Steinbeck was a genius at the tiny book, and there is more action in this last section than in the entire rest of the book combined. And having read most of the rest of Steinbeck's canon, it's easy to say that he could have fit in enough heart-breaking back story about the Joads and Casey in a few sentences, without all the Turtle/Agricultural Progress is Evil/Here is How All Poor People Act In Every Situation At All Times chapters. You know, the ones that contribute nothing except for acting like a leftist version of John Galt's speech. I'm not the sort of reader who bemoans a chunky book just because it's chunky- I think every word of Anna Karenina is necessary- but I could've easily done without the first 3/4 of Grapes of Wrath.
Another benefit of making the book a novella would be that Steinbeck would have less space to write cartoon characters. You know- Big, Bad Policeman (all of them), and Big, Bad Employer/Exploiter of the Poor (all of them), and Poor Traveling Folk From All Over The Middle Of The Country Who For Some Reason All Speak In The Same Oklahoma Dialect (another blogger pointed this out a few weeks ago and now I can't stop thinking about it) And Are All Very Nice To The Other Poor People.
So let's talk about the ending. I think it's largely regarded as ridiculous for a reason, but I don't think the reason is the shock of what Rose of Sharon is actually doing. I think the reason is that the Rose of Sharon we've been with for so long would never do something like that. Steinbeck gives us 400 pages of a selfish, whiny, self-centered brat, and then expects us to believe that she would do something so selfless and abnormal because- what? Her baby died? If she were true to type, that would make her MORE self-pitying and self-righteous- every other tragedy up to this point has done so. I think Ma would've looked deep into her eyes, and Rose of Sharon would've burst into tears and complained about how she was hungry, too, after all she's the one who just did all that labor and has nothing to show for it.
So, the book is preachy to a major fault (even though I agree with a lot of what Steinbeck is saying). The characters, with the exception of a few of the family members (MA, HOW I LOVE YOU) are wooden and two-dimensional. I know this book is beloved by many people because it makes you FEEL THE FEELINGS and HUMAN DIGNITY and hey, I get it. I don't think this is the most successful of Steinbeck's works, but it's a SUPER-SUCCESSFUL work of socialist propaganda (I don't mean that snottily, I think that is literally what it is) and definitely worth the read. I would force it on all the Republicans on the whole wide world if given the chance.
That is SUCH an accurate thing about Rosasharn... I've always just been like 'ewwwww' and also kind of 'awwwww' (because of inarticulateness) but it is SO true that the Rose of Sharon we love to hate just WOULDN'T do that at all. Interesting. *ponders*
ReplyDeleteAnd you know what? I pretty much agree that it's basically the best piece of Socialist propaganda ever, and I don't think it's not meant to be that. I mean, I think Steinbeck wanted to get a story in there too, which he does, but I think what he really wants to say is STOP IT CAPITALISM. Which he also does. A LOT.
*tries to hatch a plan for getting all Republicans/right wing people to read this*
Yes to this post. All the parts.
ReplyDeleteSteinbeck really wanted people to GET IT by the end of Grapes, and he focused so heavily on that goal that it sounds like little things like character details got ignored or completely blown up. But the dude is persuasive - I am UPSET over this book.
I think you're right about Grapes of Wrath working better as a novella. Except for maybe two of the non-Joad chapters, they were pointless soap-box opportunities. And if Steinbeck had cut out the endless roadtrip saga, he might have had room to tell us what happened to the Joads after the last scene. (Although I doubt he would have, as them getting any sort of happy ending would have undermined his entire point.)
ReplyDeleteThe ending felt really off to me, but I figured it was just the tremendous ICK factor. I think you are right though, there is no way the Rosasharn we come to know and loath throughout the novel would be that generous.
ReplyDeleteLove your review! I read this in HS and the things that have stuck with me over 10 years later are all the business with THE TURTLE!! and the last scene with Rosasharn, which BTW is absolutely appalling when you're 16. Definitely agree that it would have been a more compelling novella than a novel.
ReplyDeleteYeah, there was a whole lot of "Hey, let me shove my politcs down your throat for 400 pages!". Damn Steinbeck. I think I wouldn't have minded all of that so much if the characters and story were better developed, because it wouldn't have seemed so damn obvious.
ReplyDeleteBut seriously, Ma definitely goes on one of the "best literary moms ever" lists.
I don't get all the Rosasharn hate. I felt HORRIBLE for her. Maybe it's because I read this book while pregnant... I don't have horribly difficult pregnancies, just the usual crap, but I couldn't help but think, if *I* am this hungry/sore/uncomfortable/exhausted/emotional/whatever, how HORRIBLE must it have been to be going through this with like zero support, not to mention NO FOOD. When I'm pregnant I eat all day, non-stop, and am still famished at all times. I can't even imagine not having enough food to eat.
ReplyDeleteI think the "hate" comes from the fact that the character shows zero pity or concern for anyone but herself until the very last (inexplicable) page.
DeleteYeah. I see the breastfeeding thing as purely symbolic... because otherwise WTF?
Delete