Using complete sentences (and be careful of your mechanics!), respond to the following prompt: Do you believe The Grapes of Wrath to be a satire, parable or neither? Defend your answer.
36 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I believe that The Grapes of Wrath is a parable because it is a story designed to illustrate and teach a moral lesson to it's readers about one's altruism and selfishness and the effects they have on a community (and surrounding cities/towns). The selfish businessmen stripped everyone from their belongings and didn't stop to think about the outcome of their actions. They drove thousands of families into poverty just to make a living for themselves. Tom Joad realized this and went out to change society out of the concern for his families life as well as his, expressing altruism.
I agree with Clarissa. The way that the story is written, it is read in the form of a parable. The form of tearing the other families down just to better themselves proves this. Shelby Stevenson Block 7
I agree, they were very selfish and didn't think about how it would effect the other family's, only their own. They needed to come together instead of just taking care of theirselves
pyI believe that Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath is a parable, not a satire. In the story Steinbeck illustrates the hard times the migrants went through while the business men were prospering, indicating that this story is a parable. He also rehearses the cruelty forced upon the migrants by the natives of California. Lastly, in The Grapes of Wrath it gives the reader a sensible depiction of the land during the time of the dust bowl. Miller’s novel is not a satire because it does not ridicule a person, place, thing, or event; instead it is very informative throughout. Ashleigh McDaniel BLK2
Though almost anything can be a parable, if you think about it, I believe Steinbeck did intend this to be one, with a lesson to everyone, but especially to the government and rich folks. The lesson he wanted them to learn was: when you beat people down, they'll only become angry and attack back. Though there are satires within the book itself, I also take Ashleigh's position that it's not a satire because he is not ridiculing any specific person, place, thing, or event. In a way, it was both a parable and a prophesy.
I believe this novel is a parable because it had moral lessons on altruism and taught truths and religious meanings within itself. I agree with Ashleigh in the fact that the book did not target any specific person or object to ridicule. Therefore, it must be a parable and not a satirical novel. The figurative language throughout the story was not mostly irony and sarcasm used to scorn others. I agree with Clarissa in the fact that this book is meant to teach its readers about one's altruism and selfishness. - Kelsey Lauersdorf, 7th Block
I definitely agree with Kelsey and Clarissa in the fact that this book is a parable. The Grapes of Wrath was meant to teach its audience a lesson about altruism and greed. It was not meant to criticize a person or event. In The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck shows the results of a society where the rich only want to get richer while the poor are getting poorer. He also is trying to teach a lesson about the unity of family and man by showing the strength in the Joad family and the bond that keeps them going. Hannah Stirnaman Block 7
The Grapes of Wrath is not a book designed to be easily "read" for lack of a better word (no pun intended..) However, I do agree with many of the other kids that this book is in fact a parable. It is designed, after looking hard enough, to teach a lesson on greed and how that affects the town and people in the town. The Grapes of Wrath teaches us that anyone, no matter what you have done in the past or who you have been, you can change for the better and change the world. A.K.A. Tom Joad.
Whether a story is a satire or a parable is always up to how the reader interprets the story. The Grapes of Wrath though is most definitely a parable. The tale of the Joad's is a tale of tests. All the tests are on their moral structure as friends, as a family, and most importantly as individuals. If a family has the right appeal to the reader the reader will actually think about the morals of the story and accept them. Steinbeck has created the appeal and this makes many more readers see and understand the moral lessons of this parable, The Grapes of Wrath. Logan Pippitt Block 2
I believe that this piece can be both (just to play devil's advocate). Satire, defined by Webster's is "a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule." Could it be said that Steinbeck is criticizing the larger farm systems in California, and is exposing them to be factories of hate and greed? I know i was disgusted with the acts of wealthy farm owners in the novel
Of course Preston is the one to play The Devil's Advocate. It was an honorable act to perform; someone had to do it. The composition of the Grapes of Wrath still points more towards being a parable, like most of the others have stated. The story can universally teach a lesson on the importance of morals, and the consequences for doing what is not right. The degradation and humiliation of the migrants was a result of the selfishness of big-time banks and businessmen. No one can justify this type of immorality because for one demographic to gain strength, another must be torn down. Lydia Clark-Hargreaves Block 7
I think that the Grapes of Wrath is a parable. The novel did not criticize any specific person or idea, which means it could not be a satire. Steinbeck uses the book to teach lessons about selfishness and alturism, along with the unity of man. Kelsey Kreiser Block 7
As the daring Preston Pyle pointed out there are things that are meant to be ridiculed in The Grapes of Wrath, but the majority of the book is written as a parable. I agree with everyone else that it is written to teach how society is going wrong and how the rich are striving to make more money, while allowing the poor to grow poorer by the day and struggling to live. It is about one man's mission to go out and try to keep it from continuing further. Chris Hohman Block 2
I agree with everyone else who said the Grapes of Wrath is a parable. This novel is a parable because Steinbeck uses the book to teach lessons about the unity of man. Steinbeck's novel is not considered a satire because it did not criticize any specific person or idea. Hillary Simpson 1st Block
I actually kind of agree with Preston, shockingly enough. Being a parable is more obvious; The Grapes of Wrath definitely has many moral lessons regarding selfishness, like CJ mentioned, as well as the importance of family and unity and standing up for what is right. On the other hand, considering we have already discussed Steinbeck favored a socialist society, couldn't you say he was ridiculing or criticizing our capitalist way of living? He shows the horrible lives the migrants led, and basically pointing at the faults in our society. Isn't that criticism? Maybe I am way off base here, but that is what I took from the book. I apologize for this extremely lengthy explanation.
Oh and Preston, dear, I wouldn't bring this up except for I know you pride yourself on perfection, but "I", as when you are speaking of yourself, is supposed to be capitalized.
I agree with mostly everyone that Stienbeck wrote this book mostly as a parable. Though it does have its ideas to be critized, he shows his piece with the intent of letting the reader form his own opinions on the morals of the book. There is not as much certain ideas standing alone to be criticised his ideas are pulled into the plot, which makes it more of a parable.
I believe that The Grapes of Wrath is meant to be a parable. Stienbeck used a story of a family to show struggles and pain that most people in the time had to go through. He wanted to tell others about those situations but not to have them critisized. He wanted morals and lessons to be told. With the use of his inter chapters he does this. Aubrey Young Block 7
Erica, you are out of your mind. This book is a parable. Steinbeck might favor socialism, but I am not sure because he did make loads of money from his books. If this book was a satire Steinbeck would have criticized individuals instead of defending them by blaming the whole mess on banks and bad harvests. The only people he blames are the large landowners and it was not their fault, they were just trying to make money.
I believe the Grapes Of Wrath is a parable. This book was meant to teach a lesson of selfishness and altruism. It was not written to criticize anybody. Steinbeck used this novel to teach the importance of unity of man.
I agree with Diamond and Quincey that the Grapes of Wrath is a parable. Instead of trying to critisize or make fun of the society, Steinbeck was definitely trying to teach a lesson along with showing the consequences. He was trying to show what would happen if people got selfish and didn't help people out.
The Grapes of Wrath was meant to be a parable. The themes expressed in general are lessons to be learned from, such as selfishness and unity of man. In no way did the context ever seem sarcastic or try to ridicle any set of people. I would have to agree with CJ and as well as Kayla Grossnickle; it is easy to see most things as a parable. Aubree Smethers - Block 1
I think The Grapes of Wrath is a parable because it teaches a moral lesson, this story does this by showing how more success can be achieved together than individually.
I think The Grape of Wrath is a parable because it shows us how in the the hardest of times people will come together to get through their difficulties and teaches us a lesson on how we have to set aside our differences to get though the rough times. Kelly Schadegg Block 2
I think that The Grapes of Wrath is a parable because it teaches people how to help people in desperate times. I also agree with Kelly on how it teaches a lesson on how we have to set aside our differences to get though the rough times. Justin Edwards Blk #2
I disagree with a few of the people at the beginning of the blog who claimed that The Grapes of Wrath is not mainly a satire because it is not "ridiculing" any specific event or people. A satire is not limited to ridiculing an event, and indeed, this is not the purpose of a satire at all. A satire is meant to provoke reflection and thought within the reader, which The Grapes of Wrath certainly does. What are the inter chapters if not a look into the mindset of the people of the Great Depression? By using these inter chapters, Steinbeck helps flesh out his illumination of the time, allowing readers to truly understand the motives behind the actions. I therefor conclude that The Grapes of Wrath is primarily a satire.
Using Preston's defining of Satire, I have concluded that this book was written with the intention of being a parable. It is not mocking or ridiculing anyone. Steinbeck wrote "The Grapes of Wrath" because he felt bad Preston, not because he wanted to tease the poor people. He even felt sorry for the rich seeing how uptight and cruel they were. He was trying to teach the people of his own time and future generations the lessons necessary so people never put themselves into such an unnecessary situation again. David Gardiner 2nd block
He is not teasing the migrants! He is criticizing the way in which wealthy farm owners have taken advantage of these displaced people! If you want a morality lesson, read the Bible, Koran, or Torah! I would consider John Steinbeck closer to Upton Sinclair than to God/Allah.
Also think about the time period in which it was written. The Crucible could be taken as a parable because it was written nearly 400 years after what happened in Salem, and it never directly came out and said the principles of McCarthyism is totally wrong and immoral (which would thus make it a satire).
However with The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck was exposing the plight of the people and wanted to make sure that their story was heard.
Ugh...It is obviously a parable. Though it can be seen as a satire, It isn't meant to be. There is some derision in the story about Californians and the prejudice the uphold, but that same derision is the stable backbone of the parable. The family's unbelievably rough journey is proof enough of a parable. It says that through hard times, unity is what we need. A broken family is only as good as itsweakest parts, whereas a family with a tight bond breaks the mold and can work together to end the hardships. Preston, I like your stance on the satire points though. It can be a very questionable toss up between the two. Josh Poindexter Block 1 homey
The Grapes of Wrath is a Satire that becomes a parable. This is due to how it criticizes society and exposes its immorality, this in perspective enables the reader to learn about morals. Therefore, the audience also obtains a moral lesson which makes the Grapes of Wrath both a satire, for the exposure of humanity's immorality, and a parable, for leading the audience to learn of morals. Edgar Suarez Block 7
Grapes of Wrath is Deffinatly not a Satire--- I mean someone could argue that Steinbeck was making fun of the migrant workers through his characters--- but the book is deffinatly more of a parable--- or ratther, a series of parables--- depicting life for the peopleof the 1950's America, while teaching that persiverence and belief in one's self as well as one's community and breathern can pull you throught the drakest of times.
I think that the book is more of a parable because in the story it teaches you about struggle and life lessons that people are learning everyday. It is teaching you about how society treats eachother and it is showing you how people get out of jail and there is a possibility that when they go home people are not going to be there.
I figured that responding to this blog later would be a better option because I could view other opinions before writing my own, but I was mistaken. Now I am just all the more confused because everyone has made excellent arguments either way. So, I am just going to stick with my idea that this book could be seen as either a satire or a parable, depending how the reader wants to view it. I, personally, would probably call it a parable because it does teach a great lesson of how men should stand together in our society (and thats what we have been talking about in class.) But it could also be seen as a satire based on the way the characters view their society and the people in thier society.
As long as we are poking fun at eachother, I would also like to point out that you should use punctuation at the end of a sentance. =)
Gah! I'm late! Yes, it is I, the famous "In America" from Cochrans blog. A.K.A., Ryan Mattox. I'm also called Chris in some circles.
I'm just going to go along with everyone else and say that this is a parable. Why? Because this has a lesson to teach everyone a lesson about character, in America. We Americans have issues with, as previously stated by many of the other bright AP students, selfishness, greed, altruism, greed, and many other things I'm sure. The fact of the matter is that Steinbeck showed us every end of the spectrum to us as he could and the troubles various groups had to go through, in America. From the bulldozer monsters to the corn children, every group was covered. So yeah, parable. -------- As a side note, nobody better forget to have fun with these posts. This is as much as a blog as it is a school project, in America.
36 comments:
I believe that The Grapes of Wrath is a parable because it is a story designed to illustrate and teach a moral lesson to it's readers about one's altruism and selfishness and the effects they have on a community (and surrounding cities/towns). The selfish businessmen stripped everyone from their belongings and didn't stop to think about the outcome of their actions. They drove thousands of families into poverty just to make a living for themselves. Tom Joad realized this and went out to change society out of the concern for his families life as well as his, expressing altruism.
Clarissa Johnson
Block 7
I agree with Clarissa. The way that the story is written, it is read in the form of a parable. The form of tearing the other families down just to better themselves proves this.
Shelby Stevenson
Block 7
I agree, they were very selfish and didn't think about how it would effect the other family's, only their own. They needed to come together instead of just taking care of theirselves
pyI believe that Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath is a parable, not a satire. In the story Steinbeck illustrates the hard times the migrants went through while the business men were prospering, indicating that this story is a parable. He also rehearses the cruelty forced upon the migrants by the natives of California. Lastly, in The Grapes of Wrath it gives the reader a sensible depiction of the land during the time of the dust bowl. Miller’s novel is not a satire because it does not ridicule a person, place, thing, or event; instead it is very informative throughout.
Ashleigh McDaniel BLK2
Though almost anything can be a parable, if you think about it, I believe Steinbeck did intend this to be one, with a lesson to everyone, but especially to the government and rich folks. The lesson he wanted them to learn was: when you beat people down, they'll only become angry and attack back. Though there are satires within the book itself, I also take Ashleigh's position that it's not a satire because he is not ridiculing any specific person, place, thing, or event. In a way, it was both a parable and a prophesy.
Kayla Grossnickle
Block 7
I believe this novel is a parable because it had moral lessons on altruism and taught truths and religious meanings within itself. I agree with Ashleigh in the fact that the book did not target any specific person or object to ridicule. Therefore, it must be a parable and not a satirical novel. The figurative language throughout the story was not mostly irony and sarcasm used to scorn others. I agree with Clarissa in the fact that this book is meant to teach its readers about one's altruism and selfishness.
- Kelsey Lauersdorf, 7th Block
I definitely agree with Kelsey and Clarissa in the fact that this book is a parable. The Grapes of Wrath was meant to teach its audience a lesson about altruism and greed. It was not meant to criticize a person or event. In The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck shows the results of a society where the rich only want to get richer while the poor are getting poorer. He also is trying to teach a lesson about the unity of family and man by showing the strength in the Joad family and the bond that keeps them going.
Hannah Stirnaman
Block 7
The Grapes of Wrath is not a book designed to be easily "read" for lack of a better word (no pun intended..) However, I do agree with many of the other kids that this book is in fact a parable. It is designed, after looking hard enough, to teach a lesson on greed and how that affects the town and people in the town. The Grapes of Wrath teaches us that anyone, no matter what you have done in the past or who you have been, you can change for the better and change the world. A.K.A. Tom Joad.
Naegele
Block 2
Whether a story is a satire or a parable is always up to how the reader interprets the story. The Grapes of Wrath though is most definitely a parable. The tale of the Joad's is a tale of tests. All the tests are on their moral structure as friends, as a family, and most importantly as individuals. If a family has the right appeal to the reader the reader will actually think about the morals of the story and accept them. Steinbeck has created the appeal and this makes many more readers see and understand the moral lessons of this parable, The Grapes of Wrath.
Logan Pippitt Block 2
I believe that this piece can be both (just to play devil's advocate). Satire, defined by Webster's is "a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule." Could it be said that Steinbeck is criticizing the larger farm systems in California, and is exposing them to be factories of hate and greed? I know i was disgusted with the acts of wealthy farm owners in the novel
Preston Pyle
Hour 7
Of course Preston is the one to play The Devil's Advocate. It was an honorable act to perform; someone had to do it. The composition of the Grapes of Wrath still points more towards being a parable, like most of the others have stated. The story can universally teach a lesson on the importance of morals, and the consequences for doing what is not right. The degradation and humiliation of the migrants was a result of the selfishness of big-time banks and businessmen. No one can justify this type of immorality because for one demographic to gain strength, another must be torn down.
Lydia Clark-Hargreaves
Block 7
I think that the Grapes of Wrath is a parable. The novel did not criticize any specific person or idea, which means it could not be a satire. Steinbeck uses the book to teach lessons about selfishness and alturism, along with the unity of man.
Kelsey Kreiser
Block 7
As the daring Preston Pyle pointed out there are things that are meant to be ridiculed in The Grapes of Wrath, but the majority of the book is written as a parable. I agree with everyone else that it is written to teach how society is going wrong and how the rich are striving to make more money, while allowing the poor to grow poorer by the day and struggling to live. It is about one man's mission to go out and try to keep it from continuing further.
Chris Hohman
Block 2
I agree with everyone else who said the Grapes of Wrath is a parable. This novel is a parable because Steinbeck uses the book to teach lessons about the unity of man. Steinbeck's novel is not considered a satire because it did not criticize any specific person or idea.
Hillary Simpson
1st Block
I actually kind of agree with Preston, shockingly enough. Being a parable is more obvious; The Grapes of Wrath definitely has many moral lessons regarding selfishness, like CJ mentioned, as well as the importance of family and unity and standing up for what is right. On the other hand, considering we have already discussed Steinbeck favored a socialist society, couldn't you say he was ridiculing or criticizing our capitalist way of living? He shows the horrible lives the migrants led, and basically pointing at the faults in our society. Isn't that criticism? Maybe I am way off base here, but that is what I took from the book. I apologize for this extremely lengthy explanation.
Oh and Preston, dear, I wouldn't bring this up except for I know you pride yourself on perfection, but "I", as when you are speaking of yourself, is supposed to be capitalized.
Erica Rains
Block 7
I agree with mostly everyone that Stienbeck wrote this book mostly as a parable. Though it does have its ideas to be critized, he shows his piece with the intent of letting the reader form his own opinions on the morals of the book. There is not as much certain ideas standing alone to be criticised his ideas are pulled into the plot, which makes it more of a parable.
Caitlyn Sanner
Block 7
I believe that The Grapes of Wrath is meant to be a parable. Stienbeck used a story of a family to show struggles and pain that most people in the time had to go through. He wanted to tell others about those situations but not to have them critisized. He wanted morals and lessons to be told. With the use of his inter chapters he does this.
Aubrey Young
Block 7
Erica, you are out of your mind. This book is a parable. Steinbeck might favor socialism, but I am not sure because he did make loads of money from his books. If this book was a satire Steinbeck would have criticized individuals instead of defending them by blaming the whole mess on banks and bad harvests. The only people he blames are the large landowners and it was not their fault, they were just trying to make money.
Quincey Johnson
Block 1
I believe the Grapes Of Wrath is a parable. This book was meant to teach a lesson of selfishness and altruism. It was not written to criticize anybody. Steinbeck used this novel to teach the importance of unity of man.
Diamond
Block 1
I agree with Diamond and Quincey that the Grapes of Wrath is a parable. Instead of trying to critisize or make fun of the society, Steinbeck was definitely trying to teach a lesson along with showing the consequences. He was trying to show what would happen if people got selfish and didn't help people out.
Kayla Duran
Block 2
The Grapes of Wrath was meant to be a parable. The themes expressed in general are lessons to be learned from, such as selfishness and unity of man. In no way did the context ever seem sarcastic or try to ridicle any set of people. I would have to agree with CJ and as well as Kayla Grossnickle; it is easy to see most things as a parable.
Aubree Smethers - Block 1
I think The Grapes of Wrath is a parable because it teaches a moral lesson, this story does this by showing how more success can be achieved together than individually.
Dylon Cale
Block7
I think The Grape of Wrath is a parable because it shows us how in the the hardest of times people will come together to get through their difficulties and teaches us a lesson on how we have to set aside our differences to get though the rough times.
Kelly Schadegg
Block 2
I think that The Grapes of Wrath is a parable because it teaches people how to help people in desperate times. I also agree with Kelly on how it teaches a lesson on how we have to set aside our differences to get though the rough times.
Justin Edwards Blk #2
I disagree with a few of the people at the beginning of the blog who claimed that The Grapes of Wrath is not mainly a satire because it is not "ridiculing" any specific event or people. A satire is not limited to ridiculing an event, and indeed, this is not the purpose of a satire at all. A satire is meant to provoke reflection and thought within the reader, which The Grapes of Wrath certainly does. What are the inter chapters if not a look into the mindset of the people of the Great Depression? By using these inter chapters, Steinbeck helps flesh out his illumination of the time, allowing readers to truly understand the motives behind the actions. I therefor conclude that The Grapes of Wrath is primarily a satire.
I'll get down off of my soapbox now.
Seth Rector, Block 7
Using Preston's defining of Satire, I have concluded that this book was written with the intention of being a parable. It is not mocking or ridiculing anyone. Steinbeck wrote "The Grapes of Wrath" because he felt bad Preston, not because he wanted to tease the poor people. He even felt sorry for the rich seeing how uptight and cruel they were. He was trying to teach the people of his own time and future generations the lessons necessary so people never put themselves into such an unnecessary situation again.
David Gardiner 2nd block
He is not teasing the migrants! He is criticizing the way in which wealthy farm owners have taken advantage of these displaced people! If you want a morality lesson, read the Bible, Koran, or Torah! I would consider John Steinbeck closer to Upton Sinclair than to God/Allah.
Also think about the time period in which it was written. The Crucible could be taken as a parable because it was written nearly 400 years after what happened in Salem, and it never directly came out and said the principles of McCarthyism is totally wrong and immoral (which would thus make it a satire).
However with The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck was exposing the plight of the people and wanted to make sure that their story was heard.
-Preston
p.s.-Making fun of the farmers would make it a parable.
-Preston
P.S.S- I mean parody!!
-Preston
Ugh...It is obviously a parable. Though it can be seen as a satire, It isn't meant to be. There is some derision in the story about Californians and the prejudice the uphold, but that same derision is the stable backbone of the parable. The family's unbelievably rough journey is proof enough of a parable. It says that through hard times, unity is what we need. A broken family is only as good as itsweakest parts, whereas a family with a tight bond breaks the mold and can work together to end the hardships. Preston, I like your stance on the satire points though. It can be a very questionable toss up between the two.
Josh Poindexter
Block 1 homey
The Grapes of Wrath is a Satire that becomes a parable. This is due to how it criticizes society and exposes its immorality, this in perspective enables the reader to learn about morals. Therefore, the audience also obtains a moral lesson which makes the Grapes of Wrath both a satire, for the exposure of humanity's immorality, and a parable, for leading the audience to learn of morals.
Edgar Suarez Block 7
Grapes of Wrath is Deffinatly not a Satire--- I mean someone could argue that Steinbeck was making fun of the migrant workers through his characters--- but the book is deffinatly more of a parable--- or ratther, a series of parables--- depicting life for the peopleof the 1950's America, while teaching that persiverence and belief in one's self as well as one's community and breathern can pull you throught the drakest of times.
Bailey Stines
Block .1.
I think that the book is more of a parable because in the story it teaches you about struggle and life lessons that people are learning everyday. It is teaching you about how society treats eachother and it is showing you how people get out of jail and there is a possibility that when they go home people are not going to be there.
Chrissy B
Bock 2
I figured that responding to this blog later would be a better option because I could view other opinions before writing my own, but I was mistaken. Now I am just all the more confused because everyone has made excellent arguments either way. So, I am just going to stick with my idea that this book could be seen as either a satire or a parable, depending how the reader wants to view it. I, personally, would probably call it a parable because it does teach a great lesson of how men should stand together in our society (and thats what we have been talking about in class.) But it could also be seen as a satire based on the way the characters view their society and the people in thier society.
As long as we are poking fun at eachother, I would also like to point out that you should use punctuation at the end of a sentance. =)
Michelle Gardner
Block 2
Fantastic "discussion" this week. I agree with Michelle that many of you had excellent arguments. Good job!
Zimm
Gah! I'm late! Yes, it is I, the famous "In America" from Cochrans blog. A.K.A., Ryan Mattox. I'm also called Chris in some circles.
I'm just going to go along with everyone else and say that this is a parable. Why? Because this has a lesson to teach everyone a lesson about character, in America. We Americans have issues with, as previously stated by many of the other bright AP students, selfishness, greed, altruism, greed, and many other things I'm sure. The fact of the matter is that Steinbeck showed us every end of the spectrum to us as he could and the troubles various groups had to go through, in America. From the bulldozer monsters to the corn children, every group was covered. So yeah, parable.
--------
As a side note, nobody better forget to have fun with these posts. This is as much as a blog as it is a school project, in America.
Can you tell how I got my screen name?
Post a Comment