Life on the Killing Beds
Mar. 8th, 2006 02:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
joodI have just finished "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair. No, I haven't read it before now. Wanna make something of it? Dear GOD, it was brutal.
Thinky thoughts and slightly irritable growls:
I'm very conflicted about many elements of the book, but one thing I find truly fascinating is that despite what a kick in the ass this book was to a complacent nation, it is still utterly relevant in a very literal way, precisely 100 years since its first publication.
In 1906, wealthy businesses bought corrupt politicians, who in turn bought legislative and judicial influence with corporate money. In 2006, no change. They just wear nicer suits.
In 1906, self-serving, price-fixing cartels ran massive business sectors like agri-business, transportation and utilities. In 2006, the methods are more subtle, and cartel practices mostly illegal, but between OPEC, massive media conglomerates and bloated megacorps like utility and agri-business, the difference is cosmetic at best.
In 1906, the socialists were a laughingstock, as even increased voter turnout couldn't hope to push their agenda into the mainstream. In 2006, centrist liberals are now considered socialists, so this particular situation has actually worsened.
In 1906, pious Evangelicals sought to alter our civil rights to more accurately reflect their particular brand of personal morality. In 2006, no change.
I find this frightening. Fortunately a hell of a lot of good has occurred since.
What's better: Improved working conditions even for unskilled laborers, laws to protect them and their wage-earning ability should they be injured at work, unions to represent their collective needs, a federal minimum wage (pathetic though it is), and programs to help feed and house those who are unemployed but actively attempting to find work. Improvements to the USDA; food quality and contents are taken seriously now. Departments of public works that take responsibility for ensuring that the annual spring thaw doesn't mean streets will be so flooded that children drown in them, and that raw sewage is channeled away from homes and doesn't just settle in people's cellars. Slumlord laws protect tenants against unsafe living conditions, and utility laws prevent gas/electric companies from shutting off service when the temperature dips below a lethal point, even if the bill is unpaid. Finance laws are strict and protect home buyers, borrowers, and depositors. True socialism is still a completely impracticable, faceless dystopia, and the vague suggestion of eugenics as a hearty companion to communism hasn't entire dissipated.
I don't know how to feel about Jurgis and his story. On one hand, his character gave a face to massive institutionalized abuse of human beings, and for that progressive purpose alone, I can overlook the frequent narrative histrionics. But the continued downward spiral of this man's life became absurd by the time ____ and _____ died. (No names to avoid spoiling the completely obvious and predictable plot turns for those who haven't read it yet.) They were both inevitable, but by the time he'd finished foreshadowing the second, I was shouting at the CD player, "Oh for GOD'S SAKE, YOU BASTARD."
Jurgis' life is a study of progressive descent stemming from innocence; from his emigration from Lithuania, to his family's unknowing move to Chicago because of false promises of riches at the stockyards, through to wretched tenements, buyer-raping real estate practices, horrible work for insufficient pay, a slow but steady fall into grinding poverty, and eventually prison, degradation and death of loved ones, life as a hobo, tunnel digger and steelworker, more prison, homeless poverty, a life of crime, an ascent into local politics, starvation and homelessness again, and eventually salvation at the hands of socialists.
Ultimately he put Jurgis through the trials of Job in order to set the stage for the final chapter, which was nothing short of a massive socialist screed. Every heart-rending point in every deadly earnest speech (transcribed for our reading pleasure) hammers home a talking point about the injustice and horrors heaped upon good honest people who only want to work for a living, as demonstrated by the protagonist at varied times throughout the story.
At first, I'd thought the socialism was another red herring; yet another golden opportunity that would lead inevitably to Jurgis' continued ruination, but alas, it was not to be. Just as I'd recovered from the third lengthy (but beautifully written) diatribe about the evils of capitalism, the book ended. Just up and ended, with a call to arms about The People taking back Chicago.
For my own comfort, I want to take it as the rallying cry I wish it was intended to be and not a really long form recruitment pamphlet, which is what it was. Fortunately, nearly all the "conversion" material is at the very end of the book, so you won't miss much if you choose to skip it. Unfortuantely you'll still be denied any closure on Jurgis' behalf, because Sinclair wrote the thing in a present day time frame, so with his inability to see into the future, there wasn't anywhere for him to go. And as it was originally written as a serial to be published in a socialist paper, the closing sentiment was clearly the end of a very, very verbose rally.
Fascinating book, and (I did the audio version) a brilliant reading. The gentleman has apparently won awards for his audiobook readings, and I can see why. His passion, gentle avuncular voice, good character differentiation and lovely Lithuanian brought the book to stark, miserable life.
If you haven't read it, you can find it here.
Thinky thoughts and slightly irritable growls:
I'm very conflicted about many elements of the book, but one thing I find truly fascinating is that despite what a kick in the ass this book was to a complacent nation, it is still utterly relevant in a very literal way, precisely 100 years since its first publication.
In 1906, wealthy businesses bought corrupt politicians, who in turn bought legislative and judicial influence with corporate money. In 2006, no change. They just wear nicer suits.
In 1906, self-serving, price-fixing cartels ran massive business sectors like agri-business, transportation and utilities. In 2006, the methods are more subtle, and cartel practices mostly illegal, but between OPEC, massive media conglomerates and bloated megacorps like utility and agri-business, the difference is cosmetic at best.
In 1906, the socialists were a laughingstock, as even increased voter turnout couldn't hope to push their agenda into the mainstream. In 2006, centrist liberals are now considered socialists, so this particular situation has actually worsened.
In 1906, pious Evangelicals sought to alter our civil rights to more accurately reflect their particular brand of personal morality. In 2006, no change.
I find this frightening. Fortunately a hell of a lot of good has occurred since.
What's better: Improved working conditions even for unskilled laborers, laws to protect them and their wage-earning ability should they be injured at work, unions to represent their collective needs, a federal minimum wage (pathetic though it is), and programs to help feed and house those who are unemployed but actively attempting to find work. Improvements to the USDA; food quality and contents are taken seriously now. Departments of public works that take responsibility for ensuring that the annual spring thaw doesn't mean streets will be so flooded that children drown in them, and that raw sewage is channeled away from homes and doesn't just settle in people's cellars. Slumlord laws protect tenants against unsafe living conditions, and utility laws prevent gas/electric companies from shutting off service when the temperature dips below a lethal point, even if the bill is unpaid. Finance laws are strict and protect home buyers, borrowers, and depositors. True socialism is still a completely impracticable, faceless dystopia, and the vague suggestion of eugenics as a hearty companion to communism hasn't entire dissipated.
I don't know how to feel about Jurgis and his story. On one hand, his character gave a face to massive institutionalized abuse of human beings, and for that progressive purpose alone, I can overlook the frequent narrative histrionics. But the continued downward spiral of this man's life became absurd by the time ____ and _____ died. (No names to avoid spoiling the completely obvious and predictable plot turns for those who haven't read it yet.) They were both inevitable, but by the time he'd finished foreshadowing the second, I was shouting at the CD player, "Oh for GOD'S SAKE, YOU BASTARD."
Jurgis' life is a study of progressive descent stemming from innocence; from his emigration from Lithuania, to his family's unknowing move to Chicago because of false promises of riches at the stockyards, through to wretched tenements, buyer-raping real estate practices, horrible work for insufficient pay, a slow but steady fall into grinding poverty, and eventually prison, degradation and death of loved ones, life as a hobo, tunnel digger and steelworker, more prison, homeless poverty, a life of crime, an ascent into local politics, starvation and homelessness again, and eventually salvation at the hands of socialists.
Ultimately he put Jurgis through the trials of Job in order to set the stage for the final chapter, which was nothing short of a massive socialist screed. Every heart-rending point in every deadly earnest speech (transcribed for our reading pleasure) hammers home a talking point about the injustice and horrors heaped upon good honest people who only want to work for a living, as demonstrated by the protagonist at varied times throughout the story.
At first, I'd thought the socialism was another red herring; yet another golden opportunity that would lead inevitably to Jurgis' continued ruination, but alas, it was not to be. Just as I'd recovered from the third lengthy (but beautifully written) diatribe about the evils of capitalism, the book ended. Just up and ended, with a call to arms about The People taking back Chicago.
For my own comfort, I want to take it as the rallying cry I wish it was intended to be and not a really long form recruitment pamphlet, which is what it was. Fortunately, nearly all the "conversion" material is at the very end of the book, so you won't miss much if you choose to skip it. Unfortuantely you'll still be denied any closure on Jurgis' behalf, because Sinclair wrote the thing in a present day time frame, so with his inability to see into the future, there wasn't anywhere for him to go. And as it was originally written as a serial to be published in a socialist paper, the closing sentiment was clearly the end of a very, very verbose rally.
Fascinating book, and (I did the audio version) a brilliant reading. The gentleman has apparently won awards for his audiobook readings, and I can see why. His passion, gentle avuncular voice, good character differentiation and lovely Lithuanian brought the book to stark, miserable life.
If you haven't read it, you can find it here.
