Community Reviews

Rating(4.1 / 5.0, 97 votes)
5 stars
40(41%)
4 stars
30(31%)
3 stars
27(28%)
2 stars
0(0%)
1 stars
0(0%)
97 reviews
April 25,2025
... Show More
Non sarebbe mai venuta la fine finché la paura si fosse tramutata in furore.

Se vi dicono che Furore è un libro sulla Grande Depressione Americana, credeteci, ma non del tutto. Siamo dopo il tracollo finanziario del ’29, storico giovedì nero. Ci sono il Presidente Roosevelt e la sua politica per risollevare gli USA dal tracollo, il celebre New Deal. E c’è nel vostro libro di storia un minuscolo paragrafo che dice così: “la riduzione della produzione agricola prevista dall’Agricultural Adjustement Act arrestò la caduta dei prezzi, ma causò l’espulsione dalle campagne di vaste masse di contadini senza lavoro”. Ecco, in questo paragrafo da libro di storia, che nemmeno avete evidenziato di giallo tanto è anonimo, germogliano le quasi 500 pagine di Furore.

Se vi dicono che Furore è un libro sull’odissea della famiglia Joad, contadini dell’Oklahoma che si trasferiscono avventurosamente in California, credeteci, ma non del tutto. L’Odissea è quella di centinaia di migliaia di contadini in marcia attraverso il continente americano alla ricerca di una nuova Terra Promessa, con le casette bianche e i frutti che pendono dai rami pronti ad essere colti. L’Odissea è quella dell’Umanità in viaggio, di qualunque fetta di Umanità costretta a migrare per sottrarsi alla miseria ed approdare forse a una miseria maggiore. L’Odissea è quella dei barconi libici che approdano sulle coste di Lampedusa. L’Odissea è quella dei nostri trisnonni che si accalcavano sui parapetti per spiare la statua della Libertà.

In Furore vedo sì il romanzo simbolo della Grande Depressione Americana, ma vedo tanto altro e quel tanto altro è più rilevante dell’effettivo contesto storico di riferimento. Altrimenti non mi spiegherei perché questo libro possa parlare a me attraverso il tempo, me che la Grande Depressione Americana non ha sfiorato di pezzo, me che nemmeno ho studiato con interesse il libro di storia. E, per smentire Wikipedia, Furore non è neanche “un’opera a sostegno della politica del New Deal di Roosevelt”. Davvero? E dove? È mica nominato Roosevelt in questo libro? E all’Umanità allo sbaraglio, all’Umanità che non ha da mangiare, interessa per caso l’aspetto tecnico del New Deal? E un qualunque americano medio, leggendo questo romanzo, avrebbe forse dovuto sentirsi rincuorato sulle sorti del proprio paese? Decisamente no.

Furore è un romanzo imbevuto di tematiche sociali e, più che sociali, socialiste. Il rapporto ricchezza/povertà, schiavo/padrone, la logica del profitto, le minacce del progresso, le istanze rivoluzionarie, l’arma dello sciopero, l’egoismo e la solidarietà di classe, la presa di consapevolezza dei propri diritti di lavoratore ed essere umano. Sono solo alcune delle tematiche che percorrono l’opera, esplorate con straordinario acume e lucidità, senza risparmiare nulla, senza censura, spietate che siano.

Le due istituzioni capitali del romanzo, intorno alle quali tutto ruota, sono la terra e la famiglia. La terra, un pezzo di terra, un proprio pezzo di terra, è per i Joad quello che la Provvidenza è per i Malavoglia, il collante dell’unità familiare, il centro focale, la chiave di volta. Quando viene a mancare la terra, tutto si sfalda, la famiglia si disperde e la disgregazione del nido è quanto di più atroce possa capitare a chi non ha che quello. Simbolo della famiglia è mamma Joad, pronta a tutto pur di arrestare lo sfaldamento, persino a minacciare figli e marito con tanto di spranga di ferro. Mamma Joad è la madre per eccellenza, la madre come cuore pulsante della famiglia, perché gli uomini la vita la portano “dentro la testa” mentre le donne “noi, la vita ce la portiamo sulle braccia”.

Altro cenno merita la figura di Casy, ex predicatore, l’anti-Dimmesdale, se così possiamo chiamarlo. Casy è uno per cui le nozioni di virtù e di peccato non hanno più senso, perché “esiste solo quello che si fa e che è parte della realtà, e tutto ciò che si può dire con sicurezza è che la gente fa delle cose che sono simpatiche, altre che non sono simpatiche”. Casy è uno che ha smesso di amare Dio per amare esclusivamente il prossimo, perché “mai conosciuto io uno che si chiami Gesù. So un mucchio di storie sulla faccenda, ma amo solo il mio simile”. Casy è uno che è stato nel deserto, “era andato per cercarvi la sua anima, e aveva scoperto che non aveva un’anima che fosse sua, ma che era solo un pezzo di un’altra anima immensa. E aveva capito che non bisogna andare a vivere nel deserto, perché lì il nostro pezzo di anima non può servire da sola, serve soltanto quando sta con gli altri pezzi dell’anima grande, e cioè quando si vive in mezzo agli uomini”.

Per quanto riguarda i modi della scrittura, posso solo dire che Steinbeck è magistrale, che la sua prosa è splendida, ricca, evocativa (e per capirlo basta leggersi anche solo il primo capitolo). Quando è così, credo che il merito sia da attribuire tanto all’autore quanto al traduttore. Tutto in questo libro è mostrato e solo poco è raccontato, tutto è immagine e solo poco è spiegazione, e il paesaggio si costruisce intorno a voi nei suoni, nei colori, negli odori. I personaggi sono cumuli di gesti e di sguardi. La sofferenza è negli atti, non nella retorica. Se cercate una trama brillante e dei dialoghi forzati e ad effetto, cercate altrove. Questi personaggi parlano come persone e non fanno nulla che una persona non farebbe. Il realismo di questo romanzo è perfetto.

Riporto una scena apparentemente insignificante. La famiglia Joad ha appena cominciato il suo viaggio verso la California. La loro auto allestita a casa mobile si ferma presso una stazione di rifornimento. I componenti della famiglia scendono per sgranchirsi le gambe e scende con loro anche il cane, che hanno portato con sé. Passa un’auto di lusso – un’auto di lusso accanto alla vettura dei Joad, una carretta, una pila di mobili e materassi e miseria – e trancia in due il cane. Ruth e Winfield, i bambini della famiglia, si avvicinano ai resti dell’animale.

“Aveva ancora gli occhi aperti, hai visto?” Winfield sapeva di aver visto una cosa grandiosa: illustrò la scena con abbondanza di gesti. “Visto gli intestini? Schizz…schizzati dappertutto, schizz…” Non poté finire: fece appena in tempo a sporgersi all’infuori e vomitò. Ma si ricompose subito, e cogli occhi ancor lagrimosi e il naso gocciolante cercò di giustificarsi dicendo: “Non è come ammazzare il maiale.”

Ecco, io credo che Furore stia tutto qui, in quei resti di cane abbandonati e in questo bambino che vomita, nel dover soffocare e dissimulare il dolore di lasciare indietro la propria terra, nel dover mostrarsi fiduciosi ad ogni costo, perché si deve pur vivere, si deve pur trovare qualcosa da mangiare, non importa quanti cadaveri lasciamo sul nostro cammino, non importa quante umiliazioni dovremo sopportare. Quei resti di cane non ci riempiranno lo stomaco, quei resti di cane sono solo una zavorra per la nostra coscienza. Dimentichiamoli. Dimentichiamo che siamo esseri umani, perché la miseria non ci consente di esserlo. Siamo animali anche noi, animali come gli altri, e prima di tutto dobbiamo riempirci lo stomaco.

Ecco, Furore è un romanzo che vi fa rimproverare la cena che state consumando, che vi fa venir voglia di imbracciare un fucile, tanto è assurdo e disperato e desolante il tutto, il mondo, il futuro, il sistema.
April 25,2025
... Show More
Chirst. This was a tough one to read.

I don't just mean it was depressing. It was, obviously - a book about a poor family being forced from their home during the Great Depression and having to beg for the chance to pick cotton at fifteen cents per hour can't be anything except depressing - but it wasn't the most depressing book I've ever read. That honor probably goes to The Hunchback of Notre Dame, although I guess Angela's Ashes is a close second.

This was hard to read, not because it was a portrayal of a horrible period of history that actually happened. That contributed to the tragedy of the book, of course, coupled with the knowledge that there were not just a few Joad families during the Great Depression, but millions of them, so your percentage of possible happy endings is going to be pretty low.

It wasn't even sad because Steinbeck was using the backdrop of the Great Depression to illustrate the greater problems in America - the disparity between rich and poor, the way low-level laborers have to fight tooth and nail to achieve the most basic human rights, the fact that the people who run the major banks and farms are horrible unfeeling shells of human beings, etc.

The Grapes of Wrath is sad for all of these reasons, but here is what makes it sadder than anything: not the fact that Steinbeck is writing about a horrible period in history that's behind us now. It's because that horrible period went away, and then it came back. We aren't in the middle of a second Dust Bowl, but make no mistake: we are living in the second Great Depression.

If you haven't read yet and have always been meaning to, there's no better time than now. Steinbeck's book was written in the late 1930's, but just about everything that happens here is happening right in your state - possibly in your neighborhood - as you read this. You read about the banks in the Great Depression sending men to bulldoze people's houses while the family stood outside, and find yourself thinking, "Well, at least now they just pile all your stuff on the curb after you get foreclosed on." You read about migrant families accepting offers to work all day at pitiful wages, because fifteen cents an hour is still better than zero cents an hour and the kids have to eat, and you think about the immigrants who pick your food in exchange for shitty wages. You read about the Joad family and the others being called "Okies" and forced out of their camps by the cops, and think about politicians who scream about "illegals" taking away the good American jobs and deporting kids' parents.

Is this review getting too politcally-minded? Good. That's how Steinbeck would have wanted me to talk about his book, because let me assure you - The Grapes of Wrath is extremely fucking political. Another reviewer called it the anti-Atlas Shrugged, which is pretty damn apt. It's all about unions and the rights of the worker and how poor people need government assistance because sometimes life just sucks for no fucking reason.

It's sad and it's searing, and beautifully written, and unrelentingly depressing. But it should be read.

(the only reason this gets four stars instead of five is because of the ending. Look, I know that Steinbeck didn't have to give the Joads a happy ending, and I'm not saying he gave them a sad one either - he gave them a weird one instead. I was already pretty sick of hearing about Rose of Sharon and her magical pregnancy, so it was just the cherry on top of a shit subplot sundae that the ending had her breastfeeding an old man after her baby died. First: allow me to turn into a middle-schooler for a second and say ewwwwwwwwwww. Second: I kind of get what Steinbeck was trying to say with his ending, because it kind of tied into his idea that the only ones who help poor people are other poor people, and Rose of Sharon was literally feeding a dying man with her own body and oh my god personal sacrifice...but on the other hand, she was breastfeeding an adult man. And it was weird and gross and then the book was over. Nope.
April 25,2025
... Show More
Whenever I revisit a classic I'm struck by how much more I get out of it now than I did when I was 24 or 19 or, God forbid, 15. Giving a book like the Grapes of Wrath to a 15 year old serves largely to put them off fine literature for the rest of their lives. The depth of understanding and compassion for the human condition as communicated by a book like this is simply unfathomable to those who haven't lived much life yet, but after you've gotten a healthy dose of living, it comes across like fine music to a trained ear. My heart doesn't bleed for the Joads today as it might have 25 years ago. Yes, it's grim and unfair, but it's no longer shocking or disturbing, and I can see now that Steinbeck didn't intend sensationalism to be the main point. What he's about is revealing the human dignity, the innate goodness and unbreakable pride of these people, and by extension the American people in general, something that still resonates today, especially with reference to the working classes. When the Joads and their kind decline government hand outs, requesting instead the simple opportunity to work hard and be rewarded commensurate with their labor (even if it means a grueling cross-country journey to a place they don't know) one can hear today's white working poors' exasperated disdain for government, insisting that they simply be allowed to keep more of their pay and not be held back in their efforts by nit-picking legalities and cultural trivialities that disapprove of their lifestyles. Sadly, most such people will never read the Grapes of Wrath. Worse yet, many liberal lawmakers won't read it again after high school and won't glean from it an essential understanding about the pride and perseverance of the American working class which the far right is playing like a fiddle much to the detriment of the entire nation. A book like the Grapes of Wrath should be required reading - for every American over 30.
April 25,2025
... Show More
انقدر تاثیر این کتاب روی من عمیق بود، ریویو طولانی شد. اگر با دیدن تعداد پاراگراف‌ها دارید بیخیالش میشید (که حق دارید!) فقط همین رو بگم که
خوشه‌های خشم رو بخوانید

کتاب‌های داستانی معمولی، اصولاً حیوانات خانگی رام‌شده‌ای هستند که دندان‌هایشان رو به شما نشان نمیدن و کشان کشان شما رو به دنیای وحشی نمی‌برند. اما خوشه‌های خشم داستانیه که دندان‌هاش به خونتون آغشته‌ میشه[گاردین]. داستان ساده و تلخه. اُکی‌هایی (مهاجران اکلاهما) که به سمت باغ‌های میوه‌ی کالیفرنیا راه افتادند و در تلاش برای یافتن سرزمین موعود، چه زجرها که نکشیدند. خانواده جود، یکی از هزاران خانواده‌ای بودند که از زمینی که در اون متولد شده بودند رانده شدند و دوازده نفر، سوار بر ماشینی قدیمی به سمت غرب کوچ کردند. در نهایت، بدبختی و فلاکت تنها چیزیه که نصیب این خانواده و هزاران مهاجر دیگه شد

بدبختی در دل بدبختی

:داستان دو پس‌زمینه‌ی تاریخی مهم داره

رکود بزرگ The Great Depression .۱
با سقوط بازار سهام در سال ۱۹۲۹ و رکود اقتصادی آمریکا، بانک‌ها به هر راهی متصول شدند تا ضررهای خود رو جبران کنند. از آنجا که یکی کردن زمین‌ها و برداشت محصول با تراکتور از لحاظ اقتصادی سود بیشتری داشت، بانک‌ها کشاورزان کوچک که با قرض و وام زمین‌هاشون رو به بانک باخته بودند رو بیرون کردند و باعث ایجاد یک مهاجرت بزرگ از شرق به غرب شدند

کاسه‌ی خاک Dust bowl .۲
از ابتدای دهه ۱۹۳۰، دشت‌های جنوبی آمریکا دچار طوفان‌های شدید خاک و خشکسالی شدند که باعث مرگ انسان‌ها و دام شد و همچنین محصولات کشاورزی از دست رفتند. این شرایط، تاثیرات کمرشکن رکود اقتصادی رو تشدید کرد و خانواده‌های کشاورز به امید شرایط بهتر مجبور به ترک زمین‌های خود شدند

بحث‌برانگیزِ خوب یا بد؟

خوشه‌های خشم احتمالاً بحث‌برانگیزترین و نقد شده‌ترین رمان قرن بیست هست. چنین آثاری اصولاً جنگ‌های کتابی ایجاد می‌کنند و کتاب‌هایی در دفاع و کتاب‌هایی برای تخریبشون نوشته میشه و این دقیقاً اتفاقیه که برای این اثر افتاد. مردم کالیفرنیا و اکلاهما از نحوه‌ی تصویر شدن در این کتاب گله داشتند و به دروغ‌پراکنی متهمش کردند. سرمایه‌داران و سیاستمداران شک نداشتند که این داستان چیزی جز پروپاگاندای کمونیستی نیست و البته که به خاطر تفاسیر نامتعارف از مسیحیت و الفاظ زشت به مذاق محافظه‌کاران هم خوش نمی‌آمد. امتحان اصلی کتاب‌ها اما، گذر زمانه. با فاصله گرفتن از زمان رکود اقتصادی و پیوستن این ماجراها به تاریخ، مردم با دید بازتری به این داستان نگاه کردند و مجبور شدند با حقیقت مواجه بشن، اینجا بود که مخاطبان بیشتری روایت کتاب رو پذیرفتند

کل و جز

کتاب فصل‌بندی متفاوتی داره. تقریباً یک فصل در میان داستان خانواده جود قطع میشه و نویسنده سعی می‌کنه تصویر بزرگتری از رویدادها رو ترسیم کنه‌. البته با اینکه جودها در این فصل‌ها حضور ندارند، در حقیقت با همون مسائل بعدا رو به رو میشن. اگر کتاب فقط با فصل‌های کلی نوشته می‌شد، تصور دردهایی که ازش صحبت می‌کنه سخت می‌شد و اگر فقط از مشکلات جودها می‌خوندیم، شاید فراموش می‌کردیم که این خانواده فقط مشتی از خروارها بودند

از من به ما

بخشی از فلسفه اشتاین‌بک که از مارکس تأثیر گرفته، در مورد قدرت جمع در مقابل ضعف فرده. تمام کاراکترهای اصلی رشد شخصیتی‌ای در همین راستا دارند. تام جود، شخصیت اصلی داستان در ابتدای کتاب بسیار خودمحوره و به سرعت عصبانی میشه. ما جود، مادر خانواده، در فصل‌های ابتدایی به هیچکس جز خانواده خودش فکر نمی‌کنه. اما هر دو بعد از تجربه‌ی مصیبت‌های بسیار، به مرور فراتر از خودشون رو می‌بینند و سعی می‌کنند به هر نحو به مهاجران دیگر هم کمک کنند. مادر در حالی که خودشون غذای زیادی ندارند، به بچه‌های گرسنه کمی غذا میده و تام در انتها بزرگترین تصمیم برای پیوستن به جمع معترضین رو می‌گیره
اما بزرگترین تغییر از فردگرایی به از خودگذشتگی برای «رُزاشارن» خواهر باردار تام اتفاق می‌افته که با همسر جوانش و سری پر از آرزوهای شیرین این سفر رو شروع می‌کنه. کم‌کم واقعیت روی سیاهش رو به رزاشارن نشان میده و هر روز بخشی از رویاش رو از دست میده. در نهایت این دختر جوان در صفحات نهایی کتاب، مظهر طرز فکر اشتاین‌بک میشه

"زن‌ها راحت‌تر تغییر می‌کنند"

این جواب مادر به پدر خانوادست، وقتی که مرد از قدرت این زن برای مدیریت و کنترل اوضاع سخت در تعجبه. نقش مادر خانواده جود در این داستان و رشد شخصیتش از جذاب‌ترین بخش‌ها بود. داستان به وضوح در جامعه‌ی مردسالار اوایل قرن بیستم در حال رخ دادنه. در ابتدای داستان می‌بینیم که مردان تصمیم‌گیرنده‌های اصلی برای سفر پیش رو هستند و حتی زنان اجازه‌ی نظر دادن ندارند. اما در طول کتاب با سخت شدن شرایط و مواجهه با مصیبت‌ها، این مادر خانوادست که کنترل اوضاع رو به دست می‌گیره و تصمیمات نهایی رو برای خانواده می‌گیره. مادر که هدفی جز زنده و در کنار هم نگه داشتن خانواده‌اش نداره، در مقابل این تغییر بزرگ نمی‌شکنه و با قدرتش سفر رو پیش می‌بره

دردِ آشنا

اشتاین‌بک خودش در یکی از مزرعه‌های کالیفرنیا به دنیا آمد و در اون‌ها کار کرد. قبل از انتشار این کتاب از وضعیت مشقت‌بار کمپ‌های مهاجران برای روزنامه می‌نوشت، به طور مداوم ازشون بازدید می کرد و حتی با مهاجران همسفر می‌شد. تمام این‌ها مقدماتی برای نوشتن این کتاب بود. به قول خودش نویسنده تنها در مورد چیزی می‌تونه خوب بنویسه که تحسینش می‌کنه و از نظرش در اون زمان چیزی تحسین برانگیزتر از شجاعت مردم فقیر نبود

انگلیسی با ترجمه؟ کتاب صوتی چی؟

خیلی توصیه می‌کنم اگر می‌تونید کتاب رو حتماً انگلیسی بخونید. نحوه دیالوگ نویسی اشتاین ‌بک خاصه و تمام مکالمات با لهجه و سبک خاص گفتار مردم ایالت‌های مختلف آمریکا در آن بازه زمانی نوشته شده. من همزمان نسخه صوتی رو گوش کردم و از روی کتاب خواندم. به چند دلیل این روش عالی بود. اول اینکه با تمرکز و سرعت بالاتری کتاب رو خواندم و با اجرای فوق‌العاده گوینده، خواندن جملات با لهجه بسیار آسان‌تر شد

و اما این جمله‌ایه که کتاب رو برام خلاصه می کنه

n  n

سه تا از بهترین مقالات
the guardian
britannica
cliffsnotes

۱۴۰۰/۶/۷
April 25,2025
... Show More
My first 5 star book of the year.
It totally destroyed me. It is devastating ,made me cry throughout.Made me feel so hopeless.
Steinback's writing is beautiful ,simple and extraordinarily powerful. There is something about his writing ,always a punch in the gut.I thought I was ready for it, apparently I wasn't ,it pains me to think about it :(
Love the way he writes characters, you effortlessly get attached to them and always root for them.
Loved Ma and Tom in this.
Incredibly powerful writing!
April 25,2025
... Show More
Oklahoma, 1939. Tractors invade the barren plains, ruining crops, demolishing houses, stripping farmers of their livelihood, leaving only billows of dust and ransacked land behind. Bewildered families choke with disbelief at the lame excuses of the landowners who blame a monster bigger than them. Not the severe droughts, not the iron machines, not their useless greed, but the bank, the bank forced them to do it.
And so a pilgrimage of thousands of destitute families to the promised land of California where the valleys are ripe with fresh hope and sweet grapes begins, and the roads become a limbless reptile hauling an endless tail of wrecked trucks and rootless people who have exchanged their living heritage for the expectation of honest jobs and decent lives.

A debunked list of thwarted illusions and betrayed promises awaits the Joads, the protagonists of Steinbeck’s tale of protest and epitomization of countless second rate Americans who had to endure the degradation of being treated like cattle, the marginalization of inhuman living conditions and the bigoted treatment of their fellow citizens as a result of the Great Depression’s climatic, social and economic debacle.
More than seventy years later, Steinbeck's denouncement of the effects of an abusive system that endorses laws of supply and demand over humanity and social justice mirrors the precarious situation of many developed countries that are struggling against unmanageable unemployment rates and massive migratory movements, which elevates the writer’s prophetic voice of protest to an enduring literary classic that speaks on its own.

“The Grapes of Wrath” is composed of juxtaposed symphonic alternating movements. Short, jazzy and lyrical chapters combining journalistic language with spiritual rhythms give an atemporal view on the migrant drama, which in turn arise as premonitory for the interweaved longer narrative chapters depicting the Joad family’s exodus to California and their symbolic plight for moral equity.
Framed in bold dialogue and raw dialectical jargon, a menagerie of styles, dissonant voices, folk wisdom and biblical imagery gives shape to the mystic soul of the book, which orbits around two concentric points: land and family.
When the Joads are obliged to abandon their farm they are also deprived of their dignity, of their ancestry, of their roots. Once the land is lost, drastic developments threaten the family unit but Ma Joad, tough and vulnerable mother, resilient and respectful wife, gentle and brawly cornerstone of the Joads' collective willpower, and her son Tom, the male counterpoint to Ma’s ability to adapt, personify the indignation that fuels the spark of revolt to preserve self-respect in front of implacable adversity.
But when hope becomes desperation, desperation melts in prayer, prayer degenerates into hunger and hunger ferments in wrath and the skies break lose in floods of misfortune and a mother caresses the disfigured face of her son in the dark, the debilitated bonds that kept the family together shatter silently in fragmented impotence and paralyzing vexation, leaving only one absolute, pulsating soul that speaks for all people, the ghost of Tom Joad:

“Then it don’t matter. Then I’ll be aroun’ in the dark. I’ll be ever’where – wherever you look. Wherever they’s a fight so hungry people can eat, I’ll be there. Wherever they’s a cop beatin’ up a guy. I’ll be there. I’ll be in the way kids laugh when they’re hungry an’ they know supper’s ready. An’ when our folks eat the stuff they raise an’ live in the houses they build – why, I’ll be there.”

And this is how Steinbeck’s polivalent epic evolves from socio-economic determinism to numinous spirituality, for the fury of losing land and lineage metamorphoses into a chant of redemptive love for mankind that overcomes individual boundaries, temporal limits and material needs and rekindles a perdurable harmonious faith that can only be born of the most inexhaustible and universal compassion.

“The people in flight from terror behind – strange things happen to them, some bitterly cruel and some so beautiful that the faith is refired forever.”
April 25,2025
... Show More
4.5⭐
A classic by John Steinbeck during the depression era. The story follows the Joad family’s journey from the hardship in Oklahoma to California looking for a better opportunity.

I was very reluctant to give it a try after reading reviews that it's a slow story. To my surprise, I listened to the second half twice. It was that good and the ending was very moving. I must disclose this is a BBC audio production and it feels like listening to a classic story on the radio. This is a version with 3 narrators and is 2 hours and 46 mins long.
April 25,2025
... Show More

بمناسبة صدور طبعة جديدة من دار المحروسة الرواية العظيمة دي، فقلت اعدل االريفيو علشان افتكره:
أنا اقتنيت الرواية دي منذ أكثر من 4 سنوات , و حتى مش فاكر كلفتني كام , لكن أنا فاكر إنها كانت ميزانية بالنسبة لي وقتها , ولا أعرف ما سبب إحجامي عن قراءتها كل هذا الوقت , قد يكون لضخامتها , ولكني أعتقد أن السبب الرئيس في ذلك هو أنني لست من عشاق الأدب الأمريكي ولا مريديه إلى فترة قصيرة مضت , وفي النهاية كان من حسن حظي عدم قراءتها , لأني وجدت فيها متعة عظيمة في وقت عصيب .

بكل ما تحمله الكلمة من معنى , نحن أمام عمل عظيم , متقن للغاية , بديع السرد , مبهر التفاصيل , عمل واقعي بامتياز , ليس فقط واقعي الأحداث والتفاصيل , بل واقعي البشر , بمشاعرهم وعواطفهم .

هو عمل عن الوجه الآخر لأرض الحرية المزعومة , ورائدة الإنسانية (الكاذبة) في العصر الحديث , عمل عن ظلم الرأسمالية الجشعة , والتي تسير كقطار بلا سائق , يدمر ما يقابله , فلا تعمل حساب لبشر , ولا تراعي معاناتهم المحتملة نتيجة ظلمها . رواية عن أمريكا في النصف الأول من القرن العشرين , رواية عن الدولة العظمى , وكيف أقامت امبراطوريتها وسطوتها .

ببساطة مطلقة : العمل عن أسرة أمريكية قررت الهجرة من أوكلاهوما لكاليفورنيا , أسرة تقليدية رأت الحلم في الغرب الأمريكي , نتيجة اضطهاد رجال الأعمال لهم وطردهم من أرضهم , وتقديم النصح لهم (كذبًا) , أن الجنة الأرضية في الغرب , ونتيجة لضيق ذات اليد , ونتيجة لضغط مهول , آثروا أن يتركوا أرضهم بحثًا عن أخرى .

عندما ينتشر الطمع بين البشر , ويرى الإنسان في أخيه الإنسان مجرد سلعة قد يبيعها فيكسب منها , حينها تفقد أسمى القيم والمبادئ معانيها , ونصبح أقرب إلى حيوانات في غابة متنافرة الفصيلة , ف (لقد ظللت أفكر , لم يكن تفكيرًا بالمعنى المفهوم , كان شيئًا أعمق من ذلك , فكرت كيف كنا شيئًا مقدسًا عندما كنا شيئًا واحدًا . كما أن الإنسانية كانت مقدسة عندما كانت شيئًا واحدًا . ولكنها تفقد قدسيتها حين يبدأ أحد التعساء ويقضم قضمة لنفسه ويجري بها ويرفس ويقاتل ويحارب من أجلها . هذا الرجل يحطم القدسية . ولكن حين يعمل الكل معًا , لا كل واحد في مواجهة أخيه , ولكن الكل كرجل واحد من أجل صالح الإنسانية , فهذا حق وهو مقدس , وعندئذ فكرت , أنا لا أعرف بالدقة ما معنى القدسية ) , فهل القدسية هي تنفيذ كلام الرب أم أن القدسة هي تنفيذ رغبة البشر , وإن كانت القدسية تنفيذ كلام الرب , فلما تغلب علينا رغباتنا .

الرواية عظيمة , من نوعية الروايات اللي بتندمج معها وتتأثر بما يحدث , رواية تضعك في مكان شخوصها وتتخيل ماذا كنت لتفعل لو كنت مكانهم .
رواية تقليدية بلا أي ادعاء ولا تصنع , هي رواية عن الحقيقة , الحقيقة المجردة , عن معاناة البشر والظلم الذي تعرضوا له .

تفاصيل الرواية كثيفة ومبهرة للغاية , أنا بحب النوعية دي , النوعية اللي بترسم لك عالم كامل وتعيش فيه , الكاتب لم يفوته أي تفصيلة مهما كانت صغيرة عن حياة البشر الذي يقدمها , وهذا إن دل على شئ فإنما يدل على أنه كان يكتب عن نفسه وعن بيئته .

الشخصيات , كلها بلا استثناء مرسومة بدقة , شخصيات تحبها , شخصيات عادية للغاية , وعظمتها في أنها عادية , نوعية الشخصيات اللي بتشوفها في الشارع وتكلمها على مقهى .

في المجمل : رواية عظيمة متقنة متكاملة الأركان .

نسخة الشروق كانت جيدة للغاية .
April 25,2025
... Show More
A searing tale of social injustice and so on, and I'm in no way disputing that, but it's funny to see which parts of a book really stay with you. There's a passage early on in the story when the Joad family are setting off in their beat-up old jalopy to make the long trek to California. The car is not in good shape, but the driver knows all its weaknesses intimately and coaxes it along. He becomes one with the machine: he is the car.

At many points in my life, I have found myself responsible for a piece of software other people are relying on which is nearing the end of its useful existence, and I almost always think of that car. Steinbeck described it very well.
April 25,2025
... Show More
In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage.

This book really gets my goat. Those poor, dirty Joads. So poor and so, so dirty. After being displaced from their Oklahoma farm following the Dust Bowl storms that wreck their crops and cause them to default on their loans, the Joads find themselves a family of migrants in search of work and food. They join a stream of hundreds of thousands of other migrant families across the United States to what they believe to be the prosperous valleys of California. Only once they arrive, they discover that there is nothing prosperous about it—not only is there a serious shortage of work (mostly caused by an overabundance of labor that came with the influx of so many other migrant families), but they also have to contend with growing anti-migrant sentiment among the local population and wealthy landowners who think nothing of taking advantage of them in their state of vulnerability. Without proper labor laws protecting worker’s rights and no trade unions to represent their interests, the Joads are severely underpaid for whatever work they do manage to find, and they simply fall deeper and deeper into despondency.

The reason this gets my goat is ‘cause it doesn’t have to be that way. Yes, the Joads are uneducated and wouldn’t qualify for anything more than basic manual labor. Yes, it is the Great Depression and this is not an easy time to find a job even for skilled workers. And yes, they are a family of 47 and they probably look pretty ridiculous all crammed up in the back of their makeshift pickup truck. But gosh darn it, if only they had unions! If only they had fair labor standards to guarantee them a minimum wage! If only they had the protection of government legislation to prohibit wealthy landowners from colluding to keep prices high and wages low!

Which leads me to wonder… what would Ayn Rand think of all this? After all, aren’t labor unions and economic regulation precisely what she argues against? By that account, if Atlas Shrugged is the supposed Bible of right-wing thinkers, then I’d have to say that The Grapes of Wrath might just be its antithesis. But the real difference, as far as I can tell, is that while Atlas Shrugged represents a crazy woman’s vision of a whack job world that could never actually exist, John Steinbeck tells it like it is, and how it was, for so many hard working Americans who were taken advantage of under a system that did nothing to protect them. And what’s even more remarkable is that Steinbeck’s characters (whom, by the way, Rand would refer to as “moochers”—just thought we should be clear on that) make Dagny Taggart and Henry Reardon look like a couple of pussies. What is it Ma Joad says? That if you’re in trouble or hurt or need, to “go to poor people—for they’re the only ones that’ll help.”

This is a novel about the working poor, and it should serve to remind us what can go horribly wrong in an unregulated economy.
April 25,2025
... Show More
I am perhaps digging my own grave by giving a negative review to the well-respected Steinbeck, but Grapes of Wrath is a sore disappointment. Steinbeck's epic is a thinly disguised forum for political, social, and religious dialogue. Unlike great literature, which can address any number of complexities or issues in the context of a larger narrative, Steinbeck presents a only a set of ideas and bends flat characters and a thin plot around these views. His characters are intended only for metaphorical interpretation and offer little substance.

Steinbeck's "interchapters," which portray misery through broad, sweeping claims (without engaging any of the main characters or advancing the plot), are the book's most interesting portions, despite the emotional manipulation that they set forth. To add insult to injury, the novel itself is barely literary. It feels as though Steinbeck is following a checklist of what to include in a novel. (Foreshadowing? Check. Symbolism? Check. Conflict? You betcha.) This would be bad enough by itself, but it isn't even done subtly. Steinbeck might as well have put up neon signs pointing out the literary devices used. He seems to cram as much into the novel as he can, only for the sake of including, rather than for any intrinsic merit. Finally, the messages themselves are somewhat strange. The tone of much of the novel can be described as guilt-mongering - Steinbeck's characters are in a particularly bleak situation, victimized by the Depression, the Dust Bowl, and capitalist land owners - and the readers are made to feel guilty for something that others have done. At the risk of repeating myself, this guilt comes from the narrator's direct condemnations, not through the reader's own understanding of the text or connection with the characters.

Moreover, the book has many religious themes - from the prose style, which imitates the text of the Old Testament, to the very title, which alludes to Revelation - yet the religious "messages" are quite sacrilegious. The main protagonist's epiphany comes from rejecting traditional doctrines (even the idea that all humans have a soul) in exchange for looser, pseudo-Christian ideals. The characters in the text who support traditional ideals are either evil hypocrites or in the case of the heroes (specifically, Granma) laughable, foolish, and senile because of their naive ignorance. This book does not present ideas in an intellectual fashion; it is not worthy to be counted among the greats. I am not criticizing the inclusion of a set of ideas, or even of the Marxist, communist, or religious undertones. I am criticizing Steinbeck's absolute failure write a story with a moral. He opts, instead, for a moral disguised as a story.
April 25,2025
... Show More
This was a library book. I didn't get on with it at all despite trying to read it twice. I gave up about a third of the way through in the end.

It is about the life of one American family during the Great Depression. There is some beautiful creative writing in places but the story itself is so very slow. It just didn't hold my interest due to the lengthy dialogue between the characters who were talking about nothing in particular. It was like being a fly on the wall at a really dull tea party where everyone is making small talk. It seems they were allowing waves of nostalgia to sweep over them--forcing everyone to listen as one by one they recounted monotonous tales from their youth.

I guess I probably shouldn't make such comments about something labelled a classic, but for me it was not. As a Christian, I also found the language, particularly the regular blasphemy, offensive and would probably have stopped reading earlier for that reason had it not been a classic. I also didn't appreciate the early scenes where the local vicar was using his position to bed all of the young women in his parish.

I don't recommend this book due to the language, the sexual content and the monotony, I'm sorry I wasted a few hours on it. I consider that I have carried out my duty by advising you, fellow readers, not to do the same.
Leave a Review
You must be logged in to rate and post a review. Register an account to get started.