But industrialists and right-wing politicians declared The Grapes of Wrath a revolutionary call to arms.
They feared the novel would cause unrest and drive even more of the unemployed poor out west.
Then, we'll explore the novel's critique of capitalism.
How can a novel that exposes the strife of migrant farmers ruffle so many feathers?
In his 1939 New York Times review, Peter Munro Jack notes the similarity between Steinbeck's 'revolutionary' story and those of Hemingway, Caldwell, and Faulkner.
Jack calls the novel 'superb' and also 'angry.' Jack writes diplomatically, ''It may be an exaggeration, but it is the exaggeration of an honest and splendid writer.'' This New York Times critic prophecies that ''Californians are not going to like this angry novel.'' And, he was right.
The migration of workers from east to west merely aggravated a problem that was already outpaced by labor conditions.
Let's take a look at the economic and political ramifications of Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath.
Some have said this book exposes a condition and a character of people,…but the truth is this book exposes nothing but the total depravity, vulgarity, and degraded mentality of the author.'' Critics of Steinbeck's novel have never come to a conclusion as to the economic or political implications the author sets forth.
In fact, the ramifications of Dust-Bowl America continue to impact society in the 21st century.