The Grapes of Wrath, written by John Steinbeck, was Steinbeck’s most controversial and most extensively critiqued novel, released in 1939. It was a heart-breaking story of the Joad family and them trying to find their place in a financially depressed country. One year later, John Ford directed a very popular and audacious film based off of that same novel. Both the novel and the film were widely praised and were very successful works of art. Of course, the film was not a carbon copy of the novel; it added its own flair and perspective to the story of the Joad family. Starting with the opening scene of the film you can tell the director, John Ford, wanted to have his own take on the novel and altered the beginning some. The opening Whereas the novel ends with Rose-of-Sharon giving birth to a stillborn baby and then offering her milk-filled breasts to a starving man, dying in a barn, the film ends with Ma Joad’s pragmatic, forward-looking way “We're the people" speech. The novel’s ending was considered too controversial for the film, so Ford left it out and ended the film in a much better way. Additionally, while the film is somewhat stark it has a more optimistic and hopeful view than the novel, especially when the Joads land at the Department of Agriculture camp. Vivian Sobchack argued that the film uses visual imagery to focus on the Joads as a family unit, whereas the novel focuses on their journey as a part of the "family of man". She points out that their farm is never shown in detail, and that the family members are never shown working in agriculture. This subtly serves to focus the film on the specific family, as opposed to the novel's focus on man and land together. For all the differences the film had from the novel, it was basically the same story just told in a more cheerful way and was more about the Joad family. However, the differences did not take away from the film; they might have made the film even better. No matter how different the film was from the novel, they both have succeeded in their own respective fields and remain classics to this
Throughout the novel, The Grapes of Wrath there are intercalary chapters. The purpose of these chapters are to give the readers insight and background on the setting, time, place and even history of the novel. They help blend the themes, symbols, motifs of the novel, such as the saving power of family and fellowship, man’s inhumanity to man, and even the multiplying effects of selfishness. These chapters show the social and economic crisis flooding the nation at the time, and the plight of the American farmer becoming difficult. The contrast between these chapters helps readers look at not just the storyline of the Joad family, but farmers during the time and also the condition of America during the Dust Bowl. Steinbeck uses these chapters to show that the story is not only limited to the Joad family,
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
Overall, the movie and book have many differences and similarities, some more important than others. The story still is clear without many scenes from the book, but the movie would have more thought in it.
Steinbeck strikes at the fear in every man’s soul, with his portrayal of the poverty stricken life of the Joads as they travel from one stage of abandonment and what would seem like a helpless state to a journey of enduring perseverance. The Joads, Steinbeck’s creation in the Novel Grapes of Wrath is a large close-knit family living in Oklahoma during the “Dust Bowl” era. Steinbeck documents their journey beginning with their homelessness due to the crop failures to them surviving in a box car at the end of their journey. I think Steinbeck’ intention is to illustrate to the reader that being poor doesn’t always equate with being helpless. The Joads demonstrate this by their resilience to overcome homelessness, death, and prejudice.
There are few similarities between the book and the movie. Usually most movies are similar to
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.
The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck is considered a classic novel by many in the literary field. The trials and tribulations of the Joad family and other migrants is told throughout this novel. In order to gain a perspective into the lives of "Oakies", Steinbeck uses themes and language of the troubling times of the Great Depression. Some of these aspects are critiqued because of their vulgarity and adult nature. In some places, The Grapes of Wrath has been edited or banned. These challenges undermine Steinbeck's attempts to add reality to the novel and are unjustified.
“Everybody wants a little piece of lan'. I read plenty of books out here. Nobody never gets to heaven, and nobody gets no land. It's just in their head. They're all the time talkin' about it, but its jus' in their head.” (Steinbeck) The Grapes of Wrath is most often categorized as an American Realist novel. It was written by John Steinbeck and published in 1939. As a result of this novel, Steinbeck won the Pulitzer Prize, the National Book Award, and prominently cited the novel when he won the Nobel Prize a little over twenty years after the text’s publication. This text follows the Joad family through the Great Depression. It begins in Oklahoma, watching as the family is driven from their home by drought and economic changes. Within the introduction of the novel the living conditions is described, “Every moving thing lifted the dust into the air: The walking man lifted a thin layer as high as his waist, and a wagon lifted the dust as high as the fence tops and an automobile boiled a cloud behind it.” (Grapes, 1) This novel is and will remain one of the most significant novels of the Great Depression. Despite its controversial nature it is timeless. In fact, the ending of this text is one of the most controversial pieces of literature written during the time period, and has never accurately made its way into film. The ending to John Steinbeck’s novel The Grapes of Wrath is the most significant portion of the novel due to its historical accuracy as well as its message about the American spirit.
She imagines her new life in the city and dreams of how she will dress her new baby once they are there. She, and her baby, symbolize a new beginning, similar to how the migrants thought the West. “However, her fixation consumes her so much that she becomes conceited. For example, as her family is packing for the move, Rose of Sharon refuses to help them. She uses her fear of hurting the baby as an excuse to get out of work. While she takes advantage of being pregnant, she is very scared of losing her baby, like the West. Rose of Sharon continuously asks her mother if any activity she does will harm her baby. Her deep fear of losing her baby foreshadows her still-birth at the end of the novel. The profound hope at the beginning of the novel comes spiraling down while the migrants’ future seams empty. At one point Rose of Sharon’s pregnancy is a symbol of hope, towards the end it is nothing but lost and shattered dreams. However, when the family comes across a starving man and his son, Rose of Sharon feeds the old man her breastmilk. During this scene, she becomes the nurturer she was not able to be with her child. This now symbolizes how shared hard times creates a bond between the struggling
In conclusion, details involving the characters and symbolic meanings to objects are the factors that make the novel better than the movie. Leaving out aspects of the novel limits the viewer’s appreciation for the story. One may favor the film over the novel or vice versa, but that person will not overlook the intense work that went into the making of both. The film and novel have their similarities and differences, but both effectively communicate their meaning to the public.
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.
The characterizations of the main characters are not so much different in the movie than in the book but are incomplete. The movie does not show the depth and secret desires that motivate the characters and does not allow for on to sympathize and really get to know the characters. The movie follows the basic outline of the books plot but does not incorporate all of the small details that make the book so profound. In contrast, the setting in the movie and the book is mostly identical. One line in the book tells the whole story of Amir. The line is said by Rham Khan and it is “There is away to be good again.” The line tells Amir’s true desire and that is to atone for his sins as a kid. Since both the movie and the book focus on that one line they are both more similar than different. In conclusion, although, the movie was not just like the book and emphasized certain themes more than others it still told the story and shared the lessons the book
The Grapes of Wrath is a novel by John Steinbeck that exposes the desperate conditions under which the migratory farm families of America during the 1930's live under. The novel tells of one families migration west to California through the great economic depression of the 1930's. The Joad family had to abandon their home and their livelihoods. They had to uproot and set adrift because tractors were rapidly industrializing their farms. The bank took possession of their land because the owners could not pay off their loan. The novel shows how the Joad family deals with moving to California. How they survive the cruelty of the land owners that take advantage of them, their poverty and willingness to work.
...ing message and provide an emotional punch to equal the book's resonance, which would have probably made a longer film, but added to the continuity if the film.