Oh, where to begin with these musings on East of Eden by the great John Steinbeck??? What a masterpiece this novel is. I mentioned in a TBR post back in May that East of Eden is one of the classics I’ve been meaning to read for years. Happily, I got to this sooner than I thought possible in a great buddy read with Audrey & Evie!
*As always, my Musings installments are rift with spoilers!*
Personal reactions
I audibly gasped at some points, had to put the book down to process what I was feeling as I read, and was certainly brought to tears (several times) within the last 150 pages of the book. Also, I felt a particular closeness and intimacy with the varying Biblical allusions as someone who loves to read and study the Bible and has been doing so since a very young age. I always get excited by Biblical allusions in particular :’)
Introduction by David Wyatt
So. good. I waited to read the intro until finishing the book, so I wouldn’t accidentally chance upon any spoilers or be reading an analysis of the novel without having read it myself yet. It was well worth the wait, of course. I found Wyatt’s examination of East of Eden to be informative, thorough, and compelling.
Steinbeck’s Method; the “mystery” of character; & the “three motions”
Wyatt discussed Steinbeck’s method and structural approach to East of Eden. Steinbeck wrote that he was “inventing method and form and tone and context.” It turns out that he was very concerned with pace, tone, and structure. Steinbeck essentially let East of Eden create its own “digressive, unhurried rhythm.” He also placed emphasis on the novel’s obvious tone of “wisdom literature”; there is a philosophical quality about the book that lingers from start to finish, at some places stronger, at others, more subtle.
The “mystery” of character has to do with the part of people that can never be explained. It’s the idea that, even when all characteristics and environments, ie, nature vs. nurture, are explained or dissected; there is still something left, an “excess” that can never be known by others. Cathy & Adam, as I will delve into later, are a huge example of this. They are “figures for two character functions that throw the notion of character into question.” In a sense, they are merely a vehicle for Steinbeck to explore that “otherness”.
Finally, Wyatt closes his introduction by discussing the three major motions in East of Eden. Motion one asks the audience to “perform…a reverse projection—to take on the story, to take it in.” Adam does this, but he stops here. When Cal goes beyond this, he starts the “second and crucial motion; he begins to rewrite the story.” Lastly, motion three relates to how Cal must go even further than revision: it is “brave indifference, the leap of an intention that can have confidence in nothing beyond itself.” p o w e r f u l.
East of Eden Themes
There are a myriad of themes within this work of art, and I think that chief among them are: rejection, timshel—“thou mayest”, and love (as well as the uncertainty that comes with it). My assertion is that all other themes find themselves under one, or more, or all of, these three major themes.
Disillusion, manipulation, self-containment, reduction, and favoritism, for example, will all tie in strongly with rejection. More specifically, rejection is what most often causes the manifestation of these others.
Revision, determination, and individualism all fall under timshel, and redemption comes in under love. There’s also a certain amount of crossover between quite a few of these themes.
*Much more to come on timshel at the end of this post!!*
And still, there are other major subjects, like motherhood, Steinbeck’s “theory of monsters”, or predestination and free will, that also come into play. Even a few of the characters are stark symbols of these themes. I created a wildly scattered mind map that shows how I came to approach these themes, subjects, and characters and how they coalesce. Hopefully, you can make some sense of this mess :’)
Characters
I could go on and on about quite a few of the major players in this novel, but I’m going to try and condense my thoughts as much as possible!! :’)
Aron
He inhabits a world where stories are either lies or truth; he cannot make the difficult transit to a world in which all stories are seen as things that people make, fictive things.
David Wyatt, “Introduction”
This is so eloquently and succintly put. I think he follows Adam in this sense, and yet he stays further behind than even Adam manages to do. As I briefly mentioned before, regarding the three motions, he is at least able to absorb the story, but that is all. Aron, I think, can’t even get to this level.
If you want to play into the idea of a family curse, I would go back to Cyrus, and his lies, stories, & tall tales that even he came to believe of himself. He unleashes a generational curse of disillusion and deceit that is only broken by Cal.
Cathy
She is Steinbeck’s “monster.” There was, and remains, a certain level of implausibility surrounding her wickedness. Nonetheless, Cathy is still “the novel’s silent center, around which interpretation avidly scurries.” When it comes to the Biblical allusions, she is at once Adam’s Eve, the clever Tamar, the manipulative Delilah, and the murderous Jezebel. Cathy is “other”; she is “difference”.
Cathy, like Adam, is not “self,” as Wyatt says. They are both “figures for two character functions that throw the notion of character into question: depression and difference.” You can’t completely understand her, but if you want to try, you have to look at her actions as opposed to her motivations.
Katie is a total representative of Satan. If you can believe in saints, you can believe that somebody can be all good, you’ve got to believe that somebody can be all bad.
John Steinbeck
Adam
He falls under that “mystery” of character, and he also “throws the notion of character into question.” Adam is our “thoroughly passive hero”. He floats his way through life, simply digesting it, and even then, it can take him a long time to get to that point.
Cal (!!)
My FAVOURITE. He continues what Adam could not. He breaks the family curse. And I think he beautifully exemplifies human nature, especially from the Christian perspective. He is given the opportunity to overcome, and he does!!! He fulfills “thou mayest.” It is Cal who actually gives the blessing in the closing pages of the story.
Cal blesses his father and forgives him, but he does not know, as he never has or will, whether that father loves him. Like the mind, love is lonely, an emotion necessarily self-confirmed. It is time for Cal to stop caring whether his father’s love exists or is true, and time to admit that the pain he feels in being human is not because he is not loved, but because he loves.
David Wyatt, “Introduction”
Is that not BEAUTIFUL???? Because he loves.
Samuel Hamilton & Lee
I instantly fell in love with both of these characters. What they brought to the table, what they added to this novel, their depth and wisdom—incredible. Words pretty much fail me; you can just read them and see why they’re so fantastic.
Their philosophical and theological discussions were fascinating and worthwhile. I think Steinbeck effectively used them as vehicles for laying out and expounding upon his allusions. In a way, I think they also act as foils for many of the other characters as they bring a much-needed dimension of warmth and reality, of family, to this story and to these characters.
Also, they are the glue that hold their little families together. Samuel certainly does that in his, and Lee does it for Adam and the boys; he did it from the very start,,,MY HEART. In summation, they are genuine, loving, honest, and deep characters—some of the best that I have ever had the pleasure of reading.
Foils
Just wanted to briefly mention a few character foils within East of Eden as I think they’re interesting and worth notice.
Adam & Cal // Cal & Aron // Abra & Cathy // Tom & Samuel Hamilton (maybe that’s controversial?? i think there’s definite grey area in this assertion) // definitely Will & Samuel
Timshel — Thou Mayest
And here we come to the pith of this essay. (Sorry, it’s long, but I don’t really care; I needed to gush over East of Eden like no tomorrow.) Arguably, timshel is the overarching theme of this novel and rightly so. It beautifully and effectively touches on free will in a moving manner. Cal takes this to the very last pages of the book, after wrestling with it for so long, and he is triumphant!! It’s thrilling.
*Just in case you weren’t aware, there is no Hebrew word, timshel. There is a word, timshol, which means “you will rule.”*
East of Eden brings up the topics of predestination and free will within discussion of the Biblical, theological context, and I already really enjoy studying that on my own time, so this was a really sweet crossover for me when it came to gathering my notes for this blogpost.
A little bit of context…
Reformed theology views predestination and the sovereignty of God as a beautiful thing. Free will is not absent, rather these two, seemingly opposing, points of view come together in what is referred to as “concurrence.” Concurrence stipulates that there are things that happen that are simultaneously an act of man and simultaneously an act of God.
Ultimately, God is sovereign over all, but He allows, and He causes. It is a mystery of His will that this is possible. Surely, when finite beings trust in an infinite God, there’s bound to be some things us mortals can’t fully understand, especially not whilst we live in this fallen world. This is certainly a topic that could be talked about for hours, but I think it adds some rich context when discussing timshel.
Now, I think Steinbeck operates under the non-biblical assumption that God arbitrarily picks “favourite children”, and this is evidenced in the way that Samuel and Lee discuss the Cain and Abel story. In actuality, when you dive into Genesis chapter 4, and you look at the wording, Hebrew and otherwise, Abel wasn’t just picked over Cain for “no reason.”
That’s especially clear when you look at the Bible as whole, take a look at cross-references, and understand the character of God. But I’ll start with Genesis 4: Abel brings of the “firstborn” of his flock, as well as their “fat portions.” God, the Author and Creator of life, is entitled to the first and the best of everything. This is especially evidenced in the Old Testament sacrifices and such.
To continue…
God’s words to Cain also suggest that he was in the wrong. But, God also tells him that he has an opportunity to do what is right. In other biblical passages, we learn more about Cain. To quickly preface this, I’ll reference 1 Samuel 16:7, where it’s made clear that God knows our hearts; He knows our motives and true intentions, and those are just as important as our actions. This is a theme that is really unpacked in the gospels.
So, we might assume that Cain begrudgingly gave God a sacrifice, or, even if he offered the first of his crops, he did so not out of a desire to gratefully obey his Creator, but because he had to, because it was required. One important cross reference is found in 1 John 3:9 where it’s revealed that Cain’s “own deeds were evil and his brothers righteous.” This suggests that Cain had been in the wrong long before the events of Genesis 4 occurred.
ANYWAY, I shall end here. If you’re interested in a few other biblical passages related to this, check out Hebrews 4:13; 11:4 & 6. I think East of Eden relates what I know to be a biblical and real truth: we have all been like Cain, and perhaps we still are. But God’s mercy and love is from everlasting to everlasting, and in His glorious grace, He does offer us the chance to act “well”. Though this is inextricably tied to His sovereignty and predestination for the regeneration of our hearts, and it might not always make sense, He is good, and He is merciful to those who least deserve it. (Heck, He even extended to Cain His protection despite the murder of Abel. Read the rest of Genesis 4 ;))
Finally!!!
If you stuck with me for this entire post, I <3 you very much. THANK U!! If not, I totally get it :’) There was a lot I felt I wanted to unpack and get into hehe.