Dr. Bickford                                                                                                                          

ENGL 300

25 March XXXX

Who are the Boy and the Mother?: A Review of Criticism on The Grapes of Wrath

            John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath has inspired many diverse and controversial critical responses. The question of the novel’s ending is often debated as well as the true nature of the characters. With such a large and complicated setting, The Dust Bowl of the thirties, The Grapes of Wrath struggles against critiques regarding the application of setting and the validity of Steinbeck’s research. Characters, setting, and style are often among the aspects that are subjected to criticism. The criticism on The Grapes of Wrath may be divided into two sections: the first section includes the criticism by which the critics choose to explore Steinbeck’s characters within a larger concept, such as myth, feminist, Marxist and Darwinian criticism; and the second section includes critics who choose to focus on Steinbeck’s writing and narration styles throughout the novel.

            Myth criticism on The Grapes of Wrath is diverse in its approach, but the application of each distinct myth gives a deeper meaning to the novel and its characters. Patrick A. Shaw argues in his essay, “A Fugitive upon the Earth: Tom Joad and the Myth of Cain,” that the Cain myth is masterfully interwoven into the story of the Joads with Tom as the Cain figure. Shaw’s myth criticism differs from Micheal Barry’s essay, “Between Inaction and Immoral Action: Tom Joad’s Self-Definition,” stylistically and in mythical approach. Although both articles focus on Tom as a potential Cain figure, Barry’s essay focuses on the revelations that are unearthed by the novel’s tensions, and Shaw seeks to display Tom as the Cain figure throughout the novel.  Expanding from the Cain myth, David Cassuto’s essay, “Turning Wine into Water: Water as Privileged Signifier in The Grapes of Wrath,” begins to unfold how the Biblical myth of the garden can be applied to California and Oklahoma in The Grapes of Wrath. Cassuto’s essay differs in approach from Ken Eckert’s deconstruction essay, “Exodus Inverted: A New Look at The Grapes of Wrath.”   Cassuto’s decision to review the book with the signifier of water as the forefront symbol creates another dimension that was unexplored in Eckert’s essay. Although Eckert did involve many elements of Christian symbolism, he failed to include water, which Cassuto considers to be a dominant symbol throughout both Biblical text and The Grapes of Wrath.

            Feminist criticism on The Grapes of Wrath is primarily focused on the characters of Ma Joad and Rose of Sharon and the systems and transitions between patriarchy and  matriarchy. Joan Hedrick’s essay, “Mother Earth and the Earth Mother: The Recasting of Myth in Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath,” begins with an examination similar to Cassuto’s exploration and Eckert’s deconstruction of the garden myth. Hedrick does not focus on the garden myth but rather the replacement Mother-earth myth.  Hendricks argues that this ideal reinforces the gender roles, specifically matriarchy, which is the primary focus of Warren Motley’s essay, "From Patriarchy to Matriarchy: Ma Joad's Role in The Grapes of Wrath." However, Motley takes Hendrick’s argument to a profounder, more sociological level as it examines the switch from patriarchy to matriarchy in Steinbeck’s Dust Bowl setting. In further explanation of the Dust Bowl and its influence on the characters,  Jan Goggans’s essay, “Houses Left Empty On The Land': Keeping The Postcolonial House In The Grapes Of Wrath, " gives a unique analysis of the mothers of the Dust Bowl, who inspire characters such as Ma Joad and Rose of Sharon.

            Ma Joad and several other characters can be examined as a social transition from capitalism to socialism in a Marxist or Marxist-feminist critical approach. In Nellie Y. McKay’s essay, “‘Happy [?]-Wife-and-Motherdom’: The Portrayal of Ma Joad in John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath,” McKay argues that Steinbeck’s representation of Ma Joad is not that of an individual but rather a social and political ideal, which differs from Goggans, Hendricks, and Motley’s symbolic and sociological examination of the character. McKay also focused on the power switch from Pa Joad to Ma Joad as a proponent of the switch from capitalism to socialism, which exposes a unique tie between the feminist and social aspects of The Grapes of Wrath. Michael G. Barry’s Marxist essay, “Degrees of Meditation and their Political Value in Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath,” explores the ideology of socialism that Steinbeck weaves throughout the story. Barry does not focus on Ma Joad as a proponent of socialism, as McKay does, but his examination of examples of characters or events that favor socialism or rebuke

capitalism acts more as a broad overview of the theme of socialism than McKay’s pointed essay.

            The most interesting literary critical approach to The Grapes of Wrath is Darwinian or evolutionary criticism, for this type of criticism follows Steinbeck’s belief system throughout his work. In his essay, “The Darwinian Grapes of Wrath,” Brian Railsback focuses on the migrants as a species, and the system of capitalism as an individual agent that has skewed the natural order. Railsback’s essay offers an interesting biological and evolutionary evaluation of the novel, and his proposal that the characters act as a species provides an interesting understanding of the migrant mentality that is pervasive throughout the novel. Andy Smith also approaches The Grapes of Wrath with an evolutionary understanding in his essay, "Mutualism and Group Selection in The Grapes of Wrath,” but Smith analyzes the importance of survival strategy and an internal self-organized mutualism that is apparent among the migrants. Contrary to Railsbck’s essay, Smith rejects the importance of Darwinism for evolutionary interpretation; therefore, much of the Darwinian-based theory that Railsback uses to examine the migrants’ behavior differs from Smith’s approach. Smith and Railsback do agree that capitalism has uprooted the species, the migrants, and has uprooted the natural order.

            The structuralist and formalist criticism on The Grapes of Wrath is usually only a small aspect of another type of critical response; however, a couple of predominantly structural and formalist articles deal with narration style and the controversial ending. Louis Owens and Hector Torres focus on the narration style of Steinbeck in their essay, “Dialogic Structure and Levels of Discourse in Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath.” Owens and Torres find the relationship between the narrator and the audience problematic structurally; however they argue that the ending of the novel is definitive and noteworthy. Chris Kocela defies this conclusion in his formalist essay, “A Postmodern Steinbeck, or Rose of Sharon Meets Oedipa Maas.” Kocela, like Owens and Torres, questions the effectiveness of the narration and interchapters of the novel, but he concludes that because the characters represent larger, biblical characters, the novel’s ending is inevitably poor and controversial.

             Owens and Torres and Kocela’s articles involved some aspect of reader-response, and many reader-response critics have retorted or supported Owens and Torres’s argument.   In his essay, “Audience and Closure in The Grapes of Wrath,”Visser chooses to focus on who the audience of The Grapes of Wrath is and how they are to respond to the novel’s problematic literary elements and conclusion. Visser and John Timmerman in his essay, “The Squatter Circle in The Grapes of Wrath,” agree that the ending of the novel is insufficient, because Steinbeck had no ability to conclude the larger issues and themes within the novel. This conclusion, as supported by both Visser and Timmerman, conflicts with Owen and Torres’s essay regarding the necessity of the ending. Visser and Timmerman agree on many of the larger points, but Visser proves to be more reader-oriented as he critiques Steinbeck’s ending.  Christopher J. Salter, in his essay, “John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath as a Primer for Cultural Geography,”  does not focus on the narration style or the ending of the novel, but he focuses on the reliability Steinbeck’s novel as a means to teach the reader about the geographical landscape of the Dust Bowl and the migrants. Salter presents Steinbeck as a reliable narrator; unlike Owens and Torres, who question Steinbeck’s narration and the effectiveness of his discourse.

            Whether their critique is favorable or unfavorable, the critics of Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath have added to the complexities of the novel. The Grapes of Wrath is a hard, complex, and enduring glimpse into the mindset of the Dust Bowl migrants. Placing Steinbeck’s novel into larger concepts, such as feminism, Marxism, or evolutionary theory, provides a better understanding of the concept as well as the novel and reveal s the malleability of Steinbeck’s genius. The diversity amongst the critics and critical approaches creates a dynamic among not only the critic and the author but also between the critics. As the critics respond to and retort one another’s work, the discourse concerning Steinbeck’s novel increases as does the possibility for the reader to enjoy a deeper, more adept understanding of the novel. Each critique of the novel leads the reader to reimagine, reform, or revisit his or her interpretation of the novel. Critical examinations into the characters, setting, and writing style unwind the novel bit by bit and allow for the reader to approach the novel with a keener eye.  For some critics, this action may be considered a waste because the novel is flawed, but for others, The Grapes of Wrath is worthy of hard criticism because it can withstand it with fortitude.

Works Cited

Barry, Micheal..” “Between Inaction and Immoral Action: Tom Joad’s Self-Definition The           Betrayal of Brotherhood in the Work of John Steinbeck: Cain Sign. Ed. Michael J. Meyer.         Vol. 33. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen, 2000. 255-78. Print.

Barry, Micheal G. “Degrees of Meditation and their Political Value in Steinbeck’s The Grapes of             Wrath.” The Steinbeck Question: New Essays in Criticism. Ed. Donald R. Noble. Troy,       NY: Whitston, 1993. 108-23. Print. 

Cassuto, David. “Turning Wine into Water: Water as Privileged Signifier in The Grapes of            Wrath.” Steinbeck and the Environment: Interdisciplinary Approaches. 55-75. Tuscaloosa, AL: U of Alabama P, 1997. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 24 Feb.      2014.

Eckert, Ken. “Exodus Inverted: A New Look at The Grapes of Wrath.”  Religion And The            Arts 13.3 (2009): 340-357.MLA International Bibliography. Web. 24 Feb. 2014.

Goggans, Jan. "'Houses Left Empty On The Land': Keeping The Postcolonial House In The          Grapes Of Wrath." Steinbeck Review 7.2 (2010): 39-60. MLA International Bibliography.        Web. 6 Feb. 2014.

Hedrick, Joan. “Mother Earth and the Earth Mother: The Recasting of Myth in Steinbeck’s The    Grapes of Wrath.” Twentieth Century Interpretations of The Grapes of Wrath. Ed.        Robert Con Davis. Eaglecliff, NJ: Prentiss-Hall. 1982. 134-43. Print.

Kocela, Chris. “A Postmodern Steinbeck, or Rose of Sharon Meets Oedipa Maas.” The Critical    Response to John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Ed. Barbara A. Heavilin. Westport,         CT: Greenwood, 2000. 245-66. Print.

McKay, Nellie Y. “‘Happy [?]-Wife-and-Motherdom’: The Portrayal of Ma Joad in John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath.” 1990. John Steinbeck. Ed. Harold Bloom. New ed.             New York: Bloom's Literary Criticism, 2008. 33-51. Print.

Motley, Warren. "From Patriarchy to Matriarchy: Ma Joad's Role in The Grapes of Wrath."           1982. John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea   House, 2007. 51-65. Print.

Owens, Louis and Hector Torres. “Dialogic Structure and Levels of Discourse in Steinbeck’s        The Grapes of Wrath.” 1989. The Critical Response to John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of      Wrath. Ed. Barbara A. Heavilin. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000. 119-36. Print.

Railsback, Brian. “The Darwinian Grapes of Wrath.” 2000. John Steinbeck. Ed. Harold Bloom.     New ed. New York: Bloom's Literary Criticism, 2008. 149-58. Print.

Salter, Christopher L. “John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath as a Primer for Cultural       Geography.” 1981. Critical Essays on Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath. Ed. John Ditsky.         Boston, MA: G.K. Hall, 1989. 138-52. Print.

Shaw, Patrick W. "A Fugitive Upon the Earth: Tom Joad and the Myth of Cain." The Betrayal of             Brotherhood in the Work of John Steinbeck: Cain Sign. Ed. Michael J. Meyer. Vol. 33.       Lewiston: Edwin Mellen, 2000. 239-53. Print.

Smith, Andy. "Mutualism And Group Selection In The Grapes Of Wrath." Steinbeck Review7.1   (2010): 35-48. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 28 Feb. 2014.

Timmerman, John H. “The Squatter Circle in The Grapes of Wrath.” 1989. The Critical      Response to John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Ed. Barbara A. Heavilin. Westport,         CT: Greenwood, 2000. 137-47. Print.

Visser, Nicholas. “Audience and Closure in The Grapes of Wrath.” 1994. The Critical Response   to John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Ed. Barbara A. Heavilin. Westport, CT:         Greenwood, 2000. 201-19. Print. In