Thursday, May 21, 2009

East of Eden Discussion Starters

First, a little personal news. Angela and I bought a fixer-upper at the end of last month and, wow, has this month flown by as we've been fixing it up. Except for Sundays and the season finale of Lost, I can't remember the last time I sat on my couch. The sad part is, there's no way we can finish it now before Angela is scheduled to be induced. But hey, it's fun, I'm losing weight, and I'm sure it'll all be worth it in the end.

And now for East of Eden. The problem with discussing this book is that there's so much to discuss. I think my notes below are just scratching the surface.

1) Timshel. I've read several debates on whether Steinbeck got this right from a linguistic standpoint, and the reviews are mixed. So I'll back off from the linguistic side of things and focus more on the doctrine. On the one hand, Lee's interpretation seems somewhat dangerous--it ignores the role of Christ in overcoming sin, and places all of the responsibility of overcoming sin on the individual. This, as we know, is an impossible task. So it sets us up for failure. Instead, "will" may be a more accurate word than "may" because Christ overcame sin for everyone. On the other hand, I believe that Lee's interpretation is true in the sense that it imparts upon Adam and Samuel the possibility of man improving his own condition--so if by "overcome sin" we mean to learn form our mistakes, then yes it's an accurate interpretation.

An interesting side thought--Jehovah (at least, my understanding is that by "the Lord" the text refers to Jehovah at this point), is addressing not only Cain but all of mankind. Is He therefore including himself? Could it be that the prospect of "overcoming sin" was still conditional, in His mind, because he had not yet done it?

2) Could this story have worked without Kate being a whore? I think Steinbeck does an A- job of leaving things to the imagination instead of spelling things out, but I worry about the movie version of this that is supposed to come out in the next year.

3) Steinbeck goes out of his way to call Kate a half-human. But is Adam also a half-human? Is Adam the half that Kate is missing? I was initially inclined toward this interpretation, but towards the end I began to think that Aaron was in fact the other half of Kate. His inability to accept sin was just as pronounced as Kate's inability to understand good. I think this statement about Aaron describes both Aaron and Kate: "[He had] the ability for generalization that only the inexperienced have."

4) Steinbeck walked a fine line throughout the novel between writing an epic and writing a sermon. In fact, my chief complaint in the novel was that he used Lee and Samuel more to give sermons than as characters. All in all, I think Steinbeck writes well enough that I don't mind the sermons so much.

5) Lee--I just don't buy him. Especially the pidgin thing. I know Steinbeck was trying to make a point about cultural attitudes towards Asians, and I give Steinbeck props for being a little ahead of his time as far as multi-culturalism goes, but I think he's still a little guilty of stereotyping.

6) One thing I think Steinbeck did very well was constantly tease us. We all knew where the story was going. But the way he danced around the inevitable was what made the story entertaining. For instance, how many of you thought that Charles was going to kill Adam? But instead of resolving it there, he backs off completely and resets the story for a second movement.

7) Favorite metastory narrative observations: "I think the difference between a lie and a story is that a story utilizes the trappings and appearances of truth for the interest of the listener as well as the teller." and "If the story is not about the hearer, he will not listen."

8) Narrative statement most packed with hidden meaning: (with regard to Adam) "Perhaps the hard flat light of the West was blotting out his birthplace."

9) Just another thought-provoking quote: "if the Lord God wanted you to understand it He'd have given you to understand or He'd have set it down different." (from Liza)

10) Why was Cal's gift to his father so "wrong?" In Steinbeck's description of the Cain story, Steinbeck suggests that the unsuitability of Cain's gift was largely cultural. So was Cal's gift wrong because it went against the culture of the era to profit off of the war? Or is Steinbeck, as I suspect, saying something more fundamental about capitalism?

11) To what extent is it important that this is an American novel. Lee's discussion with Cal in Chapter 51 sets forth the paradox that is America--e.g. "we're overbrave and overfearful--we're kind and cruel as children." And I can't quite figure out if this is side commentary, or somehow crucial to the story.

12) When I first finished the novel, I was so distracted by Timshel, that I thought Timshel was the main point to the novel. I don't think so anymore. I think the story is more about fathers and son, birth and rebirth, the quest for immortality and perfection. It can be summed up with Lee's question to Cal: "Can you think that whatever made us--would stop trying?"

13) And finally, Samuel Hamilton (and the patent system). I don't know how accurate Steinbeck's depiction of his grandfather is (certainly, his character seems a little over-idealized and flat, with the exception of his last conversation with Adam). Clearly John admired his grandfather greatly. At any rate, Steinbeck wasn't exaggerating too much when it came to Samuel and the patent system. John's grandfather actually had three U.S. patents.

I probably ought to be defending my profession after passages like this:

Meanwhile Samuel got no richer. He developed a very bad patent habid, a disease many men suffer from. He invented a part of a threshing machine, better, cheaper, and more efficient than any in existence. The patent attorney ate up his little profit for the year. Samuel sent his models to a manufacturer, who promptly rejected the plans and used the method. The next few years were kept lean by the suing, and the drain stopped only when he lost the suit. . . But he had caught the patent fever, and year after year the money made by threshing and by smithing was drained off i npatents. The Hamilton children went barefoot, and their overalls were patched and food was sometimes scarce, to pay or the crisp blueprints with cogs and planes and elevations.


But, well, it's true. The patent system has a lot of flaws. Anyway, it's very rare that my profession pops up in literature, so I found this link to be a pleasant surprise. (Ironically, about the same time I was reading East of Eden, I was watching Dickens' Little Dorritt on Masterpiece, and Dickens also paints unkind pictures of the patent system, at least as it's implemented in the U.K.).

---

I hope everybody enjoyed the book as much as I, and I hope it wasn't too long for some of you. Namely Jesse :)

No comments: