Dust Bowl Odyssey Essay

1061 Words3 Pages

The “Dust Bowl Odyssey” presented an initial perspective of why families migrated from drought-ridden, Dust Bowl, areas to California. Edward Carr cautions, “Interpretation plays a necessary part in establishing the facts of history, and because no existing interpretation is wholly objective, on interpretation is a good as another, and the facts of history are in principle not amendable to objective interpretation” (Carr, 1961, p. 31). Historians had to separate the prejudices, assumptions, and beliefs of the times in order to have a more objective reasoning of the migration. The migration had valid evidence that supported against the theory of the Dust Bowl being the only contributor. Rather there were other historical contributions to …show more content…

He will maintain that the criterion of right interpretation is its own suitability to some present purpose (Carr, 1961, p. 31). A number of prejudices, assumptions, and beliefs contributed to not seeing the bigger picture. The wisdom of the time suggested that the Dust Bowl affected all of Oklahoma. Removing that assumption and looking at the facts, it shows that the affected area was the panhandle of Oklahoma.
A popular book written by John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath, perpetuated the assumption it was the whole of Oklahoma. Turning of the book into a popular movie further perpetuated the conventional wisdom of the time. The book was a narrative written by an author, not a historian. It paralleled the biblical parable of Job and the trek to the Promised Land. This shaping of public opinion continued. Thus allowing for the imagery and understanding through symbolism. The imagery further shaped public opinion by presenting photographs of the time showing the farmers …show more content…

The migrants did not want to become the bum due to their own prejudices. They did not want to consider that those “bums” were down on their luck or contributed to not wanting to work, rather than not being able to locate a job. Yet other assumptions, labeled the farmer as contributing to the events of the Dust Bowl by over plowing their lands. Having a support system when relocating (i.e., other family members support) furthered the success of these individuals. Misconceptions occurred. Other factors were not contributing to the migrant crisis. Prejudices labeled both of these classes of individuals and put the blame elsewhere. Some blamed the banks, while others blamed the invention of the tractor replacing migrant workers.
Historians stepped back to evaluate the significant historical facts were, and eliminate the non-historical facts. They used statistics to evaluate these. The censuses opened up a different perspective, substantiated by facts, rather than prejudices and assumptions. Evaluating the census numbers from 1910 to 1970 showed that the migration started well before the Dust Bowl. While it may have been a contributing factor, it was not the sole factor. An objective look at what else was going on at the

Open Document