Thread: Grapes of Wrath Essay

I see that this forum is here for essays, among other things. I figured "what the hell" and decided to post my essay on The Grapes of Wrath just to get some feedback. So enjoy, and if you havn't read the book, I highly recommend it. Thanks all.

Here's the prompt I was given:

Define the word "archetype." Do you find that Tom Joad is an
archetype for the union organizer seeking justice? Or - do you find
Casy to be an archetype of a self-sacrificing martyr? Trace the
actions and behavior of one of these characters and see if you find any
patterns that you might characterize as archetypal. You do not need
to summarize all that happens to the character; instead, select those
aspects of his behavior that seem significant and that suggest the
archetypal pattern.

Jim Casey: The Martyr

The Grapes of Wrath, By John Steinbeck, is one of America’s most well known classics. The story tells the tale of the Joad family’s escape from the Dust Bowl of Oklahoma to conditions not much better, if at all, in the so called promise land of California. When looking at the characters of The Grapes of Wrath, it is easy to see that a few of them fall into well defined archetypes; an archetype being an idealized model. Ma Joad can easily be described as the “earth mother”; Tom Joad, the “seeker”; and Jim Casey, the “martyr.” Not only is Jim Casey the “martyr”, but America’s most well known martyr, Jesus Christ.

Jim Casey and Jesus Christ have the same initials. Steinbeck did not do this on accident. Just to hammer it in, though, Steinbeck had the character allude to being Christ-like, ”I been in the hills, thinkin’, almost you might say like Jesus went into the wilderness to think His way out of a mess of troubles" (109). To top it off, Casey died for the plight of his people, the strikers, just as Christ died for the plight of his people, the Jews. This is not to say that Steinbeck was preaching the doctrine of Christianity in his work, in fact, far from. Christ represents a transition from Judaism to something else; a something else that became Christianity. Just as Casey, a former Christian preacher, represents a transition from Christianity to something else.

That “something else” is most certainly socialism. Socialism in The Grapes of Wrath is represented by the government camp the Joads move to in the middle of the story. Socialism is a concept created by Karl Marx, and Marx is quoted saying, “religion is the opiate of the people.” Steinbeck adds this “opiate” to the government camp in the form of a religious minority dead set against the camps one outlet of enjoyment, the Saturday night dance. This religious minority was included, to show, while Casey emulates Christ, The Grapes of Wrath is not preaching Christianity. What it is “preaching,” is socialism, and, even more so, the evils of capitalism, a system not present in the government camp.

If there is one dominate theme in The Grapes of Wrath, it is: capitalism is evil. It is the capitalist society that drives the Joads from their farm; it is the capitalist society that creates the heinous conditions of the Hoovervilles; and it is the capitalist society that keeps the dust bowl migrants homeless and starving. America, arguably, is a Christian nation, and even more so during the time period in which The Grapes of Wrath was released. What better way could there have been for Steinbeck to drive his theme home than by having capitalism kill the representation of Jesus Christ. Casey did not even get a public execution, like Christ. Casey was killed in the black of the night with a club. Steinbeck’s message is clear: Capitalism kills everything, even Jesus Christ.

Jim Casey is one of the more beloved characters in The Grapes of Wrath. This is typical of the martyr archetype, and certainly typical of the martyr he emulates, Jesus Christ. To rewrite the Grapes of Wrath and have Jim Casey’s death become a driving force of social change would be wrong. Steinbeck wanted to convey to people that capitalism a horrible scourge on society and did so by killing Jesus Christ on a dark night in the middle of nowhere.

Aside from spelling and usage errors, I have a few problems with this piece. Perhaps the most glaring misstatement is this:

'Socialism is a concept created by Karl Marx, and Marx is quoted saying, “religion is the opiate of the people".'

To take the least important first, the words of Marx regarding religion are almost always misquoted, and by taking them out of context the meaning is skewed. What Marx said was:

'Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people (...ist das Opium des Volkes) ." - Karl Marx in Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right, 1843

By pulling the words 'It is the opium of the people' out of context the impression is given that the people are being drugged by someone, presumably by those with power or wealth. Marx' meaning becomes clear when we see the context. Religion is 'the sigh of the oppressed creature...', not the weapon of the oppressor. People turn to religion when there is no other hope.

Far more serious is the first part of the statement, that 'Socialism is a concept created by Karl Marx...' This is not true.

First, the concepts of socialism have existed in one form or another throughout history. Two generations before Marx the basic principles of socialism were incorporated in the origins of the French revolution in1789. Remember 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity'? It was a French journalist, Pierre Leroux, who first used the term in its modern sense in 1832 while editor of the Paris journal Le Globe.

Marx' best-known work is the Communist Manifesto, published in 1848. In it he advocated, as the title says, communism, not socialism. The two are often deliberately confused by those who support unbridled capitalism, but the two are not the same. Communism calls for the abolition of capitalism, private property, and private wealth, with all means of production under centralised control.

Socialism calls for limitations on capitalism and the accumulation of private wealth and property so that the wealth of a community is not concentrated in the hands of a few. Social welfare programmes such as social security, unemployment insurance, and free education are all socialistic. Marx would not approve because they are supported by a capitalist economy.

The dust bowl was created by destructive agricultural practises. The people who settled the land did not understand the land. They were farmers from the east where soil and climate were altogether different. They did not understand that what they did in Ohio or Tennessee or Georgia would destroy the grassland of Oklahoma, and when wind and drought finished the destruction they had no choice but to move.

A careful re-reading of the book and a study of socialism's relationship with Christianity would be in order. There are numerous sites on the Web where you will find much information on your subject, and I would suggest taking advantage of it.

As an aside, underlining a book title is proper on a typewriter where a slanted type-face is not available. On the computer underlining is not proper coupled with the use of a slanted type-face.