Ambrose Bierce’s short story, “Moxon’s Master,” and John Steinbeck’s novel The Grapes of Wrath offer an examination of what distinguishes the essence of being human. Although the works share some components in their respective conclusions regarding what the essence of humanity is, each work possesses its own motive for contrasting the essence of humanity with an increasingly more convincing doppelganger of humanity, the man-made machine. “Moxon’s Master” offers a definition of the essence of man through a philosophic argument, and warns its reader of the dangerous implications regarding the seeming tendency for the man-made machine to meld more closely with that definition. The Grapes of Wrath defines the essence of humanity with the allegory of Manself, while discussing the consequences of blending man with machine as being dehumanizing and resulting in the creation of monsters beyond the control of man. …show more content…
Ultimately, each work criticizes the increasing opacity of the established definitions of man and man’s tools in order to illuminate the necessity of self-awareness in an increasingly modernizing society. In order to offer a criticism on a modernizing society, “Moxon’s Master” first attempts to define machine, and subsequently illuminate the similarities in that definition to a definition of man. Moxon himself begs the question: “What is a ‘machine’? The word has been variously defined. Here is one definition from a popular dictionary: ‘Any instrument or organization by which power is applied and made effective, or a desired effect produced.’ Well, then, is not a man a machine? And you will admit that he thinks – or thinks he thinks.” (Bierce 235) Moxon’s creation thinks, as evidenced by his aptitude as a chess opponent, and “Moxon’s Master” attempts to describe the automaton as a living being; however, Moxon discerns the relevance of control in determining when something qualifies as man. Should the machine act only through predetermined controls established by man, it is never truly equivalent to man. Even allowing for so close a resemblance has its consequences. As Moxon interacts with his creation, the machine reacts more violently. “Moxon’s Master” employs this volatile relationship to demonstrate the consequences of regarding a machine as equivalent to man, or allowing machine to continue advancing such that any difference between man and machine becomes imperceptible. The symbiosis that inspires the manufacture of an automaton warps into a parasitic relationship the moment man attempts to grant emotion and motive to the machine. Moxon realizes the danger of a machine’s capability to display emotion without feeling it as a human would: “I observed a shrug of the thing’s great shoulders, as if it were irritated: and so natural was this – so entirely human – that in my new view of the matter it startled me” (Bierce 241). “Moxon’s Master” warns of any attempt to completely close the gap between artificial and human life through its explosive conclusion: the absence of human emotion or ambition, seemingly the only untranslatable essential characteristics of humanity, in a machine with man’s capacity for reason will only result in the destruction of man and machine alike. One can rewrite the above warning in the context of John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Throughout modernization, the institutions created by man and the machines created by man insidiously dismantle essential traits of humanness. The Grapes of Wrath criticizes the banking institution: “The bank is something else than men…The bank is something more than men, I tell you. It’s the monster. Men made it, but they can’t control it” (Steinbeck 33). As in “Moxon’s Master,” the fundamental flaw in man’s creation, and the pitfall “Moxon’s Master” serves to warn its reader of, is the advance of technology – be it literal machines or institutions like the bank – beyond the control of its human architects. The Grapes of Wrath goes on to criticize the inevitable fusion of man and machine by illuminating the dehumanizing consequence of totally embracing modernization and discarding essential human – specifically for The Grapes of Wrath this regards the human trait of belonging to a community – without self-awareness. The laborer is enslaved where the farmer was autonomous, and consequently the laborer is part of a machine where the farmer was one of many humans. “The man sitting in the iron seat did not look like a man; gloved, goggled, rubber dusk mask over nose and mouth, he was a part of the monster, a robot in the seat” illustrates the burgeoning dichotomy of man and man-dependent-on-artifice (Steinbeck 35). To communicate the consequences of relying on, thereby becoming more like, the artificial, The Grapes of Wrath introduces the concept of Manself. Ironically, Moxon embodied one aspect of Manself: the human strive for achieving something beyond the material benefit of individual work. Moxon himself admits to this: “I’m indulging in the pleasure of the chase for its own sake” (Bierce 238). Moxon achieves the construction of his automaton, but the creation is not his goal, rather the internal revelation or understanding of what life is drives Moxon to create this automaton. This striving is the embodiment of Manself, but in The Grapes of Wrath, Manself is restricted to the essential human pursuit against the rising tides of modernization, including Moxon’s quest for understanding a functional definition of life through the construction and humanizing of an artificial being. Where “Moxon’s Master” leads the reader to a state of awareness regarding the consequences of mistaking the artificial for the essence of humanity, and illuminates the precedent of granting artificial creation control over the creator, The Grapes of Wrath expands on these consequences.
A modernizing society succumbs to its institutions, or monsters, at the sociological level, and at the individualistic psychological level, humans succumb to the integration of machines into their lives. The Grapes of Wrath isn’t totally pessimistic, because it allows for the possibility that Manself – through characters such as the fully realized, leader of men, Tom Joad – is not entirely absent in the modernizing world; however, the novel provides a grim warning should Manself vanish – or more likely, become suppressed – from/in the psychologies of the citizenry of a modern America: “—fear the time when Manself will not suffer and die for a concept, for this one quality is the foundation of Manself, and this one quality is man, distinctive in the universe” (Steinbeck
151). It is not surprising that “Moxon’s Master” departs from The Grapes of Wrath regarding the scope, focus and specificity in its criticism of modernization. “Moxon’s Master” was published in 1839, while The Grapes of Wrath wasn’t published until 1939. After experiencing one-hundred years of a modernizing America, each story retains elements of concern regarding the place of technology alongside man with his eye on the future. Each story convinces a reader that there is cause for concern if society, and the individual, lose sight of the essences of humanity: control, free will, ambition, and honesty – with oneself as well as the group. Identifying shared concerns regarding the future man’s relationship with technology and his institutions among literary works spanning the course of a century becomes further disconcerting given the knowledge that technology advances at an exponentially increasing rate. Neither work encourages a reader to don the robes of a Luddite, but the echoes of their forewarning reverberate today.
When times get tough, many people turn away from everyone and everything. It must be part of human nature to adopt an independent attitude when faced with troubles. It is understandable because most people do not want to trouble their loved ones when they are going through problems, so it is easier to turn away than stick together. Maybe their family is going through a rough patch and they reason they would be better off on their own. This path of independence and solitude may not always be the best option for them or their family, though. Often times it is more beneficial for everyone to work through the problem together. It is not always the easiest or most desirable option, but most times it is the most efficient and it will get results in the long run. In The Grapes of Wrath, John Steinbeck makes this point very clear through several characters. Many characters throughout
In literature as in life, people often find that they must make difficult choices in order to survive. The reasons behind their decisions and the results of their subsequent actions affect our opinion of them. In the Grapes of Wrath, written by John Steinbeck, the author portrayed situations where two main characters became involved. The nature of their choices, the reasons behind their decisions, and the results that followed affected them greatly. However, the choices that they made were surmounted successfully. Ma Joad and Tom Joad are two strong characters who overcame laborious predicaments. Their powerful characteristics helped to encourage those that were struggling.
The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck had many comparisons from the movie and the book. In 1939, this story was to have some of the readers against the ones that kept the American people in poverty held responsible for their actions. This unique story was about the Joad’s family, who were migrant workers looking for a good decent job. They were also farmers from Oklahoma that are now striving to find some good work and success for their family in California. This novel was one of Steinbeck’s best work he has ever done. It was in fact an Academy Award movie in 1940. Both the movie and the novel are one of Steinbeck’s greatest masterpieces on both the filmmaking and the novel writing. Both the novel and film are mainly the same in the beginning of the story and towards the end. There were some few main points that Steinbeck took out from the book and didn’t mention them in the movie. “The Grapes of Wrath is a
Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath is a realistic novel that mimics life and offers social commentary too. It offers many windows on real life in midwest America in the 1930s. But it also offers a powerful social commentary, directly in the intercalary chapters and indirectly in the places and people it portrays. Typical of very many, the Joads are driven off the land by far away banks and set out on a journey to California to find a better life. However the journey breaks up the family, their dreams are not realized and their fortunes disappear. What promised to be the land of milk and honey turns to sour grapes. The hopes and dreams of a generation turned to wrath. Steinbeck opens up this catastrophe for public scrutiny.
Although Steinbeck argues for collective action to achieve specific goals, only the most unperceptive critics continue to argue that he is a collectivist in either philosophy or politics. Throughout his work he decries the mindless indoctrination of the totalitarians and maintains that only through reflection upon his bitter experience can learn the value of acting in concert with others for the relief of emergency conditions -- like the flood at the end of The Grapes of Wrath -- so that the individual may subsequently be free to realize his own potentialities. Nothing better illustrates Steinbeck's concept of social organization than the pictures in Chapter Seventeen of The Grapes of Wrath of the world that is created each night a people come together, and disappears the next morning when they separate.
John Steinbeck wrote the The Grapes of Wrath in 1939 to rouse its readers against those who were responsible for keeping the American people in poverty. The Grapes of Wrath tells the story of the Joad family, migrant farmers from Oklahoma traveling to California in search of an illusion of prosperity. The novel's strong stance stirred up much controversy, as it was often called Communist propaganda, and banned from schools due to its vulgar language. However, Steinbeck's novel is considered to be his greatest work. It won the Pulitzer Prize, and later became an Academy Award winning movie in 1940. The novel and the movie are both considered to be wonderful masterpieces, epitomizing the art of filmmaking and novel-writing.
The pages of history have longed been stained with the works of man written in blood. Wars and conflicts and bloodshed were all too common. But why? What could drive a man to kill another? Many would say it is man’s evil nature, his greed, envy, and wrath. And certainly, they all have a roll in it. But in reality, it is something far less malevolent, at least at first. The sole reason why conflicts grow and spread comes from the individuality that every human cherishes so dearly. This can easily be shown in the story “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut, in which a society has been created where everyone of talent has been handicapped so they are not better than anyone else, all for the sake of equality. This text will show that Individuality
than science or system. His writing is warm, human, inconsistent. occasionally angry, but more often delighted with the joys associated with human life at its lowest levels (Holman 20). This biological image of man. creates techniques and aspects of form capable of conveying this image of man with esthetic power and conviction; the power to overcome adversity. through collectiveness, or in this case, as one combined soul (Curley 224).
In the novel The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck the author uses excessive profanity, religion, and migrants to show the hard times family’s had to go through in the 1930’s. Most people believe that Steinbeck novel is too inappropriate for high school students because of its content. This novel should be banned from the high school curriculum.
The Grapes of Wrath is a novel written by John Steinbeck, which focuses on an Oklahoman family that is evicted from their farm during an era of depression caused by the Dust Bowl. The Joad family alongside thousands of other refugees (also affected by the dirty thirties) migrates west towards California seeking employment and a new home. John Steinbeck’s purpose for writing this novel was to inform his audience of how many of their fellow Americans were being mistreated and of the tribulations they faced in order to attain regain what they once had. As a result, The Grapes of Wrath triggered its audience’s sympathy for the plight of the Dust Bowl farmers and their families.
The tale of The Grapes of Wrath has many levels of profound themes and meanings to allow us as the reader to discover the true nature of human existence. The author's main theme and doctrine of this story is that of survival through unity. While seeming hopeful at times, this book is more severe, blunt, and cold in its portrayl of the human spirit. Steinbeck's unique style of writing forms timeless and classic themes that can be experienced on different fronts by unique peoples and cultures of all generations.
... states, “. . .and in the eyes of the people there is the failure; and in the eyes of the hungry there is a growing wrath. In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage.” (Grapes, 385) This is a shockingly accurate summary of everything this timeless novel was written to represent, and will forever continue to represent.
Steven Pinker lays the foundation for his book by highlighting three main philosophies that permeate society’s view of humanity and their historical context: The Blank Slate (empiricism), the Noble Savage (romanticism), and the Ghost in the Machine (dualism) (2002, p. 11). Pinker is correct to challenge previous philosophical frameworks as they skew the way scientific research has been conducted. Present-day scientific and social research will only benefit from an acknowledgement of innate human nature.
The book The Grapes of Wrath focuses on a particular section of America called the "Dust Bowl" during the early nineteen thirties. During this time, when tenant farming was a way of life for so many Oklahomans, there came a drought which drastically cut down production of crops and forced the bank to evict the tenants in order to cut losses. The problem may seem straightforward at first, and maybe it is, but the cause of the problem should not be simplified. Naturally, the three participants in this disaster, the tenants, the bank and the workers, have their own separate, and logical, points of view. Who is right? In the larger picture, events occurring during this time period involving banks and corporations are primitive examples of the widespread greedy capitalism infused in our modern society.
` Even though Steinbecks essay could be considered a dated opinion being written in the 19 hundreds. it goes to show his considerably harsh outlook hasn't sadly strayed from our reality all that much from its original publishment. He makes a statement “We are restless, a dissatisfied, a searching people.” Steinbeck may seem brutal and disappointed. but when reading you get a surprising tone of disapproval that doesn't sound hateful. It’s cruel but almost disapproving in a condescending way. He also makes a statement “We are self-reliant and at the same time completely dependent. We are aggressive, and defenseless.”