Scan barcode
A review by blueyorkie
Batalha incerta by John Steinbeck
4.0
Against a backdrop of social revolt in Californian orchards, "In a Dubious Battle" strips the human soul. Steinbeck offers us an instructive reflection of the exploitation of man by man.
Whether economic, psychological, or obtained through force and intimidation, whether in service of a cause or motivated by selfish greed, this novel's central question is: How do we get a crowd to move towards the same goal?
At what point can this sum of such different individuals with disparate priorities and opinions form a united whole toward a common goal?
And if the importance of being welded and united to face more powerful powers is essential, can we consider that the end justifies the means? That the exploitation of drama is justifiable?
The book does not provide answers, only a frightening observation. It unabashedly shows the complexity of the situation. It made me feel deeply how difficult it is to rebel, how easy it is to fail or give up, to what extent sacrifices seem useless, and how the mechanisms structuring a movement can be "questionable," as the title would say, bordering on sickening. "And you say to yourself: 'What's the point of all this?' Then you think about the millions of guys who are starving, and you understand," Mac would say.
If it seems easy to position yourself at the start of reading, the more the tension intensifies, the more lenient and understanding you become towards many different points of view.
As for the few negative points, I needed more subtlety around the characters. Some fall too often into caricature; others have personality shifts that do not always seem to me to be justified in storyline.
On the other hand, you should remember to put your feminism in the closet while reading this.
These slight drawbacks in no way detract from the quality of this work, which shakes and makes you think, which always makes for an enriching reading experience.
Whether economic, psychological, or obtained through force and intimidation, whether in service of a cause or motivated by selfish greed, this novel's central question is: How do we get a crowd to move towards the same goal?
At what point can this sum of such different individuals with disparate priorities and opinions form a united whole toward a common goal?
And if the importance of being welded and united to face more powerful powers is essential, can we consider that the end justifies the means? That the exploitation of drama is justifiable?
The book does not provide answers, only a frightening observation. It unabashedly shows the complexity of the situation. It made me feel deeply how difficult it is to rebel, how easy it is to fail or give up, to what extent sacrifices seem useless, and how the mechanisms structuring a movement can be "questionable," as the title would say, bordering on sickening. "And you say to yourself: 'What's the point of all this?' Then you think about the millions of guys who are starving, and you understand," Mac would say.
If it seems easy to position yourself at the start of reading, the more the tension intensifies, the more lenient and understanding you become towards many different points of view.
As for the few negative points, I needed more subtlety around the characters. Some fall too often into caricature; others have personality shifts that do not always seem to me to be justified in storyline.
On the other hand, you should remember to put your feminism in the closet while reading this.
These slight drawbacks in no way detract from the quality of this work, which shakes and makes you think, which always makes for an enriching reading experience.