The Jungle and Upton Sinclair

[charliechaplinfan]

Having had time on my hands and not being here I decided to read The Jungle by Upton Sinclair, I'm about 75% through it. I put this on my reading list many moons ago when I was reading about Chaplin and this book connected in with him, he knew the author well, Upton Sinclair ran for office in the 30s. I was expecting a literary history lesson but my goodness, it's unremittingly gloomy, it makes Dostoyevsky seem like a writer for children. This poor man Jurgis Rudkus and his folk, their lives go from bad to much much worse. I've just read a segment where Jurgis gets brought home by a drunken young rich boy, shades of City Lights here.

I'm wondering if any of my SSO buddies can shed some light on this book. It's an important one in American Literature, it deals with the poor when many books deal with the rich. In the slaughterhouses, factories, steel works, the tramps etc. It smacks of journalism. But how real is it? I'm hoping that no one went through what Jurgis went through, perhaps his tale is a combination of lots of tales. It starts with a wedding and then descends but I can't put it down. I wonder if anyone had any thoughts on this work. Is it essential reading at school?

[charliechaplinfan]

I was dashing around before when I left my previous post and may not have expressed myself quite as I'd like to. I knew what the book was about before I picked it up, I knew it was a social commentary on the times, perhaps like Steinbeck and The Grapes of Wrath or Dickens and his works. What I'm reading is direct and unrelentless. We're so used to the history books telling us about the numbers who emigrated to America, wave upon wave upon wave arriving day after day. This book reminds me of some of the very early silent movies, the ones that told about living in tenements, I'm thinking of the early Roaul Walsh movies or The Musketeers of Pig Alley. Chaplin's figure, now seen as purely a comic figure, odd and would stand out in a crowd but now I'm not sure, perhaps there were men out on the fringes who starved and begged like it says in The Jungle. I guess what I'm puzzling about and probably what got people hot under the collar about Upton Sinclair is was he pushing an agenda? Or was he trying to highlight social ills? Was it a combination of these things? I want to believe that life was never that bad even though history is littered with people who've suffered. To say it's left me with food for thought is one thing. To say I need to read something more uplifting next is also true.

[Rita Hayworth]

I'm wondering if any of my SSO buddies can shed some light on this book. It's an important one in American Literature, it deals with the poor when many books deal with the rich. In the slaughterhouses, factories, steel works, the tramps etc. It smacks of journalism. But how real is it? I'm hoping that no one went through what Jurgis went through, perhaps his tale is a combination of lots of tales. It starts with a wedding and then descends but I can't put it down. I wonder if anyone had any thoughts on this work. Is it essential reading at school?

To me, I read this book in my High School Days and I had to do a book report on it (all 37 students in my History Class) and I had a hard time understanding it because Upton Sinclair is a complicated author when he wrote The Jungle. My Parents did not care for Upton Sinclair at all because they think that this book was too far-fetched and was angry at the School District for allowing me to read a paperback edition of this book and making me to do a book report on it.

Many Parents were and result of that the History Teacher was ordered to drop the book report of this book because many parents like mine considers this book somewhat controversial and I didn't read it at all until I moved out of the house and checked out that book at my local library.

It was essential reading at school by my History Teacher ... until many angry parents (including mine) stopped the School District from reading it and they banned the book in the School Library. There were several copies to choose from.

When I read it in my late 20's ... I can't put the finger on it of why many Parents back in my High School Days were against it and never will because my Parents never, ever shed that light to me and kept their opinions on this book to themselves.

And ... never will.

Because of that ... I was never, ever understand that and that alone makes me wonder why all this came about.

Because of that banning of that book ... that book report was 20 percent of the grade and all students were graded by the History Teacher ... the History Teacher gave me a grade of B Minus for the whole year ... and when the final grade came out ... I was given an A Minus instead and that's made the History Teacher mad and he was forced to resign because he thought Upton Sinclair's The Jungle as real as its get.

I haven't read that book in years and during my last year of High (1977-78) School was the most upheaval year because the problem dealing with this book.

I have formed no opinions on this book and I wanted to share my history of dealing with this book back in my High School Days.

[JackFavell]

My sister worked on a book about Upton Sinclair when she was doing her graduate work in school. He was famous as more of a political figure/journalist who used the novel to make a point. He did have an agenda, a rather socialist one, if I am remembering correctly. He was most famous for stories outlining the horrible poverty, and the conditions of the poor, especially in large cities. Many of his writings had to do with tenement dwellers who were crammed together in these small apartments, row upon row. His journalistic style outraged people, but it also led to great changes in places like the meat packing or canning industry with his exposes on the filthy conditions and long hours in these fetid factories. He was very much a voice of workers rights.

I believe that there was a good deal of truth in his stories, since he worked undercover in meat packing plants to get information for his books and articles.

[RedRiver]

I haven't read the book, so can only share what I've been told. Some people feel there was A LOT of truth to the story; that working conditions in some scenarios WERE that bad. I gather Sinclair's writing drew attention to that and served as an inspiration for change.

[charliechaplinfan]

Thank you for helping me understand it. I've finished it now and the last couple of chapters are redundant for me, they are a polemic for the Socialist party but it is interesting to read this being ten years or so before the Communists came to power in Russia. My knowledge of it was through reading about Chaplin, we've discussed elsewhere about his leanings which taking this book at face value, were for the common man. I knew the essence of what I was picking up when I started reading it, the main character goes through so much, several life times of suffering which would have quelled lesser men, he became a criminal both without intention and with intention. He goes through every humiliation known to man and his women folk to women.

Erik, I can understand your history teacher choosing this book, in many ways it opens up a world that we all should know about, however painful but I guess Sinclair was tainted through the years by the shadow of socialism once supposedly socialist parties were in power. His book was the early 1900s when it was possible to hopeful about socialism, it was possible to think that there was a purity about it which would see that this kind of suffering didn't happen anymore. Jurgis's hope at the end of the book is tied up in socialism, without that he was a broken man. it must say a lot about the man if it caused so much controversy to be given as a text.

I'm glad I read it, one always realises that the rich have the poor tied up but I didn't realise until I read this book just how much. And not just the working practices but the food they were using, tubercular cows, choleric pigs. It's funny the news is rife here at the moment, horsemeat has been found in processed burgers and lasagnes. What goes around, comes around.

[Rita Hayworth]

Erik, I can understand your history teacher choosing this book, in many ways it opens up a world that we all should know about, however painful but I guess Sinclair was tainted through the years by the shadow of socialism once supposedly socialist parties were in power. His book was the early 1900s when it was possible to hopeful about socialism, it was possible to think that there was a purity about it which would see that this kind of suffering didn't happen anymore. Jurgis's hope at the end of the book is tied up in socialism, without that he was a broken man. it must say a lot about the man if it caused so much controversy to be given as a text.

Allison,

I might read that book again later on this year ... I will check out a copy (or order it) from my local library and proceed from there. Nice write-up here and thanks for sharing your views on this book. I learned a lot from you.

[charliechaplinfan]

I knew if anyone could put it in perspective then my pals here could. My friend has a degree in American studies and she had studied it but she couldn't remember very much about it.

[JackFavell]

I think someone once described him as having the brains, compassion and talent to make a good writer, but no sense of humor.

[RedRiver]

The title of this thread sounds like a Saturday afternoon adventure film. Lex Barker, Barton MacLane and Acquanetta star in today's feature, THE JUNGLE AND UPTON SINCLAIR!

[charliechaplinfan]

Upton Sinclair might have had no sense of humour but Red has.

[JackFavell]

[Rita Hayworth]

I'll seconds that too ...