The Grapes of Wrath: No One Man, But One Common Soul
Many writers in American literature try to instill the philosophy
of their choosing into their reader. This is often a philosophy derived at
from their own personal experiences. John Steinbeck is no exception to
this. When traveling through his native Californian in the mid-1930s,
Steinbeck witnessed people living in appalling conditions of extreme
poverty due to the Great Depression and the agricultural disaster known as
the Dust Bowl. He noticed that these people received no aid whatsoever
from neither the state of California nor the federal government. The rage
he experienced from seeing such treatment fueled his novel The Grapes of
Wrath. Steinbeck sought to change the suffering plight of these farmers
who had migrated from the midwest to California. Also, and more
importantly, he wanted to suggest a philosophy into the reader, and insure
that this suffering would never occur again (Critical 1). Steinbeck shows
in The Grapes of Wrath that there is no one man, but one common soul in
which we all belong to.
The subject of Steinbeck's fiction is not the most thoughtful,
imaginative, and constructive aspects of humanity, but rather the process
of life itself (Wilson 785). Steinbeck has been compared to a twentieth
century Charles Dickens of California; a social critic with more sentiment
than science or system. His writing is warm, human, inconsistent,
occasionally angry, but more often delighted with the joys associated with
human life on its lowest levels (Holman 20). This biological image of man
creates techniques and aspects of form capable of conveying this image of
man with esthetic power and conviction; the power to overcome adversity
through collectiveness, or in this case, as one combined soul(Curley 224).
Steinbeck's basic purpose of the novel is essentially religious,
but not in any orthodox sense of the word. He is religious in that he
contemplates man's relation to the cosmos and attempts to transcend
scientific explanations based on sense experience. He is also religious in
that he explicitly attests the holiness of nature (Curley 220). A common
fear during the nineteenth century was one of this naturalism leading to
the end of reverence, worship, and sentiment. Steinbeck, however, is the
first significant author to build his own set of beliefs, which some would
refer to as a “religion,” upon a naturalistic basis. Because of his “
religious” style on a naturalistic basis, he is able to relate man with a
natural soul that they own, and combine them into a grouping of a larger,
more important soul (220).
America and American literature was founded on the spirit of
necessity of the individual. But Steinbeck disagrees with this idea of
individualism. He feels that the individual by himself is not going to
succeed through the efforts of his own soul. It is through the combined
effort of everyone's souls that a common goal is able to be reached
(Critical 5). The Grapes of Wrath uses the naturalistic movement of
literature to prove this as well. Forces like economic, social,
environmental, and genetic forces fight against the Joads (the main family
of the novel) and other Okies (the farmers and their families who migrated
west from Oklahoma in search of work). But in the end, the Okies
themselves are triumphant because they learn that they belong together, and
their souls cohere to this group. Steinbeck points out that the only way
these naturalistic forces can be beaten is through a combined group effort.
Steinbeck also promotes humanism in the novel as a way of
expressing the idea of an oversoul. The end of the novel defeats the
accusation that the Okies are animals with no human characteristics at all.
The characters of Uncle John and Pa help to build a dam to prevent the
rising waters from entering the boxcar that they are living in. Steinbeck
shows this image as a common goal among the combined souls of the two men
to survive and the humanity of man, in midst of great inhumanity and
indifference (Critical 5).
Unanism, another one of Steinbeck's beliefs, is also evident
throughout the novel. Steinbeck's unanism was derived from his friend, the
biologist, Edward Ricketts. Rickett's interest was in groups of marine
creatures functioning as one organism (Smith 411). Unanism is a group
theory wherein the collective emotions of two people, of two small rural
communities, of cities, of countries, and of the whole world transcend and
are superior to individual ones (441). Or, in other words, in relation to
the soul, the entire soul is greater than the sum of its parts. This is
shown in the novel where the final triumph of the Okies as a collective
soul is greater than their individual battles as single souls.
Transcendentalism is a belief in the Emersonian oversoul. This is
where no one owns an individual soul, because each soul contributes to a
universal soul. Transcendentalists feel that harming others merely hurts
oneself. Emerson, the forefather of transcendentalism, believes that self-
-reliance and individualism are the key to happiness (Grapes 5).
Steinbeck, who reflects transcendentalist views in his novel,
rejects Emerson's belief of individualism, however. Steinbeck believes
that collective happiness is the way to total happiness (Critical 3). In
the novel, Casey's thoughts reflect Steinbeck's thoughts, and
transcendentalism evolves in Casey's mind throughout the novel (Grapes 2).
Casey makes the revelation to Tom that, “Maybe all men got one big soul
ever'body's a part of” (Steinbeck 345). Steinbeck also supports his
transcendentalist views in the novel through the fact that helping one
another and sharing with one another is the key to survival for the Joads
and the rest of the Okies, which contributes to the importance of the one
combined soul (Grapes 2).
Steinbeck's theory of the collective soul goes against the
foundation of the American system. This theory in American society is that
the thoughts and rights of the individual, and hopefully, other individuals
will fall into the same thoughts and rights (Critical 3). Democracy, on
the other hand, is for the rights of the majority, and is not influenced by
the path of the individual. Steinbeck uses this theory in his analogy of
the soul, and in the transition of the Joads. The Joads, at first, are
only concerned about the well-being of the family. But after witnessing
the suffering of the other farmers, they change their views. The Joads
realize that only through a collective effort can the Okies overcome the
appalling circumstances in which they are forced to live (3).
In Plato's Republic, Plato uses a diagram of the perfect city to
analyze the human soul and what is good and bad for it (Critical 4).
Steinbeck also uses a Platonic-like setting to show how the individuals of
a group contribute to the soul of the whole. He also does this by using
each character to symbolize what is good or bad for the soul. Each of the
twelve characters which make up the family the novel have a distinct
purpose in the group. When one leaves, the group suffers for it, making
the chance for success not as strong. This relates to the idea of each of
the members' soul contributing to the success or failure of one soul as a
whole, and has no regard to any individual outcome in terms of success and
failure (4).
The theme of the novel, relating to the theory of a universal soul,
is represented through the entire social condition of which Steinbeck's
characters are a part of, and it is primarily in terms of the total
situation that they have existence (Lisca 91). Thus, their role is
collective, and representational of the theme of the novel in regards to
the Okies and the migrant workers just as in the novel the evicting
landlords are in reality representative of the actual Shawnee Land and
Cattle Company, and the growers are representative of the California
Farmer's Association (91). These representative elements add to the theme
in that each soul is a group, and together they add up to one collective
group in a common plight (91).
As far as the central narrative about the education of the Joads is
concerned, the novel is not a social novel (Curley 223). It is, however,
in danger of being known as a period piece, and needs to be defined as art
rather than sociology. It stresses group achievement, and depicts the
necessity of education and reformation, rather than just showing the
results on people of a national disaster (224). If the Joads had not been
caught up in the events of the particular time period and place that
troubles the public, the novel would be more easily recognizable as a tale
of the travail and triumph of the human spirit as a group of people (224).
The characters of the novel, mainly the twelve that make up the
family, each represent a specific characteristic that is unique to the
family, and when added up, create a larger oversoul. The character Casey
represents spiritual belief and reasoning. Rose of Sharon represents
humanity and kindness, and Ruth and Winnie represent childhood and family
pride, and selfishness, respectively. Noah represents a childlike
innocence and a feeling of belonging to society. Connie represents
youthful aspirations of the future, and Pa stubbornness and a refusal to
give up the fight against life. Uncle John represents guilt, and Grandpa
represents heritage. Ma represents hope, and strength (second to Tom).
Tom represents idealism, and strength, while Grandma represents family
unity, and Al represents the wildside and youthful rebellion (Critical 4).
As the characters leave the story, the family is deprived of their unique
characteristics they contribute to the family soul. At the novel's end,
the key pieces to the soul are still there: Ma, Pa, Rose of Sharon, Uncle
John, Winnie, Ruthie, and Al. These characters provide the group and the
collective soul with enough different characteristics or pieces of the soul
to still proceed (4).
Although some characters depart and leave the family, like Tom and
Casey, they still fight for the well-being of the collective soul. Casey
leaves to fight the low wages and abominable conditions in which the people
are forced to live in. And when Casey dies, Tom takes the cause up to
fight the injustices, but not just the injustices in California. Tom
states:
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 Casey knowed, why,
I'll be in the ways 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 our folks
eat the stuff they raise an' live in the houses they build - why, I'll be
there (Steinbeck 537).
And when the Okies finally do rise from poverty and make it on
their own, the mentality of Tom's fight is still there also. With the
collective soul in Tom's mind, when one person succeeds, all who belong
succeed too (Critical 5).
The characters of Ma and Rose of Sharon add to the collective soul
as well. The speeches of Ma show that when people have nothing else, they
are at the very least, kind to each other. Ma says, “Use' to be family was
fust. It ain't so now. It's anybody. Worse off we get, the more we got
to do” (Steinbeck 569). This shows that Ma has shifted from a person who
was always dead set to keep the family together to a person who is looking
out for everyone in the collective soul, not just the family (Critical 4).
A change is also evident in Rose of Sharon for the benefit of the
collective soul. At the beginning of the novel, she is a self-centered
person who does not think very highly of the family or of the people in
similar circumstances. However, her attitude undergoes a change toward the
end of the novel. With the loss of her husband, Connie, and her still-born
baby, she transforms into a dynamic character who puts the cause of the
group, survival, before the well-being of herself (Critical 4). This is
shown in the end of the story when she makes the greatest sacrifice and
gives a dying man sustenance through the milk from her breast. This
illustrates the importance of the group soul as opposed to Rose of Sharon's
individual soul.
The idea of the oversoul is also emphasized through some of the
writing techniques utilized by Steinbeck. One in particular is the use of
alternating chapters. The even numbered chapters of the book are dedicated
to the tale of the Joad's plight, and the odd numbered chapters portray
images and the movement of the entire migration west by the Okies.
Steinbeck does this deliberately to show the Joads do belong to a larger
group and many people are having the same difficulties and hardships as
they are (Critical 3). These alternating chapters are used as a way of
filling in the larger picture. Steinbeck uses a variety of literary
devices to minimize their interruption of the narrative action, such as
dramatization, juxtaposition, and the prose style itself (Lisca 92). The
same folk dialect and figurative language reappear in the interchapters to
continue the natural flow of the story. To put the Joads in a necessary
situation to fulfill a larger picture would destroy their credibility as
particular and real people (92). Again, the theory of a collective soul is
strongly pointed at by the alternating chapters.
The collective soul is not a new idea, but it does clash with the
ideas that America was founded on. Steinbeck started to write the Grapes
of Wrath with the idea of changing the philosophy in place in California,
but it expanded to changing the idea of the system in place in America.
Steinbeck wished to make his mark in the field of American literature, and
that he did with this novel. Through the novel, Steinbeck shows that there
is not just one singular soul, but something bigger, which all men belong
to.
Partner sites: Pitbull history, Study Spanish in Ecuador, and Free Essays and Term Papers