P3+DONeil

Grapes of Wrath Synthesis Essay

For ages, our society has struggled over the issue of whether or not something is right or wrong. After analyzing the issue by reading The Grapes of Wrath, by John Steinbeck, it could easily be said that in order to judge, a person must have strict principles on which to base their views from. When an individual confronts injustice, it should only be confronted if the injustice threatens human rights or takes away from making the human population better as a whole.

When it comes down to an individual confronting injustice, the issue of human rights is a huge issue. In The Grapes of Wrath, by John Steinbeck, many of the injustices in the novel come across as human rights issues. In the classis, it seems as if many of the farmers’ basic human rights were destroyed as they were tricked by the salesmen. With the farmers as prey, and the “salesmen, neat, deadly, small intent eyes watching for weakness” (Pg. 61) as predators, the proud farmers were turned into fools after they were blown out of the water because of the terrible automobile prices in that era. Without a doubt, this is an instance where injustice should be confronted due to the degrading things that happened to the farmers. Also, in another area of the novel, farmers are once again stabbed in the back when they try to sell their old possessions to the brokers. Astounded by the terribly low prices, one farmer claimed that instead of sell his horse to the broker, he would “shoot’em for dog feed first.” (Pg.87) Confronting obvious injustice to his rights, the farmer had an opinion that the actions of the broker were wrong. Another injustice where human rights were tampered with occurred when a mass exodus of people migrated from the farmlands, all the way to California, using Route 66. All of the “refugees from dust and shrinking land” (Pg.118) moved to California much like a group of misplaced birds or bison would have. In the end, when an injustice occurs that threatens human rights and liberties, it should be, and ought to be confronted by whoever is experiencing it.

Injustices should also be confronted if they blatantly set back the human race as a whole. In The Grapes of Wrath, it is clearly implied by John Steinbeck that the government could have and should have done more to protect society from the depression. Since the government did not do more to prevent suffering and poverty, Steinbeck believes “there is no day and night for a tractor and the disks turn the earth in the darkness and they glitter in the daylight.” (Pg115) By only supporting the upper class instead of society as a whole, the government committed a huge injustice against the American people. Due to this injustice, Steinbeck took the initiative, and revealed all the injustices he feels to the American people. Another instance where an injustice took place and society was negatively affected was when Hoovervilles were set up to aid the homeless migrants coming from the dustbowl. Rather than help the migrants, these Hoovervilles, or shantytowns, were actually breeding grounds for inhumanity, which negatively affected society as a whole. Describing the people as “clustered like bugs near to shelter”, (Pg. 193) Steinbeck expresses his point that such towns bring far more injustice than they do justice. Again, when an injustice threatens to push society back as a whole, there is a vital need to facilitate change.

The issue of when to confront injustice goes way farther than just The Grapes of Wrath however; it can be applied to outside sources as well. When looking at our society. It can be concluded that there are many injustices that involve the infraction of human rights. This issue seems to also occur a lot when talking about America’s biggest blight on society; the homeless. In Joseph Perkins’ write up, “Homeless: Expose the Myth”, he goes into depth how becoming homeless is the same thing as losing basic human rights and liberties. One suggestion to cut back on the amount in today’s world was to “have the federal government turn over former military bases and other vacant property to the homeless.” (Home. Exp.) Unfortunately, most of the homeless people discussed will continue to lead their barbaric lives until the demons are thrown out of their head. In another expose on the homeless, called “Dumpster Diving”, by Lars Eighner, It is discussed how ordinary people with ordinary rights often times feel sympathetic to the homeless, or those without rights. Eigner, who was once homeless, explained that he “heard people, evidently meaning to be polite, used the word foraging,” but he prefers to “reserve that word for gathering nuts and berries.” (D.D.) Both of these homeless examples show how injustices that involve rights can be found today, and why these kinds of injustices should be stood up to. In “Civil Disobedience Part1” by Henry Thoreau, the issue on what kind of government should be used comes at hand. Thoreau wants a government that benefits society as a whole. While pleading for a new government, Thoreau exclaims, “From this example it can no government, but at once a better government.” From this example it can be concluded that a government that does not govern the whole should not be dealt with. Again, important injustices that need to be confronted exist outside the novel as well.

In the end, injustices that need to be confronted are ones that take away from society as a whole, and those that strip humans of their rights. Once these two principles are violated, then the individual definitely has grounds for standing up for his or her right. Principles must be observed and conclusions should be drawn!

Doneil period 3