Annotated Bibliography Keough, Trent. "The Dystopia Factor: Industrial Capitalism in Sybil and The Grapes of Wrath." Utopian Studies 4.1 (1993): 38-54. Keough criticizes industrial capitalism by discussing two novels “Sybil” and “The Grapes of Wrath.” He describes that these two novels are socio-political that document “the spiritual disintegration” and “ideological failure” of industrial societies. This novel moves from reflecting social problems and the difficult lives of ordinary people to the big national ideology. Keough says that Steinbeck criticizes the American idea of “agrarian Utopia” which is supported by the Republican’s homestead principle to reactivate idealism in contrast to capitalism’s selfish designs. Keough
…show more content…
According to Owens, Steinbeck is sympathetic to the farm workers and to their dire situation as a powerless little people driven in the devastating path of “corporate America.” Owens says that Steinbeck’s doesn’t aim to sentimentalize the characters themselves, but he focuses in his “interchapters” on the big idea of “the panoramic dimension of socioeconomic tragedy.” Through the Joad family’s suffering, we will understand the suffering of whole country’s families. Owens describes the way that Steinbeck is skillfully depicting the Joads’ pain and makes them as a representative family to the country’s main anguish. One of these little people sufferings is the death of their family members as it is described in the death of Grandma, by which Steinbeck wants to say that many families in the country face the same fate. Another thing to desentimentalize is Steinbeck’s treatment of both oppressed workers and the oppressors. Owens claims that both sides are “greedy, selfish, lazy, blood thirsty and ignorant. He blames both workers and the owners of lands when he describes it as migrants’ “culpability” when they are also responsible for what had happened to their lands, but they are a victim of inhuman economic “monsters.” He ends his article by saying that no one is innocent and both are …show more content…
He cites Professor O. B. Duncan, who discusses these social and economic problems when he describes farm migrant conditions as logical results of “privation, insecurity, low income, inadequate standards of living, impoverishment in matters of education and cultural opportunities, and a lack of spiritual satisfaction.” Professor Duncan criticizes how farmers’ migrant situation is bad and how hard their lives are. Shockley reviews some critiques to this viewpoint such as some editorials in Oklahoma which said that the Joad don’t represent all families in Oklahoma. They didn’t refuse the novel’s truth but they asked for compensation when this novel is considered as a “disgrace to the state.” Some other editors defend Steinbeck’s novel and sympathize with the Joad family conditions such as Mary E. Lemon who considers this novel to be economic, social and political “preachments.” She wrote that this novel is a “keynote” of domestic depression and the best to describe the hard life situation in front of our eyes. No less empathetically, Shockley cites P.A Oliver who claims that this novel arouses sympathy of million poor farmers and tenants “who have been brought to ruin because of the development of machinery” and have been ruled by merciless contradictions of capitalism. This article ends with the refusal of Oklahoma official when they don’t agree with what Steinbeck’s
According to Owens, Steinbeck is sympathetic to the farm workers and to their dire situation as a powerless little people driven in the devastating path of “corporate America.” Owens says that Steinbeck’s doesn’t aim to sentimentalize the characters themselves, but he focuses in his “interchapters” on the big idea of “the panoramic dimension of socioeconomic tragedy.” Through the Joad family’s suffering, we will understand the suffering of whole country’s families. Owens describes the way that Steinbeck is skillfully depicting the Joads’ pain and makes them as a representative family to the country’s main anguish. One of these little people sufferings is the death of their family members as it is described in the death of Grandma, by which Steinbeck wants to say that many families in the country face the same fate. Another thing to desentimentalize is Steinbeck’s treatment of both oppressed workers and the oppressors. Owens claims that both sides are “greedy, selfish, lazy, blood thirsty and ignorant. He blames both workers and the owners of lands when he describes it as migrants’ “culpability” when they are also responsible for what had happened to their lands, but they are a victim of inhuman economic “monsters.” He ends his article by saying that no one is innocent and both are …show more content…
He cites Professor O. B. Duncan, who discusses these social and economic problems when he describes farm migrant conditions as logical results of “privation, insecurity, low income, inadequate standards of living, impoverishment in matters of education and cultural opportunities, and a lack of spiritual satisfaction.” Professor Duncan criticizes how farmers’ migrant situation is bad and how hard their lives are. Shockley reviews some critiques to this viewpoint such as some editorials in Oklahoma which said that the Joad don’t represent all families in Oklahoma. They didn’t refuse the novel’s truth but they asked for compensation when this novel is considered as a “disgrace to the state.” Some other editors defend Steinbeck’s novel and sympathize with the Joad family conditions such as Mary E. Lemon who considers this novel to be economic, social and political “preachments.” She wrote that this novel is a “keynote” of domestic depression and the best to describe the hard life situation in front of our eyes. No less empathetically, Shockley cites P.A Oliver who claims that this novel arouses sympathy of million poor farmers and tenants “who have been brought to ruin because of the development of machinery” and have been ruled by merciless contradictions of capitalism. This article ends with the refusal of Oklahoma official when they don’t agree with what Steinbeck’s