Through out the novel, there are several characters that seem to have little importance. They appear sporadically and disappear from the story forever, many times not even leaving a name. They give snapshots of humanity at the time through their minor interactions with main characters.
Steinbeck traveled with a famous photographer all across the dust bowl, taking pictures and learning about the state of people's lives. While he did back down on his offer to write a book with the photographer, I think these small snippets of humanity we get with these faceless, nameless characters are a just like a photograph. In a photograph, you may see a man behind the counter in a store. You can infer how much money he has, how happy, and what he does for a living; but that is all you have, just inferences.
The novel first opens with a truck driver. We learn so much about him, his life, and his life goals, but never learn his name. Again, just like a photograph. Next we have the used car salesman. We learn livelihood and a little about him, but no name. The same pattern is repeated again and again. The question is, does it matter that we never learn their name? We still get a different perspective on life in the dust bowl. In the chapter with the turtle, we never learn the names of the different drivers that nearly end the turtle's life. The impact they potentially could have on the life of this animal is huge, and we never even learn about them.
I believe the theme of anonymity reflects the impact these farmers and migrants had on the country and how they are hardly remembered or realized. They become part of the earth of our country and it's history, then quietly fade into the past, just like a photo.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Photos don't really fade, but they are static whereas the characters in this novel are on the move, as you rightly emphasize. Some of the interchapters do give us names ("Danny"; "Mae")--what's the effect of those names, then?
ReplyDelete