Writing novels about the poor and dispossessed in 1930s California and in the process attracting the wrath of farmers’ organisations and the attention of the FBI gave John Steinbeck a reputation which has persisted to this day. Many people assume that he was a communist, or at the very least a socialist. This novel, along with The Grapes of Wrath and Of Mice and Men is a work which cemented Steinbeck’s reputation in that regard. However, the characterization of Steinbeck’s politics as socialist or communist is incorrect. While he had a passion for supporting the underdog, he wasn’t any further to the left politically than New Deal Democrat. Steinbeck was, if anything, disparaging about communists, commenting in a letter to a friend shortly after this novel was published: I don’t like communists either. I mean I dislike them as people. I rather imagine the apostles had the same waspish qualities and the New Testament is proof that they had equally bad manners. The plot of this novel - Steinbeck’s fifth - focuses on fruit growers in a fictional valley in California. Two “Party” (presumably Communist Party) activists – the seasoned campaigner Mac MacLeod and his young apprentice Jim Nolan – infiltrate a group of itinerant fruit pickers with the intention of provoking a strike and violent confrontation with the growers. From the beginning Mac is aware that the strategy is doomed to failure because of the superior resources of the growers. However, he doesn’t hesitate to manipulate the fruit pickers and to use whatever means at his disposal to achieve the Party’s objectives. The novel works on a number of levels. At its simplest level, it analyses the process of manipulating a group of people to achieve a political end. However, it’s also an exploration of one of Steinbeck’s favourite themes – group behaviour and the way in which it differs from the behaviour of individuals. The novel also functions as Jim Nolan’s bildungsroman, the psychological portrait of a young man moving from disaffection to self-knowledge as he discovers his skills and strengths. Unusually for Steinbeck, the novel contains relatively little description of the natural world. Instead, most of the action is contained in dialogue. However, even with the absence of descriptive language, there is a cinematic quality to the narrative. I could picture scenes in the novel as scenes from a film – detailed, vivid and striking. The characters are also striking with a solidity and reality I’ve come to expect from Steinbeck’s writing. Writing a novel like The Grapes of Wrath meant that everything else Steinbeck wrote either before or after was going to be compared to it. That was a burden for Steinbeck as it would be for any writer. Given the subject matter of this novel, the comparison with The Grapes of Wrath is even more inevitable. That’s a shame, because this work has its own power. And according to Wikipedia it’s Barack Obama’s favourite Steinbeck novel, which may well be another reason to read it, should a reason be required.
I have been a lifelong fan of author John Steinbeck, but it wasn’t until I went back to the university as a mature adult that I first read IN DUBIOUS BATTLE. Published in 1936, before THE GRAPES OF WRATH, it is not one of Steinbeck’s better known novels, but I believe it is definitely one of his strongest. As a piece of literature, IN DUBIOUS BATTLE is a multi-layered story of Jim Nolan, who joins “the party” in farm country, California. The party is not identified but assumed to be the American Communist Party, whose goal is to increase its presence through agitation among fruit pickers, pitting them against the orchard owners. Conservatives of the era were quick to believe that Steinbeck’s sympathies lie with his communist leaning protagonist, and in many religious and educational institutions through the following years (like the one I attended), Steinbeck’s works were discouraged and oftentimes banned. This censorship was not only unfortunate for the author but also for potential readers, who missed an opportunity to challenge status quo beliefs they had never before considered questioning. Under the tutelage of Mac McLeod, Jim Nolan infiltrates the fruit pickers, and through him we experience a cynical view of capitalism, as harsh working conditions and low wages lead the fruit pickers to strike, which itself is a symbol of man’s eternal warfare against his own species. Who’s exploiting who in this story? Is it the orchardists taking advantage of the fruit pickers, or is it “the party” exploiting them for their political ends? Is the struggle really dubious, or is there something to be gained by it and the loss of life? Steinbeck offers a glimmer of hope: “Out of all this struggle a good thing is going to grow. That makes it worthwhile.” For serious literature readers and fans of Steinbeck, this is one of his strongest works and a must read. I rate it five out of five stars.
What do You think about In Dubious Battle (2006)?
In Dubious Battle is a politically engaged novel that was, at the time of its publication at the height of the 1930’s Depression, highly controversial. The book follows Jim Nolan, a young man from poverty stricken circumstances, who is disillusioned with a system that he perceives as unjust, in which his father fought a losing battle for justice all his life, while his mother futilely sought salvation in a God that does not exist. Joining a group of communists determined to bring about a new world order, Jim is desperate to prove his devotion to their ideals and an opportunity soon presents itself. It has been announced that pay rates have been reduced for the apple pickers in the orchards that year, this after the arrival of itinerant workers at the site. The organisation decides to manipulate this disharmony to bring about a general strike amongst the workers. Jim is to serve as an apprentice to the experienced Mac McLeod, a shrewd, idealistic and courageous labor organiser and campaigner.As the ensuing strike develops it becomes apparent that the radicals are less interested in whether the strike is successful and more in mobilising support for the ongoing war that lies ahead. Steinbeck is adept at capturing the turmoil of the times in his description of the escalating hardships of the disenfranchised migrant workers; the poverty, hunger, the fear of the police and the ever present threat of vigilantes, as the strike rises in intensity, destruction and ultimately ends in tragedy. The worker versus capital confrontation is described in great depth from the tactics deployed by both sides to the psychology of manipulation, the importance of gathering public support and the significance played by propaganda, factors that have lost none of their relevance today.This thought provoking novel is perhaps one of Steinbeck’s most compelling works, in which the author skillfully resists the temptation for commentary, leaving the reader to reach their own conclusion on where the real exploitation lies and whether its deployment is justifiable as a means to an end.
—Guy Portman
I haven't taken on Steinbeck since high school, so it was interesting to see him through adult eyes. I like his journalistic style, his ability to capture an authentic voice and strong sense of place, and how pretty much all of the story was narrated through dialogue.I like the ethical nuances of the party members. The farmers they fought were clearly greedy, corrupt, and cruel, but it is also quite clear that while Mac and Jim care about issues facing the working class, and make deep personal sacrifices to improve conditions for the working class, they didn't care about the actual workers they were organizing. The strike certainly contributed to a greater good, but the workers suffered heavy damages, and Steinbeck makes you ask if they had the right to make them pay that price (especially while believing that the strike would fail), or if it was simply a different form of exploitation. There aren't any easy answers, and I appreciated that about this work.At first Mac's "soapboxing" bothered me, but once I realized he wasn't supposed to be a do-no-evil figure, it didn't bother me as much.This made me want to re-read the Grapes of Wrath and see if it would speak to me more than it did as a teenager.
—Erin
Interesting read on how people take advantage of those who work for them, and how Mac and Jim, in spite of their 'communist' leanings, care more for the workers than they do for themselves... While the characters in the story appear to be pawns on a chessboard, the underlying current is that they are being denied of their rights, and they decide to fight, leading to a series of events that lead to a strike. The people and their characters shine brightly in this context, because they end up fighting against the machinery of capitalism in their own small ways, but in the end, the battles they fight wear them down...Interesting look into the true nature of capitalism, and the American dream.
—Eric
