2. Read and listen to Steinbeck’s Nobel Prize acceptance speech. Consider the following: What does he suggest is the duty of an author? What is his underlying purpose in the speech? What devices does he use to accomplish his purpose?
3. How does The Grapes of Wrath function to fulfill his idea of what literature should do? What is Steinbeck’s comment on the American Dream? How does it differ from Fitzgerald’s comment in The Great Gatsby?
Assignment specifics:
Respond to (reflect, agree/disagree with, speculate about...) a topic addressed in the American Dream video and/or Steinbeck's acceptance speech and address how your observations are illuminated, represented, contrasted, etc., in either or both pieces of literature: The Great Gatsby and The Grapes of Wrath . Responses should be 200-250 words and must include specific quotes from the article. In addition, unless you are the first student to respond, you should address a comment made by one of your classmates. (What you choose to address from your classmate does not necessarily need to be directly related to your topic of discussion.) As always, follow the conventions of standard written English. This is an academic assignment, not a Facebook posting...
Due Date: Thursday, 10/30/14
Food for thought...
“The ancient commission of the writer has not changed. He is charged with exposing our many grievous faults and failures, with dredging up to the light our dark and dangerous dreams for the purpose of improvement.” This is the quote from Steinbeck's nobel prize speech stood out to me the most. Steinbeck claims that the duty of the writer is simple, he or she is simply charged with pointing out to the public the flaws and failures of a society and shed light on our successes. Later in his speech, Steinbeck describes this duty as a “God like power” filled with lots of responsibilities. I love this quote because it shows that Steinbeck thinks the duty of a writer is to do far more than just entertain and tell stories, he believes that a writer has a moral obligation similar to the duties of God to point out the flaws in a society.
ReplyDeleteSteinbeck’s interpretation of the duties of a writer have been highlighted by many of the great novelists throughout history. For example, George Orwell points out the flaws of communism and government control through 1984 and Animal Farm. Aldous Huxley points out the flaws of modern society in Brave New World and Fitzgerald points out the shortsightedness of the roaring twenties in The Great Gatsby. However the best example of Steinbeck’s ideas is in The Grapes of Wrath. Steinbeck wrote many novels about the flaws of society such as The Grapes of Wrath and Of Mice and Men. His social commentary on tragedies such as the great depression serve to remind humanity of their failures and flaws.
The Grapes of Wrath is the greatest example of an author’s responsibility. Steinbeck uses the Joads as a sample family going through the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl. Steinbeck describes the way people acted during this time period and shows how some people acted well in tough situations yet others acted irrationally and selfishly. Steinbeck highlights how different people reacted to the same situation and provided social commentary on socialism throughout his novel, something that many writers of his time period would be afraid to portray.
For these reasons, Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath is a perfect example of the role the author must assume according to Steinbeck in his Nobel prize speech.
Bringing up the multiple novels was a great point made by Alex. Many novels love the point out the flaws in many topics which are relevant during the time they are writing the novel. In The Great Gatsby, Fitzgerald shows how people are cherishing materialistic items rather than true relationships and the consequences that can come. Because of such a need for material things there is a decline in the American Dream and a rise of social classes and money. All of this was a point Fitzgerald made to show the times of the 1920s, and how people spent money constantly and without ease.
DeleteAlex brings up a good point when he mentions that “The Grapes of Wrath” is one of Steinbeck’s messages to the public saying that humanity has many flaws within itself. As you read through the novel, there are many examples of the flaws that are present in humanity. One of the biggest flaws that can be seen is greed. This greed is represented by the bank and is shown though the action of the banks repossessing the farmland and forcing out all of the tenant farmers. However, Steinbeck also gives you a character that is able to communicate the point of William Faulkner, and his topic of “a tragedy of universal fear so long sustained that there were no longer problems of the spirit, so that only the human heart in conflict with itself seemed worth writing about”. This Idea is shown through Jim Casy in “The Grapes of Wrath” were he has lost belief in the Holy Spirit and now begins to focus his belief on the human spirit. Chandra makes good point when she says that there were many pieces of writing that had to deal with the relevant situation that was going on during that current time period. For example, the novel “The Great Gatsby” takes place during the Roaring Twenties which was seen as a nonstop party. There was also a rise in crime, specifically bootlegging and this idea comes up in the novel were Jay Gatsby is believed to be a bootlegger himself and that is where all of his money could possibly be coming from. These two novel emphasize the point that many of society problems were discussed through many peices of famous literature.
DeleteIn many well-known novels, one of the main themes that are commonly expressed is how humanity always has the strength to endure some sort of conflict and get over that hurdle. At the Nobel Banquet in Stockholm, Steinbeck, a Nobel Peace Prize recipient, addressed some of the duties that an author should make when writing a novel. One of his main points is authors should always show how humanity has endured the harshest times in the past. Because of this, authors also can alter the minds of the readers, and even show them a light in times of despair. The quote that stood out to me the most in his speech is as follows, “In the endless war against weakness and despair, these are the bright rally-flags of hope and of emulation.” Novels are a way to help and to see the mistakes humans have done in the past such that they aren’t to be repeated again.
ReplyDeleteSteinbeck applies the rules that he mentioned in his speech in the novels he himself wrote. A great example is The Grapes of Wrath. The Joads have to endure the Great Depression and the hatred of the natives of California. This applies to many of the families that had to go through this move to the West. From the novel readers learn what happened and how to prevent something like this to happen ever again in America.
I find it interesting about how Chandra mentioned the themes of humanity and strength after a conflict being prominent in literature. This can be shown through F. Scott Fitzgerald's novel The Great Gatsby as well, though Fitzgeralds approach to exposing it is different. Instead of showing a picture of humanity through unity, he describes of individuals who are careless and shallow with no humanity. By giving characters such as those of “new money”, who venture on their own, he is able to show their aloof nature and further shallowness. One example is when the guests show up to Gatsby's parties, but don’t even know him as a person. Likewise, it exposes the upper class in their indecencies, such as how they try and ignore the people in valley of ashes when passing by on their way to New York. Also shown was how even after Myrtles death, the characters were still as impulsive and unsympathetic as they began: Gatsby was clandestine, Daisy failed to confess, and Tom agreed to tell Myrtle’s husband Gatsby killed her only in spite of his hatred for Gatsby. In essence, by providing these characters flawed motives, the reader can see that the characters do not gain, but lose the humanity within themselves. Humanity is, in contrast, the strength of coping with others after a conflict to build the relationships of friendship and morality such as the families joining together on the move to California in John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath.
DeleteI agree with Chandra in finding that one of the more interesting points that Steinbeck makes when giving his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize, is that a writer must in some way demonstrate the struggles that people go through every day. I find this particularly interesting because, for me, in good literature, there is a plot or problem that everyone and anyone can relate to. This is apparent in John Steinbeck’s, The Grapes of Wrath. There are many things that one can relate to whether it be, living in poverty, moving locations, family struggles or discrimination.
DeleteOne thing that I found particularly interesting was in the American Dream video, there was a man who said that he believed the American Dream was built off of “false dreams and materialistic lies”. This is interesting to me because after just finishing The Great Gatsby, we see the effects of the materialism and selfish dreams of people most of the time results in unhappiness and in the case of the 1920s, this materialism helped bring on the Great Depression which was one of the main topics discussed by Steinbeck in The Grapes of Wrath. I agree with this man to an extent though, I believe that the American Dream is not as attainable as it seems. With financial struggles and the state of America today it is much harder for someone to come from nothing and become extremely successful. It is still possible, but much more difficult than before.
John Steinbeck's Banquet Speech that he had given at the City Hall in Stockholm, December 10, 1962, was the true telling of one of the greatest works than an author could possibly write. His speech had metaphors that exhibited the purpose of a writer. He tackled the issues of what one must write about, in order to appeal to the intellect of humans. In Steinbeck’s speech he has said, “…it as a tragedy of universal fear so long sustained that there were no longer problems of the spirit, so that only the human heart in conflict with itself seemed worth writing about.” This quotation from Steinbeck’s speech truly resonated with me. The key phrase that I had been most drawn to was, “only the human heart in conflict with itself seemed worth writing about.” The purpose of the authors was to strike the intellect of their readers. Society had come to a point where the external and internal conflicts of one’s heart in itself, had been a central focus. This is evident through the great works of “The Grapes of Wrath.” Several characters within this acclaimed piece of literature experience some form of conflict and affliction through with a change in their moral character if affected. I strongly agree with Chandra’s comment pertaining to a common theme of ‘humanity always has the strength to endure some sort of conflict and get over that hurdle.’ Chandra had also addressed the specific ‘duties’ to that of an author, and how Steinbeck incorporated this into his novel. Speaking more on the topic of humanity, this is even more evident through the character of Jim Casy (J.C.) as he experiences internal moral conflicts early on in the novel.
DeleteJohn Steinbecks speech when receiving the nobel peace prize spoke of the importance of writers in creating explicit representations in literature. One quote that I found most interesting was when he declared, “Literature was not promulgated by a pale and emasculated critical priesthood singing their litanies in empty churches- nor is it a game for the cloistered elect, the tinhorn mendicants of low calorie despair.”
ReplyDeleteThis quote elucidates the importance of exposes in literature, and that the only way we can see the world for its significance is through an unaltered perception. Throughout literature, there have been many works that have accurately depicted the events and lives of the people during the time such as F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby showing the excessiveness of the roaring twenties, as well as John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, that provides an accurate image of the struggles during the Dust Bowl.
Steinbeck believes it’s important to retain the accuracy of emotions and events in stories, and not to belie the truth of the situations. In his novel, The Grapes of Wrath, he describes the desperation of families simplifying wanting jobs to provide for their families after being kicked off their homeland.
Rendering an accurate view of the issue and its details is the most important part in literature. Without it, the work has no substance, nor does it have any “calories” to sustain the reader of the time and events. Steinbeck believes it is this notion, of proper representation of the people of the time periods in literature, that provides representation are the most noteworthy and important works.
I think Greg makes a very good point, as it was exceedingly important to Steinbeck for his works to be authentic. As has been said once or twice, Steinbeck really tried to expose injustices and propose solutions in his writing, and to do this most effectively, he felt he had to see first hand the problems the average American faced. In this way, his writing is a sort of investigative journalism. I think, though, too, it’s important to note that, as Greg also states, to a great degree Steinbeck attempts to eliminate bias. He shows the struggles of the migrants in great detail, yes, but he makes very apparent to the reader the moral dilemmas of those interacting with them. And this only makes things more authentic. Life is gray, and he presents it as such.
DeleteAs for Fitzgerald, he quite literally lived his writing. They say “write what you know”, and this is really what he did. So many of Fitzgerald’s works have to do with the culture of the twenties that was his experience, but this isn’t a negative thing. Fitzgerald is remembered as a great American writer for a reason, despite his arguably narrow subject matter. But again, this simply adds a level of authenticity to his work which I think Steinbeck is trying to say is essential to any good work of fiction.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn John Steinbeck’s acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize in Literature, dating 1962, he brings to light a very serious perspective on his occupation. His main point is that writers are meant to write for the sake of informing others of man’s “many grievous faults and failures” and that, if they don’t take this duty seriously, then they have “no dedication nor any membership in literature”. It follows that man is meant to improve and grow by means of learning from past mistakes. This philosophy is valid and also gives higher importance to the career of writers. Steinbeck’s tone seems annoyed by how factitious others are about his job. He doesn’t understand why others don’t see how novels influence society holistically, something he most likely concluded by the lack of serious and enthusiastic responses to the word “writer”.
ReplyDeleteChandra addresses the quote “In the endless war against weakness and despair, these are the bright rally-flags of hope and of emulation.” and comments, “Novels are a way to help and to see the mistakes humans have done in the past such that they aren’t to be repeated again.” In addition to her valid comment, Steinbeck’s purpose with this sentence was for the audience to understand the salience of books in society for means of motivation. He also says that novels are proof of man’s ability to strive towards perfectibility. Thus, the books that writers create are actually leaders by example for others to follow or rather “emulate”; they give hope “against weakness and despair”. I’ve never thought about books in this sort of manner, so I found this interesting. I think that books are undoubtedly a source of knowledge and recreation. I never really saw them, however, as a beacon of hope or a leader for me to mimic.
This is an interesting point; while it is plain as day that Steinbeck is claiming that the point of writing is to point out the previous flaws of man, I had not considered why he might want to do so. 'Striving towards perfectibility' seems like a far-fetched goal for someone who opens his discussion of man by calling us fearful people and further going into how writers must identify the bad and the good, but as was mentioned in class he does manage to be both an optimist and a realist mixed into one.
DeleteThe quote that caught my attention the most from John Steinbeck’s Speech at the Nobel Banquet was "Humanity has been passing through a gray and desolate time of confusion. My great predecessor, William Faulkner, speaking here, referred to it as a tragedy of universal fear so long sustained that there were no longer problems of the spirit, so that only the human heart in conflict with itself seemed worth writing about.” This quote interested me the most because one can get many different meanings from it whether connecting it back to the time setting in which he delivered the speech (with fear of destruction in the undertones of society) or an almost entirely different idea. I side more with the entire different idea in the way that I dissected this quote. The words “universal fear so long sustained that there were no longer problems of the spirit” leads me to think of when one is in physical pain long enough that they gain an immunity towards it. I believe Steinbeck was trying to state how the spirit of humanity is immune especially with his connection back to William Faulkner. Faulkner had a strong belief in humanity’s ability to endure as well as fight and he conveyed that in his books just as Steinbeck did in the Grapes of Wrath in which many families migrate to the west, fighting for a better life. The spirit of humanity is immune however the hearts of the individual human beings are always changing, always conflicting with others. Steinbeck seemed to convey that the faults lie in the human heart and it is that which writers write about. It is the human qualities of simply having flaws that is worth writing about.
ReplyDeleteKarma focuses on how seriously Steinbeck portrayed his feelings on his occupation as a writer of literature. She states how “His main point is that writers are meant to write for the sake of informing others of man’s ‘many grievous faults and failures’”. I found this interesting because it relates to how Steinbeck really sees humanity. It’s stated how humanity has many faults and failures, but humanity is not in itself only faults and failures. This also shows his undying optimism in humanity’s ability to become greater than it has been in the past and even become greater than that. This relates back to his quote about the human heart being in conflict with itself with writers being the ultimate helper to help resolve the conflict by having humanity reflect on it’s decisions through literature.
I agree with Lolas’ comment on the whole idea that the spirit of humanity is strong, and the whole fault is in the hearts of the individuals a part of that group and the fact that there’s constant change in their beliefs and actions. The whole idea of human failure and the experiences one learns from these so called actions is what makes literature so famous.
DeleteWhile listening to Steinbeck describe the duties of a good writer, it occurred to me that maybe he was a bit too narrow-minded in his descriptions. Specifically, I believe that rather than stating generally what a writer does, he is presenting the qualities of his own writing, and claiming them to be what good writing should include. Now, I’m not saying this is a fault by any means. No one knows everything, and regardless of how general and all-encompassing you attempt to be, your opinions and statements will still be biased by your own experiences.
ReplyDeleteHowever, using Grapes of Wrath as a context (although this applies to his other works too), and going point by point, this should become apparent. Firstly: “He is charged with exposing our many grievous faults and failures, with dredging up to the light our dark and dangerous dreams for the purpose of improvement.” In Grapes, this very clearly applies to most of the people and themes of this book. Steinbeck obviously saw a problem with Capitalism and man’s apparently prolific inhumanity towards man (and, one could argue, the two are innately intertwined in his view). Steinbeck was something of a journalist in his writing, reporting on the human condition at the time and the injustices which were occurring. This novel, though, discusses at length the way society will exploit desperation and poverty, but more simply, it touches on faults of human nature. This is evident in the motif of things being very gray; e.g., the migrants are not wholly good and those antagonizing them are not wholly bad. In the second part of this quote, “dreams” are very clearly translated to Grapes - this book deals heavily with a definition of the American dream (as does much classic American literature), and not all of these are positive. While the migrants do want a sustainable livelihood and a new place to call home, it’s important to keep in mind that those with thousands of acres of land who keep it to themselves and keep themselves wealthy have a dream, which just happens to be exactly where they are. But in all likelihood, at one point, they dreamed of reaching that place as well. “Improvements”, however, is slightly more ambiguous. This could refer to the need for the antagonistic characters to have more altruistic dreams, or for the migrants to be less naive.
Moving on, Steinbeck also claims that one of the duties of writing is for it to include “hope and...emulation”. There are spots here and there of hope in Grapes, such as the man helping the family with his sedan, but there are quite a few times when, in the intercalary chapters, he directly speaks to the reader, taking time and with consideration for each type of audience. Finally, Steinbeck continues on to say that “a writer who does not passionately believe in the perfectibility of man, has no dedication”. In Grapes, it is shown multiple times that people can change and personal improvement is entirely achievable. However, if you look at other classics, things are usually not so peachy. But also, Steinbeck himself was an optimist. Socialist that he was, he truly believed that one day this was something that could become widespread in America and would lead to good change.
Ultimately, what I’m attempting to point out is that Steinbeck defines a writers’ duties in this way because these are the things which he’s done in his works and career. Does classic literature, to an extent, typically have some of these aspects? Sure it does. But Steinbeck has every single one of the things he ascribes to the duties, because he is basing it off of his own experience.
To me the quote in Steinbeck’s Nobel Prize speech that caught my attention was “With humanity’s long proud history of standing firm against natural enemies, sometimes in the face of almost certain defeat and extinction, we would be cowardly and stupid to leave the field on the eve of our greatest potential victory”. This quote seems rather interesting to me because there is so much packed into this one sentence that is true when it comes to the American Dream. The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck himself , discusses the whole idea of mixed messages when it comes to the true meaning behind the American Dream.. During the Great Depression the continent itself was in poverty and the dust bowl made matters worse. However the quote is more focused on the progress humanity goes through when it comes to being conquered in a literal sense, and the whole idea that giving up shouldn’t be an option when it comes to difficulties because the feeling one receives after stepping over those milestones is what people should aim for because the prize is priceless.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Damien that The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck was based off of the American dream, that the duty of an author is to expose the flaws of society of the day, and that the novel is his portrayal of the flaws in the society of that time and their view of the American dream. Plowing through difficulties is one of the major themes in The Great Gatsby, and that failure is not an option when it is a moral difficulty. During the 1920s,like in The Great Gatsby, the American dream was less about surviving into the next day as it was becoming wealthy and making sure the world knows that. The Great Gatsby and The Grapes of Wrath both point out flaws in society. Fitzgerald used that by explaining the hollowness of the upper class and Steinbeck through the Dust Bowl and the replacement of sharecroppers with machinery. Authors purposes are to search through the mixed messages of their day and expose the flaws.
DeleteOne thing that I had found very interesting after watching the American Dream video is the fact that everyone had a different view on what is the American Dream. Somewhere cynical if the American Dream is beneficial to aspire towards, while other thought the American Dream is to make your economic status better than what it was before. Not only that there was two general viewpoint, that each person had a different answer that would vary. One person said that his friend is achieving the American Dream because he was homeless before now he has an apartment and a job, making his life better. Another person definition was to live comfortably and/or to have money. You can see the different viewpoints of the American Dream in the Great Gatsby and the Grapes of Wrath. The Great Gatsby was more about the American Dream as a negative, leading people to do anything in their power to get ahead, Gatsby going into illegal business to get rich. But at the same time it speak volume what could be achieved in America; the fact that even though Gatsby comes from such a poor background, he was still able to become extremely wealthy. In the Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck was able to portray those who were skeptical trying something new that could potentially backfire or give a great reward and prefer to stay where they are, Mules Grave and Grandpa. Which they have a point, the Joads family will have to deal with discrimination, rejection, and the fact that they may not even survive the journey.
ReplyDeleteAs Alex quoted, “The ancient commission of the writer has not changed. He is charged with exposing our many grievous faults and failures, with dredging up to the light our dark and dangerous dreams for the purpose of improvement.” and he stated that “that the duty of the writer is simple, he or she is simply charged with pointing out to the public the flaws and failures of a society and shed light on our successes.” The writers of the those two books were able to capture why the American Dream is both beneficial and harmful, point out the flaws and the successes of aspiring for the American Dream.
Something I found from the American dream was that in the video, everyone said in some way or another that the American dream is about improving oneself. One man said that it is full of false promises and goals; however, everyone else said that it is about growing from unsuccessful to being stable with no flaws, or having a roof over your head. The opinions of the American dream were all different, though. Everyone believed that the American dream was focused on a different part of life than the other people believed it to be. The characters in The Great Gatsby fit into the category of improving oneself monetarily while the characters in The Grapes of Wrath fit into the category of improving oneself through teamwork and through hoping for a better tomorrow, not only monetarily, but actually reaching out and helping others gain their goals. Both novels contrast the American dream of two different groups. In The Great Gatsby, the dream of East Egg was around staying stable, having a big mansion but not spending oneself into oblivion, while in West Egg, it was about showing off wealth by partying and having the grandest mansion. The Grapes of Wrath compared the dreams of the Okies to the dream of the people who run their lives, like the banks and the car dealers. Both authors were very clear as to their opinion of how America should be with their plots. Both show the main characters striving for improvement economically and socially. The Great Gatsby shows how some individuals have become rich almost overnight, starting from almost nothing, while The Grapes of Wrath shows the process of striving to acquire the dream, not having already obtained it but striving to obtain it.
ReplyDeleteMost fascinating to me is not the obvious change that the American Dream has undergone throughout the generations, but rather the sheer hopelessness expressed by both Steinbeck in his speech and in the video that we watched. In the video, we can see that ‘success’ and ‘moving up’ have been delegated to living in one’s own home- house or apartment or what have you- and maintaining such a residence. In comparison, Steinbeck says that William Faulkner “referred to [humanity] as a tragedy of universal fear so long sustained that there were no longer problems of the spirit”. While not directly related to the American Dream, it shows what was thought of it, even in the 1960s.
ReplyDeleteBefore Steinbeck explains what the purpose of a writer is, and how it is to capture both the good and the evil of man, he cites Faulkner calling humans fearful. It gives one that initial impression- that people are, as a whole, fearful; they are not hopeful or optimistic or able to move up in the world, they are just fearful.This is a clearly negative portrayal of humanity, indicating a prediction of poor prospects in the future.
The situation of both time periods doesn’t help- in 1962, Americans worried about nuclear war, and most remembered the dreadful life that was the Great Depression. And now, in the early 2010s, many Americans are worried about our standing with the world, and most remember the recent recession- and still suffer from the effects of it. In fact, there is little difference between the two, indicating that in times of trouble, the American Dream becomes being able to live and sustain oneself.
One of the topics that I found interesting from the acceptance speech was near the ending when Steinbeck begins to talk about the idea of a man. He says “Man himself has become our greatest hazard and our only hope.” The reason that I found this interesting is because of how ambiguous it is. Steinbeck actually describes this idea in his novel “The Grapes of Wrath” when he begins to talk about Manself. Manself is described as the spirit that drives progress and allows the human race to move forward in equality and justice, basically meaning that you need spirit to progress. However Steinbeck also mentions that man himself is a hazard, which is interesting to think about because normally if one thing is your greatest hope then it would not be thought of as hazardous. How in chapter one of “The Grapes of Wrath” it explains how women and children do not feel uneasy about current situations because they have their man figure to guide them through the rough times. Perhaps it is hazardous when the male figure is at a loss of what to do next is when situations are dangerous and progress is at a state of halt because without the male figure of a family then there will be not progress. This exemplifies the idea that Man could have a positive or negative effect on hope and progress.
ReplyDeleteIn the video on the American dream there were two peoples comments which seemed to contrast but in actuality were different perspectives on the same issue. One of the men who answered stated that he believed that the American dream is materialist and is a wanting of possessions. A second man who had a lack of material possessions merely desired stability. Although these dreams seem different in appearance, they are actually quite similar. This is due to the fact that the materialist values which classically accompany the American dream is a continuation on the mere desire to be financially stable. This is reflecting in Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby when the people desire to gain so much and new money is so extravagant with their money, whereas old money was much more reserved and conservative with money. Again we see in Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath it is seen that the people who have things are the most stable and the people who own land have a better chance. In the Great Depression there was so little that everyone wanted enough for their own. This caused a more materialist perspective because of the fact that they wanted to be safe and not starve.
ReplyDeleteThis is similar to what Javier said when he discussed the different views of the American dream when he said “One person said that his friend is achieving the American Dream because he was homeless before now he has an apartment and a job, making his life better.” This is due to the fact that American dream changes person to person. We even see this in the Grapes of Wrath, where even though all of the Joads want to get to California they have different long term goals, and different versions of the American dream.
I myself always seem to find it challenging to talk only about one particular piece I found intriguing/interesting, so again I will talk about two things I found interesting. I found it very interesting that both Steinbeck and Fitzgerald are extremely good at condensing their writing, but packing so much meaning and value into it. In the beginning of Steinbecks acceptance speech he states, “Literature was not promulgated by a pale and emasculated critical priesthood singing their litanies in empty churches - nor is it a game for the cloistered elect, the tinhorn mendicants of low calorie despair.” From my interpretation of that quote I think Steinbeck means to say that Literature was not and is not made by the very well off, nor was it for the very weak and impoverished. Literature was culminated because it was a need. After reading this quote I immediately thought of the opening in The Great Gatsby, “Whenever you feel like criticizing any one,” he told me, “just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had.” He didn’t say any more, but we’ve always been unusually communicative in a reserved way, and I understood that he meant a great deal more than that.” -(http://lit.genius.com/F-scott-fitzgerald-the-great-gatsby-chapter-i-annotated).
ReplyDeleteI also found it interesting that Steinbeck brought up the point that humans, in particular man, had and has excerpted and arisen to the power of a “God”, putting nature and humanity in harms way. I wrote initially that (quote) the duty of a writer was to write because humanity needs it, stay true to yourself. Uphold your beliefs, reflect on them. Humanity is destined for greatness or destruction, choice (unquote). However, I can now say that The true duty of an author is what I stated in the previous paragraph, but with an added twist. Steinbeck also cautions us (humans) that we are a harm to ourselves. He brings up that technology is constantly advancing, and if literature does not speak human values to us, we will lose them. I think Keshon brings up a very good point of how the concept of manself in The Grapes of Wrath, can be seen in Steinbecks acceptance speech. Manself is the spirit that drives progress and allows the human race to move forward. I think that Steinbeck means to tell us that we need to stay strong as a species, even through the toughest times, if we keep hope everything will fall into place.