Criticism of East of Eden
Possibly the best piece of criticism I discovered was an essay by Joseph Wood Krutch. Krutch begins by making a statement praising the enormous amount of energy that is required for a book with the scope of East of Eden. Very briefly, Krutch summarizes the novel and draws an analogy between it and The Magic Mountain by Thomas Mann. Krutch points out that in this novel, Steinbeck has avoided falling into the trap of writing a melodramatic as he has in some other pieces. Krutch says of Steinbeck: "Never, I think, not even in The Grapes of Wrath, has he exhibited such a grip upon himself and his material." (Krutch 370) Krutch points out that, especially in the first third of the book, the character parallels to symbolic figures are rather distracting, but become less so as the book progresses. Steinbeck is often associated with writers who hold deterministic philosophies and are moral relativists, but Krutch asserts "it is difficult to imagine how any novel could more explicitly reject [these values]." (Krutch 370) Krutch assigns East of Eden the position of determining Steinbeck's position as a moralist and ends his review by stating "there is no question whether Mr. Steinbeck has written an intensely interesting and impressive book." (Krutch 371)
Harvey Curtis Webster was the author of another review I found helpful. He begins with the very blunt statement that "it will take almost equal quantities of pride and stupidity to deny that it is one of the best novels of the past ten years and the best book John Steinbeck has written since the Grapes of Wrath." (Webster 369) To conclude his strong opening paragraph Webster states "It is to be doubted it any American novel has better chronicled ou...
... middle of paper ...
...ress. 1957. pp. 302-305. Rpt. In Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. David Marowski. Vol 45 Detroit: Gale, 1987. pp. 370- 371
Neary, Walter. "About John Steinbeck". 27 Nov. 2001 <http://www.steinbeck.org/About.html>.
Steinbeck, John. Grapes of Wrath. 1939. New York: Penguin, 1973.
Steinbeck, John IV Nancy Steinbeck, and Andrew Harvey. Other Side of Eden. Prometheus Books. Feb. 2001.
Various contributors. "Amazon.com Buying Information." Amazon.com <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/0140186395/
customer-reviews/qid=1007248185/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_75_1/102-8744870-2692125>. 28 Nov. 2001
Webster, Harvey Curtis. Out of the New Born Sun. Saturday Review, New York. Vol. XXXV. No. 38. 20 Sept 1952. pp. 11-12. Rpt. In Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. David Marowski. Vol 45 Detroit: Gale, 1987. pp. 369-370
Hayashi, Tetsumaro. A New Study Guide to Steinbeck's Major Works, with Critical Explications. Scarecrow Press, Jan 1, 1993
In chapter two of A Room of One’s Own, Virginia Woolf introduces the reader to the uncomfortable conditions existing between men and women during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Woolf’s character, Mary Beton, surveys books about women at the British Museum and discovers that nearly all of them are written by men. What’s more, the books that she does find express negative sentiments about women, leading Beton to believe that men are expressing “anger that had gone underground and mixed itself with all kinds of other emotions” (32). She links this repressed anger to man’s need to feel superior over women, and, wondering how and why men have cause to be angry with the female sex, she has every right to be angry with men.
Throughout history, the Devil has constantly tempted people. That much can be agreed upon. However, the similarities between these two works also show that the reason the Devil has tempted people is actually constant as well, to enlarge his kingdom. Unfortunately, their motives for enlarging this kingdom are not so alike. When Dr. Faustus inquires as to what good his soul will do to the Devil, the demon Mephistopheles responds, “[to] enlarge his kingdom […] to have the human souls of men” (Marlow 2). The Devil from Dr. Faustus appears to cultivate his kingdom with the hope of increasing his own power and possibly challen...
Forum 19.4 (Winter 1985): 160-162. Rpt. inTwentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Thomas J. Schoenberg and Lawrence J. Trudeau. Vol. 192. Detroit: Gale, 2008. Literature Resource Center. Web. 30 Nov. 2013.
In the Miller’s Tale, the story tells of a carpenter and his wife, Allison and how she is pursued by multiple men. The first man to pursue her is Nicolas, a man boarding with the Miller. When the carpenter is away he begins flirting with Allison in hopes of making love. Originally she refuses, but eventually she gives in to his will. Chaucer seems to be pointing out that women are easily swayed by temptation by showing us that Allison is unable to stop herself from making love with Nicolas. In addition Chaucer is also showing us how disloyal women can by using Allison’s extramarital affair as an example. However this stereotyping is not just limited to women in the miller tale but also reaches men too. Later in the story, Nicolas manages to convince the carpenter that there is going to be a massive flood and that he should hide. However this is all just a lie, which Nicolas is using to get the carpenter out of the way so he can be with Allison. Through the carpenter, it seems as if Chaucer is pointing out that men are generally gullible and easily fooled. The stereotyping continues when Absolon enters the story and attempts to woo the likes of Allison. Absolon is unsuccessful in his attempt to woo her however, and Allison tricks him by pretending to offer him ...
Rpt. in Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Linda Pavlovski. Vol.
Popular Press, 1993. 92-99. Rpt. in Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Linda Pavlovski. Vol. 157. Detroit: Gale, 2005. Literature Resource Center. Web. 11 Mar. 2014.
Heller, Joseph. The Chelsea House Library of Literary Criticism. Twentieth-Century American Literature Vol. 3. New York. Chelsea House Publishers, 1986.
Evelyn Cunningham once said, “Women are the only oppressed group in our society that lives in intimate association with their oppressors.” For thousands of years women have been oppressed, not in the bondage of slavery but in the bondage that comes from a lack of education and a dependence on men for their livelihood. Women have been subjected to scrutiny and ostracization, belittling and disparaging comments, and even at times they have been feared by men. Women themselves have even taken on the beliefs that they require a man in their life to be taken care of and have a satisfying life although some women and even some men have seen that the differences between the sexes is purely physical. This oppression, as well as the enlightenment of some, is well noted in many literary works. Literature has often been an arena for the examination of the “woman question,” as it was termed in the Victorian age. Four works that examine the role or view of women in society are John Stuart Mill’s The Subjection of Women, T.S. Eliot’s “Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock,” Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own, and Carol Ann Duffy’s “Medusa.” Although each work examines a side of the woman question in its own way with a variety of views on the question, all of the works examine the fear that women incite in men, the idea that women are dependent on men, and the idea that women are separate from men in some way and each piece works to show that there is actually an interdependence between men and women that is often not expressed.
Love in this time period was portrayed in a different manner than in The Miller's Tale. Though Alison was not high in the class system, she could not have been considered "good" enough for any lord as a mistress or any common man as a wife, "For any lord to leggen in his bedde, Or yet for any good yeman to wedde", (Lines 161-162). Though, when Alison was wed to an older man she lacked any attraction and longed to be away from him. Alison is thought to be a newly budded youthful pear tree suggesting her childlike vibrancy and causing many to consider her desirable. Chaucer uses many statements that can be interpreted in a different manner with massive ambiguity. ...
Tucker, Martin. Moulton’s Library of Literary Criticism. Volume 4. Frederick Ungar Publishing Company. New York. 1967.
The Miller is large and imposing person who personifies a crooked, but likeable businessman. In "The General Prologue," Chaucer describes the Miller as having a "thombe of gold, (563)" which the footnote on page 32 of The Riverside Chaucer notes, "is an ironic reference to a proverb, with the implication that there are no honest millers." The descr...
The relationship between Faustus and Mephastophilis creates a dynamic that is rejected by society at this time. Although Faustus is well educated, he still lacks the one thing he truly desires: someone to control him, especially in a sexual manner. When Faustus decides to give Mephastophilis his soul for servitude, Faustus proclaims: “Lo, Mephastophilis, for love of thee, / I cut my arm, and with my proper blood, / Assure my soul to be great Lucifer’s,” (I.V.53-54). The declaration of love for Mephastophilis suggests that Faustus realized that, by giving Mephastophilis his soul, he will be able to gain his desire for control through Mephastophilis acting as his servant and granting him his wishes. Faustus does not realize until the last line of the play, however, that Mephastophilis is the one who is
Besides Faustus, another significant character in the story is Mephistophilis. The most interesting aspect of Mephistophilis’s character is that he has mixed motives. At the beginning of the story, it is clear that he wants to play a role in Faustus’s damnation:
Based on the film, Mephisto, on the other hand, is the devil who wagered with God that Faust is indeed same as all mortal man’s soul, easy to be fooled and misled. To settle the ownership of the Earth, they bet on the soul of Faust. The story of Faust is comparable to the Bible story of Job. If the devil wins, the earth is his, even Faust’s soul, but after the last sand in the hourglass falls signaling the end of their contract, Faust’s soul will return to his body peacefully. Faust is considered a scholar and a doctor. Dr. Faust is recognized as a fine man and a prayerful alchemist. His main concern is to save men’s lives and prevent death during the age of plague. Due to disappointments of failing, his constant depression led him to become angry and embittered, ends up burning his books. One of the pages of the books were interpreted that Mephisto is trying to communicate with Faust. As the perfect timing to tempt a man into sinning, Mephisto enticed Faust by giving him an unbelievable restoring power to heal the people who sought his help from the plague. In exchange, his soul will be owned by the devil. And he revoked the name of the Lord in healing the people, instead the using the name of the devil. Such temptations start with vision into treating the plague, Faust was so taken to his priority that he was willing to give up his soul for the common good. It is seen that the morality of Faust is swayed; his aim to do good, despite knowing that in exchange for this is his soul. Regardless of this, Faust chose to agree to Mephisto’s offered contract.