I pulled this from another website (okay, fine, it was Oprah):
I thought the observation was particularly interesting because our discussion so far has covered those three topics. I guess we are typical members of the Steinbeck-reading human race.
Jackson J. Benson appear to be throwin’ a little shade there with his comment about Lee, but it doesn’t diminish my affection or respect for the character. There’s nothing my ancestors loved more than a good, healthy dose of blarney-philosophy. 
In Steinbeck’s last letter to Pascal he anticipates the “lions–editors, publishers, critics, copy readers, sales department”:
And so it goes. I like Steinbeck’s sense of humor.
*However, Steinbeck makes himself clear in an earlier letter:
I love that imaginary exchange! Steinbeck knew precisely what was “wrong” with his book.
“It has to be slowed–else how would you know when it goes fast.” Lol, we all noticed that shift, didn’t we?
And the remarks about the story of his mother and the airplane are perfect!
It was fascinating how aware Steinbeck was of the flaws of his book, but they were important to him. He knew from the beginning he wanted a long book, that he wanted the counterpoint of the two stories that are really only tangentially related, that he wanted to write about the Salinas Valley as an entity, but also about the Cain and Abel story. And he was (I guess) an established enough writer that he could do what he wanted.
I mentioned upthread that one thing that really struck me about the book was how lonelyand isolated so many of the characters were. I’m super tired because I’m super busy at work and also dealing with ongoing health issues so I’m not thinking clearly and can’t remember specifics, but I do remember one point in which it seemed like Samuel (?? or maybe one of Samuel’s sons) and Adam would be friends (meaning daily companions in each other’s lives) and then we learn that after that moment they didn’t see each other for years. That one moment made me so sad. Also, many of the marriages seemed lonely and sad. For me, this was a very strong undercurrent of the book. It made Lee and Abra and Dessie such welcome characters; they really seemed capable of human connection, unlike a lot of the other characters.
Would love to check in with @NJTheatreMOM to see how you are doing. No pressure to comment on the book but we’d love to hear you are okay!
Yes, and even the most “together” characters like Abra fall into that category: “Abra walked up and down the streets of Salinas, hoping to catch sight of [Aron]. She was angry at him, but she was also bewilderingly lonely” (p. 439).
Abra is lonely at home at well. She feels no connection to her parents. Speaking of her parents, why do you think Steinbeck chose to insert that brief bit about the criminal activities of Abra’s father? Was it, once again, to demonstrate that we are all a mix of evil and good?
I thought the characters’ overall loneliness and inability to connect was summed up well (and sadly) in this paragraph:
Dessie’s story is so sad. In the opening of chapter 32, Steinbeck describes the ripple effect of her humor and warmth; she brings joy to so many people: “That’s how Dessie was and that’s what she could do. She carried excitement in her arms just as Samuel had.”
Then a mysterious love affair breaks her. We never know what happened, do we?
seconding @nottelling’s shout-out to @NJTheatreMOM! Hope you are doing well.
Well, Steinbeck is with his third wife as he writes E of E so he can’t blame his love life on Hamilton genetics.
However, the Hamilton name does not survive despite Samuel fathering four boys out of his nine children:
I can’t but think that this would make Samuel and Liza sad. On the other hand, imagine Samuel’s pride in John Steinbeck, Pulitzer Prize winning author. (Liza - I’m not so sure - as she only read the Bible but still.)
Don’t forget he won the Nobel Prize too!
I htink Samuel would be happy with Steinbeck’s work and with his loving but honest depiction of the Hamiltons.
OK, I’m embarrassed to admit this, but I totally did not get that the Hamiltons were real and that Steinbeck is really a descendent. I thought he, as the sometimes narrator, was making up the family and his relationship to them. Feeling a little out of the loop here …
The quotes above that “Cathy is too black” and “Sam Hamilton is too white” struck me as so true. If Steinbeck had made both characters a little more gray, would they have been a little more believable? Or does the storyline depend on having them at complete opposite ends of the spectrum?
Hmm … I wonder if Steinbeck meant to write principal rather than principle.
That aside, I picture Cal with demon Kate on one shoulder and angel Abra on the other. I think in a way Lee does also:
Would Cal have returned without an Abra? Like Lee, I hesitate to say yes. I think without Abra his struggle toward overcoming what he views as Kate in him would be harder. I don’t want to discount Lee’s influence though. He starts the process of redemption and then knows enough to send Cal to Abra, so that she can continue what he’s started. I do like to think he’d return to Adam but it needed to happen quickly and I don’t know that Cal had “quick” in him at that time.
^ That’s a nice analysis of the Cal-Lee-Abra interaction.
I like the idea of “principle” – as in, “a fundamental truth that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior.” Since Steinbeck’s characters are biblically-inspired, and at times more black and white than gray, I can imagine that he sees each one as representing a fundamental truth–a more powerful role than merely being a “principal” (as in “leading player”).
You can read and listen to Steinbeck’s 1962 Nobel Prize acceptance speech here: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1962/steinbeck-speech_en.html
It’s not long and contains some classic Steinbeck verbiage, ie.:
There’s a note to the journal about Steinbeck’s habitual misspellings that were corrected, but not principal/principle. I think both words work, but I think he spelled it correctly. He sees these characters as archetypes. I believe Cal is supposed to be a blend of the two - and I see Cal not so much as gray, but as one who is constantly veering between good and bad impulses. “When he was good he was very, very good, but when he was bad he was horrid.” I think Cal needed Abra to keep him real.
At one point he says “The next sister was Olive, my mother”, but of course there’s surety at that point that the narrator is supposed to be Steinbeck himself. If I hadn’t read the Journal I’m not sure if I would have noticed that in Chapter 23 - 2 at the Thanksgiving dinner after Una’s death, Steinbeck lists everyone who was present including “Olive and Ernest Steinbeck”.
Totally missed that!!
I’m back! There were some complications associated with my surgery, and I only got out of the hospital on Monday. I’m fine now, but tired and still rather weak and will be taking some time to recuperate. (My sympathies on your “ongoing health issues,” nottelling! More than likely you are not the only other one here who has been having difficulties.)
While I was in the hospital, I read Steinbeck’s journal. Thanks so much for encouraging me to do so, ignatius! There is a lot in the journal about Steinbeck’s penchant to do little practical tasks, build things, and even invent things like the paperweight mentioned upthread (which he said everybody hated, for some reason).
There was a lot in the journal about Steinbeck’s feelings as the end of the book approached. Interestingly, I finished the journal on the very day I came back home. Somehow, it had been soothing to read about all the little vicissitudes in the author’s personal life as he labored on his magnum opus.
I’ve been reading through this thread. One thing I don’t think has been mentioned is that Steinbeck wrote in his journal that he had known women like Cathy.
On the other hand, he said that the characters were largely symbolic. He also said that he intended the writing to be rather simple, perhaps to ensure that his two sons, for whom he wrote the book, would be able to read it and appreciate when they were old enough.
Steinbeck commented that he did not want to explicate the emotions the characters may have been feeling, but rather to describe their actions and let the reader attach the emotions.
As I said in an earlier post, I loved the book. I did a CC search on the title and discovered that it is quite remarkably popular, with many young posters mentioning it as a favorite book.
I have some thoughts about Lee that I will put in a separate post.
I’ve thought about my favorite character, Lee, so much. He was wonderful and not stereotypical. I do wonder why Steinbeck made him Chinese. Perhaps he needed a bit of an outsider to fill this role. What other sort of person could Steinbeck have chosen? One thing that seemed important was for the character to be educated and erudite, yet still working as a servant. It might have been implausible to invent a woman like that, or, say, a Mexican person?? Perhaps only someone who was a California Chinese could fit those parameters.
Still, I felt that there was perhaps a bit of the “magical Negro” (a type of character often represented in films by Morgan Freeman) to Lee – a person of color who is not quite real, and is very good, and helps the white people in the story.
@nottelling - I forgot to report back on “Nutshell” by Ian McEwan after my RL Book Club meeting last week. Definitely not my favorite McEwan book (an opinion shared by most other members), but it did generate a lot of discussion. The all-knowing fetus is a little too far “out there,” but the wonderful writing makes up for a lot.
Sorry to temporarily hijack this thread, everyone.
I definitely felt there was a magical Negro aspect to Lee. But I also think Steinbeck made him a genuinely interesting character. He was a real participant in the Cain and Abel discussion, he did leave the family to try to open his book store, there was the whole interesting bit about how he stopped talking Pidgin to the characters he cared about and who cared about him. Steinbeck speaks with admiration in his journal about the Chinese people. I think he had more than just a superficial knowledge of them. Steinbeck seems remarkably free of prejudice for someone of his time.
I’m glad you are on the mend @NJTheatreMOM !
On another topic, I rather enjoyed some of Steinbeck’s rather weird chapters that had nothing to do with the story - for example - Chapter 12 which begins part 2 of the book where he gives an entire history of 19th century USA in two pages. “Oh, but strawberries will never taste so good agina and the thighs of women have lost their clutch.” Well Steinbeck may not have been a racist, but that sure sounds sexist to me. 
(Well, not really - he’s quoting “old men”.)
You know what’s strange: I think I like East of Eden because of its “flaws.” Maybe because I read Journal of a Novel: The East of Eden Letters side-by-side with East of Eden I came to understand what Steinbeck strove to do.
Maybe I’m the only one to think so but I don’t think Steinbeck portrays Cathy/Kate as “too black.” Sociopaths exist and Kate looks to fit that description. Eden needs its snake after all.
I even like the Hamilton family history as counterpoint. Call me easy. I loved the book.
Welcome back, @NJTheatreMOM! I’m glad you’re on the mend.
I read an excerpt from an essay about Lee called “The Chinese American Adam: History and Universality in Steinbeck’s Eden” (in the book Invisible Subjects by Heidi Kim). I could only access 10 pages since it was Google Books, but in those few pages, the author reflects that Steinbeck sets up stereotypes only to subvert them. For Lee, one of the stereotypes is the nonsense story that young Cal tells Abra about “the Chinaman” beating him and Aron horribly. Apparently, abusive Chinese house servants were a stereotype of the time. Who knew? The author points out that even Cal shouldn’t have known, because he lived such a sheltered existence.
As for why Steinbeck made Lee Chinese, that may have been a case of “write what you know.” Kim states:
Kim goes on to quote a story from that memoir in which a Chinese Cook by the name of Lee, living on the Steinbeck ranch in Salinas, humorously demonstrates “observational ability and pragmatism.”
Here’s the Google Books link, if you’re interested in the available pages:
https://books.google.com/books?id=zzLcCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA50&lpg=PA50&dq=the+chinese+american+adam+history+and+universality&source=bl&ots=-9ZT4ZOyTY&sig=yfT9IgJRpAvRzESNrQiGwv-C4IA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwia9cbW-eXQAhVrr1QKHZ_pCUUQ6AEIHDAB#v=onepage&q=the%20chinese%20american%20adam%20history%20and%20universality&f=false