I have to say this has been my favorite so far. I enjoyed the text and the style of the book. When my sister had to read this book I watched the movie with her. The jump from Grapes to Gatsby in the description was very different. Sometimes I felt like there was no description, it is hard to compare to Steinbeck I suppose. Anyway. With the little description I always went back to what the movie was like. I am not saying they are exact, but the movie and book were very similar. It was very helpful to picture scenes, characters, and explanations. I really enjoyed this book, and the style.
During the book I wondered what everyone else thought of it. I can't help but refer back to the movie. It was entertaining and a lot like the book. I feel like I was able to see two characters in each character. The movie character and my version of the character. I enjoyed Gatsby's character. In the book you don't really get a feel for Gatsby, but through Nick's eyes. In the movie, you see Gatsby in a whole new way. He is a little different, looking and "outgoingness". Gatsby was my favorite character. He seemed honest and kind, in the movie, he was played by Robert Redford, so...
One thing I was especially confused about was that the father came to the funeral. In chapter Four, Gatsby says that his family died, and he inherited all of the money. Later of course you discover he was lying, but I was really confused when the father came. It questioned me and I had to read it over again. One other thing that confused me a little but I remembered in the movie was when Myrtle Wilson was killed. In the book it doesn't explain anything about when they were driving or when the car actually hit her, and you don't really know what happened until after it all happened. The movie explained it very well. Also, it is kind of slipped in there, that Myrtle "escaped" from her husband. There are many things that I loved about this book, and it would be interesting if it was written from a third person omniscient point of view. Some of the book would be a lot different, but I think it would be a good read as well. The Scarlet letter is next :) Goody?
-Cool Beans:)
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Saturday, July 3, 2010
The Grapes of Wrath
When I heard we were going to read The Grapes of Wrath, I was not very enthused. Getting into the book was very slow, and I didn't start reading until just this week. Once into the story of the book, I was captivated by Steinbeck's use of symbolism and description. This book became more interesting as I read on. The tragedy and cruelty the family experienced was unimaginable, only the descriptions made that possible. Every little image was described so finely that no spec of dirt was missed. The Grapes of Wrath is one of the most famous novels in America for a reason.
Steinbeck's use of tone helped to express the theme of the difference between greed and necessity. In the book, Steinbeck describes different families traveling on the same journey as the Joad Family. Steinbeck's tone expresses that these families are struggling to stay alive, yet struggling to keep their family together. Many times, when Steinbeck changes the point of view, the tone also changes. The Joad family has a feeling of hope and excitement, while the 3rd person views are failure and defeat. For example, the jump from chapter 12 to chapter 13. In chapter twelve, the family is hungry, tired and in need of supplies they can not afford. In chapter 13, returning to the Joad family, they are just on the road excited and unknowing of the dangers ahead. As the book progresses, the views of both general people and Joad family become more the same. In chapter 21 to chapter 22, the family has seen hard times and tragedy in California. Chapter 21 in the second paragraph, it states, "guarding the world against their own people." The Joads realize they are outcasts, and not wanted.
One question that was on my mind the whole book was weather or not Rose of Sharon was right when she said, "Said it would a been a good thing if he stayed home an' studied up tractors." This made me wonder, would it have been better for a family in the Dust Bowl to stay home, or move to California. There were pros and cons to both. If a family were to stay home, they would have been out of money, on the road, or needing food. But that family would have friends and neighbors and support. In California, there would be jobs, no dust, good crops and good land. On the other hand the majority of the people experienced the cons. No job opportunities, no money, no food, no home, and worst, no friends. In an unknown land, you can trust no one. The Joad family was lucky, they found people who they trusted and had some money for food. So would it have been better to stay in Oklahoma? Did Connie, Noah, and Muley make the right decision leaving the family?
This book was an opportunity to see into the past when times were not like today. I enjoyed the book when it was over and am excited there isn't another long one like it. I am truly excited for the next book.
-Cool Beans:)
Steinbeck's use of tone helped to express the theme of the difference between greed and necessity. In the book, Steinbeck describes different families traveling on the same journey as the Joad Family. Steinbeck's tone expresses that these families are struggling to stay alive, yet struggling to keep their family together. Many times, when Steinbeck changes the point of view, the tone also changes. The Joad family has a feeling of hope and excitement, while the 3rd person views are failure and defeat. For example, the jump from chapter 12 to chapter 13. In chapter twelve, the family is hungry, tired and in need of supplies they can not afford. In chapter 13, returning to the Joad family, they are just on the road excited and unknowing of the dangers ahead. As the book progresses, the views of both general people and Joad family become more the same. In chapter 21 to chapter 22, the family has seen hard times and tragedy in California. Chapter 21 in the second paragraph, it states, "guarding the world against their own people." The Joads realize they are outcasts, and not wanted.
One question that was on my mind the whole book was weather or not Rose of Sharon was right when she said, "Said it would a been a good thing if he stayed home an' studied up tractors." This made me wonder, would it have been better for a family in the Dust Bowl to stay home, or move to California. There were pros and cons to both. If a family were to stay home, they would have been out of money, on the road, or needing food. But that family would have friends and neighbors and support. In California, there would be jobs, no dust, good crops and good land. On the other hand the majority of the people experienced the cons. No job opportunities, no money, no food, no home, and worst, no friends. In an unknown land, you can trust no one. The Joad family was lucky, they found people who they trusted and had some money for food. So would it have been better to stay in Oklahoma? Did Connie, Noah, and Muley make the right decision leaving the family?
This book was an opportunity to see into the past when times were not like today. I enjoyed the book when it was over and am excited there isn't another long one like it. I am truly excited for the next book.
-Cool Beans:)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)