Rating: 
Summary: EXTREMELY WELL WRITTEN
Review: THIS BOOK WAS ONE THE MOST INFLUENTIAL BOOKS OF ALL TIME. SOME PEOPLE THINK THIS BOOK IS CORRUPT, WELL I THINK YOU ARE.
Rating:
Summary: excellent book
Review: The Grapes of Wrath is a literary masterpiece. When I first started to read it I thought that it was boring, until I really thought about what Steinbeck was saying. The book is a harsh, insightful and true to reality book ( as Steinbeck's books almost always are) that is a MUST READ!
Rating:
Summary: Ruthless, forced slavery and endless suffering
Review: In the early chapters you'll show little compassion for a group of people refusing to change or better themselves as society around them changed. Soon, you will find yourself showing sympathy for a sector of American society that underwent unimaginable humiliation and persecution. The extended family, one that lives to remain together, working to survive, unable to ever achieve the simple riches they see in their dreams. You will become the vehicle of the dreams, regarding your reading of the book as a task, ever hoping to see the family succeed in the next chapter. While several chapters will irritate you, in that they describe the current status of the era, you will cherish the chapters that deal directly with the Joad family. This book will soften any cynical attitude toward the homeless and forgotten of our country and cause you to reassess your ability to share your personal riches.
Rating: 
Summary: The book was boring
Review: There are some historical novels that are so interesting and tell the details of the past in a creative interesting way. NOT the Grapes of Wrath. This is book was boring, and the story became very unimportant, and it made me not want to finish the book. This is one of Steinbeck's worst books, and i hope no more high school classes will be forced to read this garbage.
Rating:
Summary: Quick Guide
Review: This book is certainly an in depth affair, it goes in to the charechters in great detail, unfortunately it was so boring I burned as fire wood.
Rating: 
Summary: One snap up.
Review: "The Grapes of Wrath", I believe, can be compared to such stories as "The English Patient" and "Das Boot". While few if any of the people in these stories actually existed, the events portrayed did happen. Whether or not the latter two are more lushly romantic or exciting, respectively, it's a lot more enjoyable reading historical fiction than some dry textbook account. And, while "The Grapes of Wrath" does get a little draggy and detailed for most modern tastes, try slogging through "David Copperfield" some time!
Rating:
Summary: I rejoiced when they got to the Gov't camp...
Review: In 1987, I read "East of Eden" and it immediately raced to my top 5. Timshel! For over ten years I did not want to over-Steinbeck myself, so I waited until the proper time to read "The Grapes of Wrath" (sadly, it was not required in High School). Well, now was the time and I did NOT want this book to end. I lived with the Joads for just three days, but I aged years in that time. That book resonated deeply in my soul. I wanted to melt inside the book and help them...I wanted to live with them so I could share the load...this book has made me a better person by opening my eyes to the plight of the poor. My '90s eyes kept expecting a newer stranger to deny the Joads help, to not share their food, to not lend a hand. But that moment never came. Everyone pitched in when things got rough - except, of course, the ones who could monetarily afford it. How little our society has changed in 60 years! This book should be required of ALL 16-year-olds. But as I found out this week, a 34-year-old can be deeply, deeply affected as well. READ THIS BOOK.
Rating:
Summary: Response to the reader from New York
Review: Wasn't it Albert Einstein who said, "the map is not the territory?" Just as TV and movie actors are mistaken for their characters, so are authors often taken for their stories. No, kids, Mark Twain was not a racist, in spite of the langauge of his characters. Had these myopic critics opened their eyes a little more, they might have seen that Jim the slave is a superior man to his lighter-skinned contemporaries. What "Grapes of Wrath" represents to some is a threat, a not-so- gentle stirring up of uncomplacencies, a brutal kick in the rear to the comfortable. Working in a grocery store I see this every day in my affluent customers. Most haven't a clue where or how their fruits and vegetables make their way to the produce stands. Some have vague ideas about unwashed and illiterate Mexicans, toiling away in the feilds like beasts of burden. I live in California, home to Proposition 187, and all of the attendant misconceptions about illegal immigrants. Why, it was only last year when federal authorities raided a strawberry farm in the Salinas Valley, discovering living conditions that mirrored exactly those portrayed in Steinbeck's novel sixty years before. In spite of the efforts of Ceasar Chavez, whom I regard as a saint, and uncounted others, working conditions for the farm worker have scarcely improved since "The Grapes of Wrath." Remember the grape boycott? I'm getting a bit afield, I know. I recently tried out an American literature course at my local community college, and was unpleasantly surprised. Instead of a careful reading of good books, I was inundated with the crimes of the Eurocentric Male. Oh, and the books were included as supporting garnish. Seems to me that our culture of destructionism and revisionism is taking an awful toll upon our understanding of literature. Like the traveler confusing the map with the territory, our unimaginative academics are confusing the messenger with the message. Rather than spending precious time bashing the author, wouldn't it be more prudent to disucss the ideas as presented? Had Steinbeck been a Communist, would his ideas then be considered more suspect? I invite other readers to share their ideas. We need more of this.
Rating:
Summary: America still blind
Review: It does not surprise me that those brilliantly compassionate people who above criticized the book could only come up with: it sucks, man, its a piece of sh*t. What in depth understanding of the book! When it was released in 37, it became the most controversial book of its time. People saw hints at revolution in it; communism was seen. People thought that the harsh portrayal of class differences and some of the "tough" imagery and ideas given to the reader, along with the possibilty that America was not perfect and was deeply corrupted and injust, were reasons to ban this poignantly beautiful and epic story that defines an important novel and is both significantly historical and universal in its content. Those who argue for it to be banned today, like those who ban Huck for being racist(when its one of the greatest anti-racist books ever written), Salinger, and Of Mice and Men, do not understand it; perhaps they haven't read it- if they have, the obvious importance and beauty of the book has been lost on them. So yippedeedo! Once again people think it their right to keep us from reading books that are not only worth the read but important in literature and very influential in enhancing our moral intelligence. There was once a place across the sea that decided to not only ban but burn books; suppress important ideas from people who deserve freedom- and what a society that turned out to be!
Rating:
Summary: This isn't at all like the film, folks...
Review: Regarded by many as the seminal Amercian novel, The Grapes of Wrath is not merely a snapshot of Dust Bowl poverty, but of the strength of the human spirit. While the movie focuses on the character of Tom Joad, Steinbeck's book is really about Tom's mother, and how she eventually assumes the leadership of her family. The pages are literally choked with the red dust of Oklahoma's ruined farms, and of the dust and exhaust fumes on the road to California. The dialogue is colloquial and accurately portrayed. His characters are rich in substance, as is the entire story. Throughout the book, the scene is introduced with poetically-written interludes, giving the reader a clear sense of where he or she is. For those who feel content with the John Ford film, I recommend the book, if only for the sheer enjoyment one can get from reading this work.
|
