So far, this and Grapes of Wrath are Steinbeck's most liked books. It seems like a simple family story, but it is so expertly written.

So FANTASTIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Realistic ~ Page-Turner ~ Entertaining ~ Tear-Jerker ~ Wonderful Characters ~ Original ~ Haunting ~Great World Building - Favorite Classics

This was my 3rd time to read this book. The first time was in high school and I was amazed by it then. I then read it again in college when I wrote a paper on John Steinbeck's characters. Again I was amazed by it. Now years later I wanted to read it again. I still come up with the same thing -- this book is amazing. Some of the best characters overall in literature can be found in this pages. You loved them, you hated them, you wept with them, and at times some of frustrated you or scared you. There is so much packed into the pages that sometimes with me it was a little slower to digest for me at my current age so it took me longer to read now than it did in the past. But I caught things this read though that I didn't catch when I was younger. This book is definitely in my top 10 books of all time.

n  Bulgarian review below/Ревюто на български е по-долуn
Human life is a repetition. It repeats the lives of old and it repeats itself. Human life is also a spiral. Sometimes it seems we are walking in circles, but actually we’re getting ever so slightly closer to the center. We make mistakes that people smarter than us and people more stupid than us also made, but we continue moving towards our own centers. Everything that could ever be done has already been done, we only change it a bit and adapt it. And we keep going through time.

Steinbeck’s novel is swarming with biblical references. I haven’t even grasped all of them, I’m quite sure of that. I won’t write about Cain and Abel, the references to the characters’ names, the circular motion of events, and the inevitable predictability of some of them. I’d like to take a closer look at some of the characters who touched me to the raw. At the guilty without guilt. For example, it would be logical, considering all the other parable elements, that Cathy’s character should be related to Eve, with the original cunning and sinful nature attributed to women. Cathy, however, is a victim of herself. She’s a victim of what she doesn’t know and can’t recognize in others. Steinbeck doesn’t condemn her, he just states her psychological crookedness, pities her, even forgives her. Cathy is one of those people who lack something, and she lives with her disability without being able to fathom it out. How can you explain to a blind person what does the color blue look like? She is not what she is because she wants it, but simply because she can’t be anything else.

‘Perhaps we can’t understand Cathy, but on the other hand we are capable of many things in all directions, of great virtues and great sins. And who in his mind has not probed the black water? Maybe we all have in us a secret pond where evil and ugly things germinate and grow strong… Might it not be that in the dark pools of some men the evil grows strong enough to wriggle over the fence and swim free? Would not such a man be our monster, and are we not related to him in our hidden water?’

If Cathy is the shadow, Samuel Hamilton is the brightest sun. Samuel is a dreamer, an inventor, a philosopher, restless, eternally seeking. He passes through life like a blaze, like a demigod, and even his children can’t believe he’s getting older. Though invariably poor, Sam Hamilton has other treasuries that are brimming over – his family and his imagination. He’s the incarnation of the gentle rapture of existence, a person who have realized perhaps one of the most important truths – that we should enjoy every little thing, for what else are we living for? The characters of Sam and Cathy prove the simple principle that if you are deprived of something, then fate, nature or whatever it is that takes care of these things, gives you something else in abundance in order to survive. Whether you are ‘good’ or ‘bad’, whether you will harm or help someone. A principle that even Darwin noticed, observing the creatures around him.

‘East of Eden’ is an allegorical novel. It tells a story old as the hills. Steinbeck builds a thesis gradually and patiently and manages to shatter it to pieces at the end. Yes, there were whispers here and there about this twist. The last character I wanted to scribble something about is Caleb. Like Cathy, he carried something in himself that he couldn’t appease. Cal played his biblical role brilliantly. He did everything that was expected of him. He sought love and goodwill, made a gift, killed his brother, and he was marked by his guilt. The only thing left for him was to close the circle. That is how it has always been and how it should be.

Human life is a repetition. It repeats the lives of old and it repeats itself. What choice do we have then? Only one – the choice of getting out of this pitfall.

‘And I feel that a man is a very important thing – maybe more important than a star… I have a new love for that glittering instrument, the human soul. It is a lovely and unique thing in the universe. It is always attacked and never destroyed…’
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Човешкият живот е повторяемост. Повтаря животите преди него, повтаря и самия себе си. Човешкият живот също така е и спирала. Понякога ни се струва, че обикаляме в кръг, но всъщност малко по малко приближаваме към центъра. Допускаме грешки, които са допускали и по-умни, и по-глупави от нас, но продължаваме към своя си център. Всичко, което някога е можело да бъде направено, вече е направено, ние само го попроменяме и нагаждаме. И продължаваме напред през времето.

Библейски отпратки в романа на Стайнбек колкото щеш. Някои от тях дори не съм уловила, убедена съм. Няма да пиша за Каин и Авел, за препратките в имената на персонажите, за кръговрата на събитията, за неизбежната предвидимост на някои от тях. Ще ми се да се спра върху няколко персонажа, които ме жегнаха по-дълбоко. Върху виновните без вина. Така например съвсем логично би било, като се имат предвид всички останали притчови елементи, образът на Кати да се обвърже с Ева, с някак изконната лукавост и греховност, която се приписва на жената. Кати обаче е жертва на себе си. Жертва е на онова в себе си, което не познава и не може да разпознае у другите. Стайнбек не я осъжда, единствено констатира психическата ѝ уродливост, съжалява я, прощава ѝ дори. Кати е от хората, на които нещо липсва, и живее с недъга си, без да може да го проумее. Защото как да обясниш на един по рождение незрящ човек какво е синьо? Тя не е такава, каквато е, защото иска, а просто защото не може иначе.

„Ние може би не разбираме Кати, но, от друга страна, сме способни на много неща в различни посоки, на големи добродетели и на големи пороци. Та кой от нас в мислите си не е решавал да се окъпе в черната вода от приказката? Навярно у всекиго от нас има по едно скрито блато, в което се въдят и растат, и укрепват всякакви грозни и долни неща… Не е ли обаче възможно в мрачните блата на някои хора злото така да се развие, че да се прекачи през оградата и да плъпне на свобода? Няма ли такъв човек да стане за нас чудовище? И не сме ли по някакъв начин сродени с него чрез тези наши скрити води?“

Ако Кати е сянката, то огрян от най-яркото слънце е Самуел Хамилтън. Самуел е мечтател, изобретател, философ, неспокоен, вечно търсещ. Той преминава през живота като някакво ярко зарево, като полубожество, за което дори децата му не могат да повярват, че остарява. Макар и неизменно беден, Сам Хамилтън си има други препълнени съкровищници – семейството си и своето въображение. Той е въплъщение на кроткия възторг от битието, човек, който може би е осъзнал една от най-важните истини – трябва да се радваме на всяка дреболия, иначе за какво ни има? Образите на Сам и Кати са доказателство на простичкия принцип, че ако си лишен от нещо, съдбата, природата или там каквото се грижи за тези работи, ти дава друго в изобилие, за да оцелееш. Без оглед дали си „добър“ или „лош“, дали ще навредиш или помогнеш ти самият на някого. Принцип, който впрочем дори Дарвин съзира, наблюдавайки тварите около себе си.

„На изток от Рая“ е иносказателен роман. Разбира се, че проследява история, стара като света. Бавно и търпеливо Стайнбек гради една теза и успява да я разбие на късчета в края. Да, промъкваха се тук-там нашепвания за този обрат. Последният персонаж, за който исках да драсна нещичко, е Кейлъб. И той като Кати носеше нещо у себе си, което не можеше да усмири. Кейл изигра блестящо своята библейска роля. Направи всичко, което се очакваше от него. Търсеше обич и благоволение, направи дар, уби брата си, белязан беше от своята вина. Остана му единствено да затвори кръга. Така е бивало и така трябва да бъде.

Човешкият живот е повторяемост. Повтаря животите преди него, повтаря и самия себе си. Какво ни остава тогава? Само едно – изборът дали да се измъкнем от тази примка.

„И схващам, че човекът е нещо изключително важно, дори може би по-важно и от небесните светила… заобичах това блестящо сечиво, човешката душа. Във Вселената тя е нещо прекрасно и неповторимо. Вечно нападана, но никога не унищожавана...“

I really enjoyed this book and could not put it down. The characters are wonderful from the wise Samuel, naive Adam, astute Lee and the entirely evil Cathy.

Cathy is truly one of the most evil and despicable characters in literature. It shows beauty does not necessary mean goodness. Her parents and then becoming a mistress to a brothel owner who beats her after discovering her true character when she has a few to many drinks. She finds herself on the farm of Adam and his brother Charles. They nurse her back to health and while Charles recognizes she is bad to the bone Adam becomes infatuated and marries her. They then move to Salinas in California where Cathy gives birth to twins Arun and Caleb. She then reveals her true colors to Adam and leaves him to go back being a whore.

With his Cantonese cook Lee, Adam raises the boys.
The two families of the wealthy Trask's and the poor Hamilton's are great contrasts. The biblical themes throughout are used well in comparing good with evil all set in the Salinas valley.

This epic novel tells the story of Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel. The mystery of who we fall in love with and the path life takes us. Loneliness, identity, betrayal, depravityand passion this novel has it all.

Въздействаща, философска, библейска. Прочетох я на един дъх. Удивителна история, разказана майсторски от неповторимия Стайнбек. Едва ли мога да кажа нещо, което вече да не е казано. Бих добавил само следния малък, но изключително важен детайл, който обикновено се губи в преводите. Оригиналният текст завършва с думата "Timshel" (иврит: תִּמְשָׁל)

Преводи:
- "and thou shalt rule over him", King James, 1611
- "но ти трябва да го владееш", Протестантски превод, 1940
- "и ти ще владееш над него", Цариградски превод, 1914
- "но ти владей над него", Православна библия

Оригинал:
הֲלוֹא אִם תֵּיטִיב שְׂאֵת וְאִם לֹא תֵיטִיב לַפֶּתַח חַטָּאת רֹבֵץ וְאֵלֶיךָ תְּשׁוּקָתוֹ וְאַתָּה תִּמְשָׁל בּוֹ:

Оригиналът е преведен на английски от Jewish Publication Society по следния начин: "but thou mayest rule over it", буквално ти можеш да го владееш.

A masterful and interwoven epic story and a half that takes the reader on a journey of grand proportions. Steinbeck knows how to weave a tale. This novel is rich in symbolism, the biblical references the thread that runs throughout this novel. I don’t know how Steinbeck does it, he gets inside the most intricate parts of the human soul, he knows how to show the human and the beast side. Also that ending got me good. To be honest I don’t even know how to review this book. For me after reading The Grapes Of Wrath I knew I was in safe hands as I was left in no doubt at the literary mastery that is Steinbeck, it also became a firm favourite, undoubtedly this novel much like the bible will stand the test of time as it’s a work of immense skill and I think I’m just feeling a little in awe right now that my words hardly seem worthy.

An epic American masterpiece and no doubt Steinbeck's Magnum Opus, also his closest to being autobiographical, capturing the farmland of California's Salinas Valley to a tee, family loyalties lie at the heart of the story, fathers, sons, and legacy are deeply studied throughout, and in Cathy Ames (later known as Kate Trask) we have one of the most evil women ever committed to literature.
An ambitious and majestic work of art, and possibly the best narrative I have come across in a novel.
Will read again and again.

ریویوو نوشتن برای «شرق بهشت» که یکی از آسان خوان ترین کتاب های زندگی ام بوده، بنظرم سخت ترین کار جهان است. هرچه فکر میکنم نمیدانم از کجا باید شروع کنم، از کجا حرف بزنم و حتی دقیقا نمیدانم احساسم را با چه کلماتی بیان کنم، ظاهراً برای حسم به بعضی کتاب ها هم مثل بعضی آدم ها هنوز کلمه ای اختراع نشده است.
با این حال میتوانم با اطمینان بگویم کتاب های «جان استین بک» از تأثیر گذار ترین کتاب های زندگی من بوده اند و خواندشان چیزی را در من تغییر داده اند که نمی دانم چیست. این احساس را اولین بار وقتی خیلی سال پیش «خوشه های خشم» را خواندم تجربه کردم و بعد با «ماه پنهان است». و حالا امروز با پایان بردن «شرق بهشت» همه آن احساسات شگفتی، بیچارگی، حسرت، اندوه، دلتنگی، سرخوشی و چیز های غریب دیگر تکرار شدند.
از زمانی که تازه الفبا را آموختم و روزنامه های بابا را خواندم تا پانزده سالگی که تحت تاثیر هورمون های بی قرارم هر کتابی که ذره ای اروتیسم داشت بلعیدم، تا وقتی به شدت مذهبی شدم و منتهی الامال کتاب محبوبم شد و بعد تا زمانی که دنیای ادبیات را با کتابخانه خاک گرفته همسایه کشف کردم، هرچیزی که خوانده ام مرا تغییر داده است؛ تغییری که خودم متوجهش نشده ام یا حسش نکرده ام اما بی شک اتفاق افتاده. بعضی کتاب ها اما جوری تاثیر گذارند که آدم تغییر را در وجود خودش حس می کند. انگار کلمات این کتاب ها روی هم مثل بلوک های آجری می نشینند و در قلبت مغزت جانت خانه می سازند، از آن خانه های جادار و دلباز که قرار است تا آخر عمرت آباد بمانند و آبادت کنند. داستان «شرق بهشت» برای من همین کتاب است، کتابی که بخشی از جانم شده و تاثیرش قلبم را می فشارد.
.........................
ممنونم از دوستان خوب و خیلی خیلی خیلی عزیزم محمد و سعید که فایل صوتی این کتاب رو بمن هدیه دادند ‌(⁠*⁠˘⁠︶⁠˘⁠*⁠)⁠.⁠｡⁠*⁠♡⁩
و حقیقتا به جرات میتونم قشنگ ترین حس دو ماه اخیر رو تونستم باهاش تجربه کنم. این کتاب نوری بود در تاریکی جهانم ، حتم دارم برای شما هم که الان تصمیم میگیرید بخونیدش همین طور خواهد بود.
....
کاش یه درصدی از فروش کتاب یا فایل صوتیش رو حداقل بهم بدن با این ریویوو ‌ಠ⁠﹏⁠ಠ⁩

........
خطر اسپویل

Before he started writing this novel, Steinbeck conceived of it as a gift for his sons. He wrote:

They are little boys now and they will never know what they came from through me, unless I tell them. It is not written for them to read now but when they are grown and the pains and joys have tousled them a little. And if the book is addressed to them, it is for good reason. I want them to know how it was, I want to tell them directly, and perhaps by speaking to them directly I shall speak directly to other people.

Steinbeck wrote that he planned to tell his sons “one of the greatest, perhaps the greatest story of all – the story of good and evil, of strength and weakness, of love and hate, of beauty and weakness” and that he wanted to demonstrate “how these doubles are inseparable – how neither can exist without the other and how out of their groupings creativeness is born”.

The extent to which Steinbeck succeeded or failed in this endeavour is one of the fascinating aspects of this novel. Inserting himself into the narrative as both the narrator and as a minor character, Steinbeck wrote about the Salinas Valley and about his mother’s family, the Hamiltons, with tenderness and love. The other part of the narrative, the account of three generations of the (fictional) Trask family and the re-telling of the Biblical story of Cain and Abel, overshadows the history of the Hamiltons and pulls the novel in lots of different directions. However, the resulting work, while flawed, is powerful and compelling.

There’s so much I love about the novel. I find Steinbeck’s use of language breathtaking. While very accessible, it demonstrates a powerful ability to observe and describe what is being observed in a manner which conveys both images and emotions. In this novel, Steinbeck did not strive for a natural style of dialogue. His characters do not always speak in the way real people speak, but the way they speak is part of the power of the work. I love the characters as much as I love the language. Lee’s insight, Sam Hamilton’s wisdom, Cal’s desperate longing for approval and even Cathy’s psychopathy will haunt me for a long time. I also love the setting, with its carefully detailed evocation of Salinas in the early years of the 20th century.

Most of all, though, I love the passion that Steinbeck put into this novel, the work that meant most to him personally. I’m glad that I listened to the audiobook (very capably narrated by Richard Poe) immediately after reading Jay Parini’s excellent biography of Steinbeck. It’s given me a greater understanding of not just the extent to which East of Eden is Steinbeck’s family history, but also how much of it relates to his complicated personal circumstances at the time he was writing the novel.

As noted above, the novel has flaws. The structure is unwieldy and the narrative is often melodramatic. However, Steinbeck’s passion and warmth, his beautiful prose and the way in which he builds his central themes make this a complete winner for me. It’s one of those novels which I know I will want to read again. Probably very soon.

I hate this book. Hate. Ponderous, pretentious, melodramatic, self-satisfied, patronizing to its readers, with ultimately nothing to say. Can be summarized thus: a bunch of people with no formal education whatsoever sit around discussing the time they read the Old Testament in Hebrew. They then tell us all how to live. Uh...right. I knew we were in trouble with the unbelievably lame introduction -- some forced, self-congratulatory metaphor about a box, if memory serves -- but it's hard to believe it actually got worse from there. In any event, with its smug aura of "Here you will find WISDOM," it's certainly no wonder that it's right up Oprah's alley.

The fact that people worship this misbegotten mess of a book as they might worship pieces of the True Cross is just plain depressing. Apparently the way to literary immortality is to give 'em a decent narrative, throw in some breathless nonsense about free will and the Bible, and don't forget to puff out your chest and tell everyone that you've written a masterpiece. Gack. For this they gave him the Nobel Prize?

********

After deleting I don't know how many comments calling me names and getting several pieces of hate email, I'm adding this addendum, because it will save both me and a bunch of other people from wasting time: I'll delete any comments that I consider abusive or that I think constitute ad hominem arguments, so do keep that in mind if you're considering posting a long screed.

Adam Trask was a weak but kind boy and later man, his father treated him quite badly even his jealous, sadistic half- brother younger but stronger hit him repeatedly , barely surviving one brutal vicious fight. Born in the middle of the American Civil War, in a Connecticut farm he and brother Charles are turned into good little soldiers at a very tender age. Cyrus their father lost a leg in the war, boasting of being in every major battle (which is physically impossible). In fact the private was only in a blue uniform six months, getting his appendage shot off during the first day of his first battle. But Cyrus becomes such a good liar, that people begin to actually believe him as he, does as well! Yet writing these marvelous but fictional war articles, in the major American newspapers. Consequently he receives a job with the Grand Army of the Republic an influential veterans group of Union soldiers, in Washington. His first wife commits suicide, the second dies of illness let's say Cyrus was not a very lovable person. Adam is forced by his father at sixteen, to join the army to make him a man and save his hide from Charles. Running down the few scattered renegade Indians in the plain states, Adam hates his job still does it bravely and well. When the father dies both boys inherit a vast sum of money, was their father not only a liar but also a thief ? Out of the military good Adam marries a woman of ill repute Cathy, a lady so evil that Satan would be ashamed to be associated with her. Adam buys a farm in central California's rugged Salinas Valley , Cathy gives birth to twin boys non identical Caleb (Cal) and Aaron (Aron), shoots Adam and abandons the newborns. Not mother of the year material, the wife's manners could also be improved. Cathy takes up residence in a home which you can guess what kind it is, but Adam lives and goes into a deep funk ... Lee the much loved Chinese servant, takes over and raises the kids better than the moody, distant, bitter father could ever do ...Thoughts: This story is an allegory of the Bible's Adam and Eve , being thrown out of The Garden of Eden but also about wicked Cain and his good brother, Abel. Steinbeck was born in the frontier town of Salinas the Old West was still alive, the few settlers struggled to make a living in the harsh land. The world changed forever, as the book says when the year 1900 arrived,"Ladies were not ladies anymore and you couldn't trust a gentleman's word". Sam Hamilton a neighbor of Adam and soon friend, was different like a Patriarch out of the Bible with his nine children, wise and tough but not practical thus always poor ... Nevertheless these people are needed as Steinbeck believes, to give guidance to others, which is very lacking today. ..The author's most ambitious and his favorite work. Love and lots of hate, much conflict and a little peace all there. Sam Hamilton was the writer's grandfather.