Few works of fiction left so little impression on me in my adolescence as The Pearl. In no small way, in its simple style and obvious symbolism, the 1947 novella by John Steinbeck reminded me of another short work of fiction: Ernest Hemingway’s The Old Man and the Sea.
The reaction of Steinbeck’s contemporaries, as
summarized by the Nobel Prize laureate’s biographer Jay Parini, could also have
applied to Hemingway’s Pulitzer Prize winning book: “naïve” and “simplistic.”
Quickly dismissing both books, I thought little about
them for many years, especially after reading longer, more complex works of their
creators—erven though, over time, I would continually see them in bookstores and
libraries because of their presence on high school or young adult reading
lists.
But, re-reading The Old Man and the Sea about a
decade ago, I found numerous passages that reminded me of why I was drawn to
Hemingway at his best: lean, pure, powerful prose. Similarly, Steinbeck’s empathy
for the common man and bone-deep familiarity with their work routines and
aspirations for a better life—undoubtedly developed in hours of manual labor in
childhood, youth and early adulthood—shine through so much of The Pearl.
At heart, both authors were consciously striving to
answer their critics by demonstrating that recent mediocre work did not mean
that their best days as writers were behind them, that fame and success hadn’t softened
them. At the same time, they transformed their naysayers into malign forces
threatening their principal characters (interestingly enough, Latino males who
become stand-ins for their creators’ creative midlife crises).
Hemingway’s humble Cuban fisherman Santiago finds
himself beset by sharks as he hauls back a marlin, the biggest fish he’s ever
caught. Steinbeck’s Mexican-Indian pearl fisherman, Kino, must deal with his fellow
villagers, all of whom want a piece of his expected wealth from discovering a
priceless pearl, —with some even plotting to kill him for it.
Like other writers who produced prolifically while
constantly challenging themselves, Steinbeck’s output could be uneven—marked by
highs (The Grapes of Wrath, East of Eden) and lows (The
Wayward Bus), with his energy often dissipated by outside projects such as
film work.
But, if The Pearl doesn’t possess the power of,
say, Of Mice and Men, it tells a simple story vividly, with the timeless
force of a Biblical parable.
The novella centers on Kino, who, despite his poverty,
has lived happily in a hut in a rural village of La Paz in northwest Mexico, with
his wife Juana and baby Coyotito.
Then a scorpion stings Coyotito, and though Juana
sucks out the poison, the wound keeps swelling, forcing the family to seek
emergency medical attention to save the boy’s life.
What I didn’t notice when I first read The Pearl
around 45 years ago—but what struck me with full force now—was Steinbeck’s deep
compassion for Kino and Juana, who yearn for the freedom from insecurity
enjoyed by Anglos. It comes to the fore when the fisherman goes to seek help
from a white doctor:
“This doctor was of a race which for nearly four
hundred years had beaten and starved and robbed and despised Kino's race, and
frightened it too, so that the indigene came humbly to the door.”
The doctor, stout to the point of caricature because
of his greed (“His voice was hoarse with the fat that pressed on his throat”),
won’t attend to the baby without payment.
A miracle seems to present itself when Kino comes upon
the pearl. But it’s not just any valuable object: it’s a giant “Pearl of the
World.”
When Kino celebrates his good fortune by dressing to
show off, it shifts the entire social fabric around him, because it enters “into
the dreams, the speculations, the schemes, the plans, the futures, the wishes,
the needs, the lusts, the hungers of everyone, and the only person that stood
in the way and that was Kino, so that he became curiously every man's enemy.”
No wonder that “All manner of people grew interested
in Kino—people with things to sell and people with favors to ask.”
What had been a basic use of the money that could come
from the pearl—just enough to save a life—has rapidly degenerated into the
community’s greed and Kino’s paranoia about protecting his treasure.
Several aspects of this tale made me remember what a
compelling voice Steinbeck was for me when I first read him as an adolescent:
Nature: Steinbeck was
enthralled by California’s rivers, coast, and farms from an early age, and his
novels frequently reflect this sense of awe in the presence of the environment
and how it interacted with its inhabitants, as seen in this passage from The
Pearl: “The dawn came quickly now, a wash, a glow, a lightness, and then an
explosion of fire as the sun arose out of the Gulf. Kino looked down to cover
his eyes from the glare. He could hear the pat of the corncakes in the house
and the rich smell of them on the cooking plate.”
Sympathy for the underprivileged and
marginalized: Steinbeck did something fairly daring
for his time—put at the center of his narrative not just the kind of “forgotten
man” so often found in fiction beginning with the Great Depression, but a
Latino. Even more so than today, a member of such a group would have been dimly
understood, at best, by Anglos. Having traveled to Mexico many times—and encountering
so many immigrants from Mexico in the Thirties and Forties—he could render
their struggles with great understanding.
Toxic masculinity:
Women can bring shake and shatter men with their seductiveness in some
Steinbeck novels (Of Mice and Men, East of Eden), but more often
they stabilize families grown unexpectedly shaky by the weakness of men. In The
Pearl, he dissects how false dreams lead men to abuse their
partners—specifically through Kino, whose fury at the sensible Juana results in
physical brutality, expressed through similes with Biblical overtones: “Kino
looked down at her and his teeth were bared. He hissed at her like a snake, and
Juana stared at him with wide unfrightened eyes, like a sheep before the
butcher.”
A keen grasp of communal psychology:
Although a diverse city has so many different components that it is hard to
ascribe a particular characteristic to it, a small community is different, as
Steinbeck expertly conveys. Perhaps because of his long friendship with marine
biologist Ed Ricketts, he realized that towns like Kino’s were like organisms:
“A
town has a nervous system and a head and shoulders and feet. A town is a thing
separate from all other towns alike. And a town has a whole emotion. How news
travels through a town is a mystery not easily to be solved. News seems to move
faster than small boys can scramble and dart to tell it, faster than women can
call it over the fences.”
Will The Pearl continue to maintain its place
on today’s high school reading lists? It might. An article in my local
newspaper, The Bergen Record, made me roll my eyes when teenagers
offered their opinions on J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye
(narrator Holden Caulfield was too “whiny”) and Henry David Thoreau’s Walden
(“boring”).
However, The Pearl seems to have escaped much of this groaning. It offers a character that many minority and underprivileged students find recognizable from their own backgrounds.
Moreover, it conveys a
lesson that youngsters of all backgrounds should learn—and adults from all
walks of life should be reminded of: the most priceless things in our lives are
what sustains our spirits rather than what fills our bank accounts.
No comments:
Post a Comment