The Grapes of Wrath
discussion
What makes John Steinbeck a good writer?
His feelings of compassion. The narration. Brings alive plain folk.
His willingness to take on tabu topics such as human sexuality, biological determinism (nature vs nurture), capitalism vs communism and socialism, social ills like poverty, prostitution, sexism and racism, female villainy; his realistic, unforgettable characters; his authoritative third person narrative voice.
He has faith in the reader to acknowledge his characters' and society's flaws in a period of great change in the U.S.
John Steinbeck lived during the times he wrote about. He looked at, lived with, and experienced these events and never forgot them. Those that were alive during the dust bowl and depression didn't forget them, they are embedded. Steinbeck saw and had the ability to write of, to comprehend and explain to others what people were experiencing. Many live through bad times but don't have the knack of being to describe it, Steinbeck lacked no such talent and created the life like characters to live these harsh times that required daily struggles to survive. Indeed, one of our great authors.
The way in which he writes, it makes you want to keep reading although the subjects are not really extraordinary, even a shopkeeper's daily life as in The Winter of Our Discontent. He has something that makes you stick to his books till the end.
His beyond-human sensibilities.
Steinbeck could have written about a n y t h i n g. His descriptions are superb, he can convey meaning to everything, even the simplest things in life. V.
Monty J wrote: "His willingness to take on tabu topics such as human sexuality, biological determinism (nature vs nurture), capitalism vs communism and socialism, social ills like poverty, prostitution, sexism and..."You seem like you know a lot about John Steinbeck. What was John Steinbeck's political views? People told me socialist. I'm just curious, I've been looking on the internet. I got socialist, communist. I would totally love it if some one gave me a straight forward answer. Thank you in advance.
Steinbeck was a middle of the road Democrat, ultraliberal on union matters (IN DUBIOUS BATTLE), moderate to conservative on Cold War Issues. Something like Hubert Humphrey from what I can gather, a second New Dealer with a Cold Warrior streak.
Sarah wrote: "Monty J wrote: "His willingness to take on tabu topics such as human sexuality, biological determinism (nature vs nurture), capitalism vs communism and socialism, social ills like poverty, prostitu..."He can't be easily pigeon-holed. He certainly wasn't communist. Today he'd be considered a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. He studied communism and socialism because he was interested in solutions to social ills. He wanted things to be better.
He was for the little guy and was keenly aware of the way fortunes are made by exploiting them. He saw this first-hand in California's agricultural fiefdoms and never forgot it. But he understood the job-creating engine that capitalism was and is.
Monty J wrote: "Sarah wrote: "Monty J wrote: "His willingness to take on tabu topics such as human sexuality, biological determinism (nature vs nurture), capitalism vs communism and socialism, social ills like pov..."Thank you for clearing that up. I was getting a tad confused. I was like what? You helped a lot, thank you.
Steinbeck understands people better than most and has a sympathy for those who have difficulties in life. A very humane and compassionate writer.
For one Steinbeck was an intelligent writer. He could make readers really relate to each of his characters and their respective place in a story. I always cared for just about all of the characters he wrote about. For me the beauty of a story comes from the ability to be transported to another world, Steinbeck could do that..
The way he can make you feel what his characters are feeling. A good author knows not to say "so-and-so was sad," but a great author knows how to make the reader feel the sadness that the character was feeling.
I was fascinated to learn from Mockingbird, a biography of Harper Lee, that she and John Steinbeck became friends when asked to collaborate on the board of the National Council for the Arts. Isn't that awesome? Two American writers who took on issues of injustice better than anyone else.
Kressel wrote: "I was fascinated to learn from Mockingbird, a biography of Harper Lee, that she and John Steinbeck became friends when asked to collaborate on the board of the National Council for the Arts. Isn't ..."That's funny! I just recently finished To Kill A Mockingbird.
Thanks for that tad-bit of interesting information.
His attention to detail is remarkable and I love his characters
A - It takes Steinbeck two pages to describe a turtle crossing the road, and the reader doesn't lose interest.
Sarah wrote: "Kressel wrote: "I was fascinated to learn from Mockingbird, a biography of Harper Lee, that she and John Steinbeck became friends when asked to collaborate on the board of the National Council for ..."Now that you've done To Kill A Mockingbird, you might want to try Truman Capote's In Cold Blood. He and Harper Lee were childhood friends, and he was the model for Dill. She was his research assistant for In Cold Blood. It's very different than To Kill A Mockingbird, though.
The things that make Steinbeck a good writer are the same things that made Charles Dickens a good writer. They both wrote about a specific time and place, but their stories and messages -- their depictions of the human condition -- transcended that particular time and place. They both addressed social issues, but in a compassionate and not political way. They both wrote for the widest possible audience, and were, and still are, beloved by a very wide audience (and they're both held in disdain by highbrow literary critics, which, for me, is a point very much in their favor). And, as others here have noted, they both had a wonderful descrpitive power, and placed the reader directly into the scenes.
I don`t know about that James. There are a lot of critics who have a high opinion of Steinbeck.Check out his society, THEJOHNSTEINBECKSOCIETY and the roster of critics who have written books about his life and work.
Geoffrey, to give just one example among very many, when Steinbeck was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature in 1962, The New York Times editorialized, "Without detracting in the least from Mr. Steinbeck's accomplishments, we think it interesting that the laurel was not awarded to a writer whose significance, influence and sheer body of work had already made a more profound impression on the literature of our age." Talk about damning with faint praise! And they went on to add, "His limited talent is, in his best books, watered down by tenth-rate philosophizing."
Steinbeck also represented the underdogs and their world / plights / heartbreak in his work better than anyone else, such as Tortilla Flat - probably my favorite JS book. The group of friends and their never-ending quest for more wine, the old widow and her nonfunctional vacuum cleaner, making the sound with her mouth as she pushed it past the window, to make the neighbors jealous - he's as hilarious as he is gut wrenching. Steinbeck just pays attention to the right stuff, and takes the time to ponder what he wants to say about things before stating it perfectly.
The NYT has always been a pisser when it comes to talent. That was one critic among many. You can`t generalize from a single source the widespread notion that the East doesn`t appreciate true talent, where ever it may come from.Nor do the other pundits necessarily take their cue from the NYT literary section, especially in the 60`s when they had mediocre critics. Sorry to disallusion you, but the NYT may have been the best in worldwide news reporting but when it came to its culture section, it sucked royally.
As for editorializing, is that a quote from their editor in chief or their critic? Give us a date and writer.
"That was one critic among many. You can`t generalize from a single source the widespread notion that the East doesn`t appreciate true talent."Here's two sources:
UC Riverside's Carney... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHiy3w...
John Gardner... http://redroom.com/member/monty-heyin...
There was a time when the East Coast defined and felt ownership of the right to define what was noteworthy in American literature. Steinbeck caught them by surprise. I'm sure they're eating their words over that article.
Geoffrey, please note that I wrote, "One example among many." I could provide a long list of quotes from critics providing negative criticism of Steinbeck's individual works and his body of work in general, but I'm not sure what the point would be in doing that. Steinbeck is one of my favorite writers, and I've read his books many times. Frankly, I couldn't care less what highbrow literary critics think of him. Their opinions do not detract from my enjoyment of his books one iota.
His courage to write "The Grapes of Wrath".
I love his sense of detail and his lyrical descriptive scenes. Whether he's describing a campfire scene, the mechanical going on of a jalopy going down a desert highway or the intimate life in a roadside diner no detail is left unsaid. He cerates a very immersive reading experience of a time and place that is far removed from the modern world. And his championing of the humanity in people in all situations is a bonus to anyone who wants to the world differently.
I think he makes it plain and simple for the reader to understand the way the country and the world was at that time!
His concern for social justice
The most daunting aspect of Steinbeck's classic novel is how little has changed since he wrote it. Unlike Verne, whose "predictions" came true or were surpassed within a few short years...Steinbeck's laments for basic human justice are...today...as far distant from reality as they were when the author penned the book. He probably knew human nature well enough to know this...and I suspect he honestly and bitterly cried all the way to the bank...
My favorite Steinbeck book is Cannery Row, I read it again and again.He tells stories and describes people like no one else.
Doc and Mac will live for ever.
Steinbeck found insight into the human condition and how it influences our social and civic development. It rings true with a lot of his readers. Above all, his stories are interesting. They aren't intended as lectures.
I've never given any thought to why I enjoy reading Steinbeck. I just do.I've read:
THE LONG VALLEY (1938)
THE GRAPES OF WRATH (1939)
CANNERY ROW (1945)
THE PEARL (1947)
EAST OF EDEN (1952)
Very soon I'm going to read his TRAVELS WITH CHARLEY (1962).
I have given lots of thoughts to The Grapes of Wrath. The more I read it, the more I understand why we should look deeper into the underlying message and see the past experiences of the mankind to be used as a torch to light the path to the future.Some books are not just to be read...
Steinbeck writes characters you care about and though they might be very different from you you still want to learn about their world. I also like the strange traits of some of these people; Doc from Cannery Row who has a way with dogs that makes them smile. His books can be funny, but also they can touch you in a very personal way and bring tears to your eyes.
I recall years ago in Cambridge MASS talking with a socialist politician who told me the director of the refugee camp in THE GRAPES OF WRATH was Paul Taylor, husband to the world famous WPA photographer Dorothea Lange and that later he ran for President on the Socialist ticket.
Steinbeck was a great expressionist. He showed and didn't tell, almost forcing the reader to experience his characters thoughts, and physical sensations. He focused on the tiny ordinary details that we all know and made us recognize and relate with them.
Steinbeck addressed humanity in its most vulnerable of forms. His writing is lyrical and expressive but not overwrought with wordiness. His writing touches the soul.
For me the heart of it is he was an acute observer of human behavior, had an incisive grasp of human nature and a genius for expressing them.
He wrote about courage, compassion, insight, profound human flaws and emotion, and his ability to get this across to his readers. His novels make me cry- I still can't talk about the ending of The Grapes of Wrath without blubbering. What courage to write something like that. The heroes in his books are ordinary, simple people. And he was sexy.
Geoffrey wrote: "I recall years ago in Cambridge MASS talking with a socialist politician who told me the director of the refugee camp in THE GRAPES OF WRATH was Paul Taylor, husband to the world famous WPA photog..."How could a Socialist run for President in that same system?
I’ve heard people talk about his descriptive style, the personality he gives his characters, the way he takes the goings-on of everyday people and turns it into something of interest, and that’s all true. It’s why he’s a favorite of so many. But the reason Steinbeck is a favorite for me, is that within his style and voice, he always seems to know the exact point where one more word would be too much. Timeless.
I have to agree with L. When I was in high school and read Of Mice and Men and Grapes of Wrath for assignments, I couldn't stand them; I was too focused on the characters and whatever story points and symbolism were important for my essays. I recently re-read them as an adult and Grapes of Wrath is now one of my favorite novels. I actually find his style to be very similar to Neal Stephenson (though, from what I've read so far, Steinbeck may be much more consistent about achieving that perfection in voice), despite the very different genres and stories they tell.
don't get me wrong as i like his books very much, but i was pointed towards 'whose names are unknown' by sonora babb, which is concerned with the dustbowl times and which she couldn't get published as 'the grapes of wrath' was just then coming out. now js heard of her book and asked to borrow the draft. this paranoia infests everything.i am reading ms babb's book at the moment and it is beautifully written; very moving.
Ruby wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: "I recall years ago in Cambridge MASS talking with a socialist politician who told me the director of the refugee camp in THE GRAPES OF WRATH was Paul Taylor, husband to the world ..."He ran as a Socialist. We actually have more than two parties vying for the presidential slot in some states.
Since 1976 the Socialist party has fielded a presidential contender in every election bar none. In that year the nominee was Frank Zeidler, former Socialist mayor of Milwaukee from 1948-60.
The following are some of the US cities that have had Socialist mayors; Milwaukee (several) Butte Montana, Minneapolis, Schenectady, New York, Burlington Vermont (2), Flint, Michigan, Bridgeport and Norwalk Conn.
The current independent Senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, was the Socialist mayor of Burlington VT in the early 80's, having won his position by besting a corrupt Democratic hold on that city, ie. non competitive city contracts were being awarded to party friends and cronies.
The US Socialist Party bills itself as the only democratic Marxist party in the US
I've always felt that Steinbeck's special relationship with his characters was his most endearing literary quality, not unlike Dicken's own.The facility to communicate his compassion towards his characters and instill in us those feelings is what he separates him from so many other writers. There's a very strong sense of humanity that is so very pervasive in his writing.
Contrast that with Tom Wolfe's elitist attitude towards his characters in BONFIRE OF THE VANITIES and you will not see any greater difference.
In his travel book TRAVELS WITH CHARLY, he writes of the migrant farm workers he meets early on, at about the same time he meets the hermetic, unfriendly wandering actor. He writes of his strong affinity with this group.
Trivia: Writing ProcessHe was said to go out and cut a cord of wood or do outdoor chores to clear his head before coming in to write.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Grapes of Wrath (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
The Grapes of Wrath (other topics)The Grapes of Wrath (other topics)
Your reasons?