbookc...

Sheila wrote: "Rebecca, do you think the scars have some significance? Like they are a mark of evil or something? I've heard it said that this book is based on the story of Cain and Abel in the Bible, and in the..."

Excellent point, Sheila. I think I'll brush up on my Cain and Abel before I get too much farther in E of E.

I think that the scar runs parallel to the story of Cain and Abel. I do think that the colors of the scar how it lightens and darkens also play a significance as does what is said about what will happen to their scars for both Charles and Cathy. (I think that it is suppose to fade with time???). Did you find the conversation that Cathy has with Adam about hers interesting?

Rebecca, do you think the scars have some significance? Like they are a mark of evil or something? I've heard it said that this book is based on the story of Cain and Abel in the Bible, and in the Bible, after Cain kills Abel, God places a "mark" on him before he is sent out from God. Do you think these scars could represent some kind of mark on both Cathy and Charles? More of the good and evil.

I am finding the scar descritpions of Cathy and Charles very intresting. I think I must be strange for thinking about that.

Well as of Chapter 17 I am still sticking with good and evil more in the biblical sense that is. I keep thinking of the stories in the Bible and how so many of the stories are good and evil stories.

And with that comment, Tera, I'm anxious to start the next section! I am between other reads anyway - Steinbeck here I come!

okay my next question has to wait but i want to remember this conversation because i think its a great point.

Tera wrote: "Thats a good direction Elizabeth but then my question would be are those that seek evil only able to obtain it in evil (not sure thats the right word) but evil'ish ways? Does control equate to sinister methods and means to gain it?"

I believe that's Steinbeck's opinion. How's that for side-stepping the question? As I said earlier, I don't think anything is black or white, all or nothing. East of Eden was first published in 1952, the deepening of the Cold War, when the majority in this country believed (and probably still do) that Communism, with it's complete control of the citizenry, was the greatest evil of all.

ReneeB wrote: "I'm really enjoying this book. I can't wait to find out what happens. Even though Cathy is so evil, I find her very fascinating. I can't believe she shot Adam. I didn't see that one coming. I ..."

Me too, Renee! I laughed out loud when Mr. Hamilton confronted Lee about his accented speech.

Elizabeth wrote: "I had some more moments (hours!) involving air travel again yesterday and, while I didn't do any more reading, I did keep thinking about this. With the author's remarks about the strength of the in..."

Thats a good direction Elizabeth but then my question would be are those that seek evil only able to obtain it in evil (not sure thats the right word) but evil'ish ways? Does control equate to sinister methods and means to gain it?

I had some more moments (hours!) involving air travel again yesterday and, while I didn't do any more reading, I did keep thinking about this. With the author's remarks about the strength of the individual in society, I think this is less a story of good vs evil and more a story of control vs freedom. Cathy wants complete and absolute control, as does Mr. Edwards and, to a lesser extent, Charles. Adam, the Hamiltons, Lee, are about individuality and independence.

I'm really enjoying this book. I can't wait to find out what happens. Even though Cathy is so evil, I find her very fascinating. I can't believe she shot Adam. I didn't see that one coming. I just can't seem to figure out where she wants to be. I must admit that I've read on a bit and I'm kind of surprised where she goes.

I'm also wondering where the Hamiltons are going to fit in. Steinbeck has provided a lot of details about them, so I think they're going to play a major role.

By the way, I just love Lee.

For some reason I don't picture Cathy going back to Charles. I don't think she wants a relationship with anyone. Since he is protraying her as being so evil, I don't see her being interested in any personal relationships, or even money. I see her wanting power and revenge. I see her wanting to hurt people.

Since she was beat up and almost killed by that "pimp" guy she was with, I could picture her returning to prostitution, but with an evil motive of hurting or killing men in revenge for what has been done to her. Men pay to sleep with her, and she tortures and kills them type of thing.

I am thinking she is going to get together with Charles, get all of Adam's money and they will get rich and greedier together.

Joanne wrote: "I am curious what you all think about Cathy. What does she want? She seemingly does not want parents, children, a husband, a nice farm to live on, or Adam's money. What does she want out of life?"

I've thought the same thing, Joanne. You'd think if she were after money, she'd stay with Adam.

I think Lee will initially raise the twins. I don't think Cathy will get very far.

I think Cathy is going to go back to Charles. Charles and Cathy are going to scheme to find a way to get all of Adam's money and land.
The twins will be raised by the Hamiltons. One twin will be as evil as his mother and the other as naive as his father.
The evil twin will pair up with Charles and Adam.

I am curious what you all think about Cathy. What does she want? She seemingly does not want parents, children, a husband, a nice farm to live on, or Adam's money. What does she want out of life?

My predictions: (I've read through chapter 17.)

1. Cathy will hunt Samuel Hamilton down; she realizes that Samuel knows she is evil & will try to eliminate him.

2. Adam will go after Cathy and attempt to bring her back into the marriage.

3. I think Lee will take care of the twins initially.

4. I predict Samuel & his sons will continue to work for Adam, & the Trask and Hamilton families will interact through this connection.


Elizabeth, I'm going to have to go back and review Chapter 13 now!

I'll guess that
1. Cathy goes back East to Charles.
2. Adam recovers, but is forever a morose individual
3 & 4. The twins are raised by the Hamiltons.

I found the bit of philosophy at the beginning of Chapter 13 to be very interesting. This was written in the early 50s when the US was reacting to the gaining strength of the Soviet Union. But I can't help but feel this is the very issue that is bringing some political disparity to the fore in 2009.

Fun questions Meg!

1. I am not sure where Cathy went, but I'm sure we have not seen the last of her.

2 & 3. I think Adam is going to stay in the valley and raise his twins sons, maybe with the help of his Chinese servant. There may be some interesting family relationships coming into play though, how the two boys end up relating to their father (like the relationship that Adam and his brother had with their father)
4. Not sure how the Hamilton's are going to fit in. Their children are all older, and the twins are just newborns, so I'm thinking that in the future we may see relationships between the twins and some Hamilton grandchildren. Not sure. I picture the twins being the rich boys who get everything they want but who have no morals (as a result of their mother?), and any Hamilton grandchildren being poor kids but with great family values, and hard feelings could develop later because the two families because of that.

Very good story so far though.