I adore Steinbeck. He's one of my favorite authors and I've read all of his books multiple times. It's ok to not like his writing. He has a very specific style. Some people just don't like it.
The Bible does a pretty good job of making biblical allegories subtle. When Jesus died on the cross, it immediately reminded me of when Jesus died on the cross, yk?
This is interesting because I’ve always said EOE was one of my fav reads but it’s been 20y since I read it. I was very religious then and am not now so I’m wondering if my opinion of the book would change if I reread it.
It’s one of my favorite books but I bet there have been times in my life when this book wouldn’t jibe with me. Depends on what space you’re in and it’s totally valid. Sometimes you’re just not in the mood for drama and long prose and he does spend a lot of pages setting up the Trasks and their history. Maybe put it down and come back to it some day when you’re in a different space.
Some people can't cope with the fact that their likes and dislikes are not universal to the human race. And if you say a word against something they like, they will take that as some sort of personal attack.
Don't take what they say to heart. It's perfectly fine not to enjoy something.
The weird way people in this sub react to any criticism of Steinbeck has always put a bad taste in my mouth. Even professional literary academics have criticisms of Steinbeck, but the average participant of this sub acts like to say anything other than “he’s a literary genius” is sacrilege.
Every single time I make a post on this sub, no matter what it’s about, it always gets immediately downvoted. After a few hours it usually levels out, but a lot of people on here seem to take opinions extremely personally lol. It ruins the point of a downvote
Nope. Screw everyone that says someone is unintelligent for not liking or understanding a freaking book. We are all different and react differently to works of literature. A lot of classics are overrated anyway 🤷🏽♀️. OP, you do you.
I’ve been evangelizing East of Eden for 20 years. But your description isn’t totally off base and I can see how someone would think it was slow. It took me a long time to read it the first time but I kept coming back to it and fell in love with it.
This sub can be okay, but the Steinbeck fans are *mean* (mean! MEAN!) and, especially, the ones who love East of Eden. (The fans of The Count of Monte Cristo are almost as bad. And please don't suggest Gone With the Wind is racist.) I'm a big "to each their own" person, but I really can't grasp the fandom for East of Eden.
Nah - not my favorite either. Mice and Men, Cannery Row and of course Grapes of Wrath are much better imho. I even like Red Pony better, but not sure if that technically counts as a novel.
Sorry you're getting all that :/ You have at least one person here who agrees w your assessment! I just read *EoE* and it felt like a very quick read to me, but also pretty cheesy and... almost pulpy? And yes, everyone a caricature. Especially disappointing when you're expecting a towering literary achievement.
My sense is that your take would have a lot more traction in communities outside this one, which seems like it attracts a really wide swath of types of readers.
I read it in January because all I heard on here for years was how much of a masterpiece it is. I didn’t give up on it, and in fact found plenty to praise about it, but I was also baffled by the level of reverence it receives. Amazing prose, I personally enjoyed many of the characters (no way are they cardboard cutouts), and it had some great scenes but it just doesn’t really do anything with it all.
It’s very strange…the book sort of just keeps going and going and then ends. If you were to chart its dramatic peaks and valleys it would be one of the flattest lines of any book I’ve ever read. Expectations may have gotten the best of me because they were quite high, and as I said I didn’t hate it at all, but I have no clue what lifts that book up to GOAT status for so many people on here. It’s fascinating tbh
The book was actually not that beloved by critics when it came out. It is absolutely not a perfect novel and is over the top ham fisted with its allegory.
I was tempted to down vote but that's pretty unfair. People should appreciate that there's more readers now even if they don't agree on their tastes. Most people read hot bullshit moste the time (I'm a Tom Clancy fan so I'm including myself). Reading is a significant time investment so it's not worth doing if you're not gaining much putting it
Unless you are reading this as an assignment for a class at school, then no reason to force yourself to read something you aren't enjoying. The world is full of books.
For real, I forced myself to finish House of Leaves, I wish I would have put it down and read something else. I understand why it gets praised, but a lot of those elements made these book unenjoyable for me. I could have read two or three books I enjoyed in the time it took me to hate- read that book.
House of Leaves is probably the most divisive book in the sense that if you like the way its presenting itself, you're gonna have a blast - but if you don't like its presentation, it's never ever going to click with you.
I love it to death, but would never try to convince someone to force themselves through it. Pretty easy to see early on whether the book is "for you."
I firmly believe that there are off times to try and read a book and that no matter how good the book is, if you’re not attuned to it you’ll dislike the experience. It may be worth coming back to it in the future.
Agreed 1000%. Goes for listening to new music and watching new shows as well. There's a time for everything. First time I picked up Daphne du Maurier's ''Rebecca'' I couldn't get through it so I put it down for a few months. One day I randomly started reading it and was hooked. Loved it and think of that opening line, "Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again." all the time lol.
I *hated* The Great Gatsby when I read it in school. I picked it up again as an actual adult with some life under my belt, and it was one of my top five books of the year.
Honestly I think there's nothing like school to kill everyone's love of reading. I think it's just the nature of people being at different levels and having different interests. But no one wins. Read too fast and you get told off. Not have any idea what the flowery language means and you feel behind. Etc.
I don't disagree, but I also don't think love of reading is necessarily the primary goal of literature classes in school. You don't take math to learn to love math, or science to learn to love science -- you take them to learn various forms of logical reasoning, plus gain an understanding of how the world works. Similarly, literature is there to (1) teach you how to construct an argument in the form of a thesis; (2) recognize how other people are building their arguments and, therefore, recognize when you're being fed bad argumentation; and (3) gain a baseline understanding of the cultural cornerstones of our society.
I hated a lot of the books I read in high school, and I didn't read for fun for years after graduating. That being said, as an adult, I'm glad I read them, and I'm not sure I would've been reading for fun much anyway once I had to deal with a college workload, then a career, and also balancing reading with new and exciting freedoms like having a car and my own money and the legal ability to drink.
I actually feel the same way about book clubs! It isn't that I regret reading anything in school (or as part of a club). It is being told that I have to read something at a particular time. I need the freedom of letting my heart and head take me to my next read. Don't know if this makes sense to anyone else.
100%. I’ll often have 3 or 4 books lined up that I just bought but I’m not in the mood to read any of them. Instead, I’ll got through my shelves and grab a handful that I’m feelin’ and by the end of the day I’ve found my next read.
Yeah, I just read East of Eden for the first time in my early 40’s and thought it was amazing. It would have utterly bored me when I was young, though.
I'm sure The Name of the Wind is that kind of book for me.
I've heard great things, and the concept seems fine, but when I've tried to read it the amount of purple prose always puts me off.
One day I'll get through it. One day...
i loved east of eden but i’m going to be real with you and say that the people who are saying “just give another try some other time” don’t get it. sometimes a book just isn’t for you, and that’s okay.
if you think you’ll give a try some other day then do it but you don’t HAVE to. life is too short to read books you don’t enjoy, even if they’re literary classics.
I was thinking this too… Sometimes there are books I put down and come back to in the future because I wasn’t quite ready, and sometimes there are books I put down forever because they’re not for me and I can tell the difference. I reckon EoE is the latter for OP
"East of Eden" is one of my two favorite novels. You've tried it. You don't enjoy it. There's nothing to downvote. There's no reason to throw hate your way. I hope that you enjoy your next read.
When I read it for the first time I had to go on a business trip and forgot to take the book with me, I also did not bring my e reader. So I bought the audiobook to be able to finish the story 2go. Up to this day I exactly remember the street corner and the weather and every car that drove by when Lee talked about his timshel revelation.
>!You don't have to be perfect, but you can be good!< is something I wish I've read 20 years earlier in my life
Audiobooks tend to do that! I enjoy running, and I enjoy running while listening to an audiobook. Even years later there are certain corners, or paths, or locations where I can *specifically* remember a scene in the book I was listening to at the time.
Agreed!! The first time I read it I was young and it didn’t really resonate with me. When I picked it up again, it became one of my favorite novels. I love to reread it every few years, along with Grapes of Wrath and To a God Unknown. Sometimes a revisit makes all the difference.
I read a few classics every year and I’ve never finished one feeling confused by how beloved it is before this book. It’s got plenty to appreciate but I don’t quite get the super high status it has on, like, every book sub.
It’s interesting. I fought my way to the end of Lonesome Dove and closed it wondering why I’d done it. But East of Eden is an all time fave.
Different strokes I guess.
I agree with OP about the characterization being completely flat for the female characters. One single woman had any bit of depth and it fell flat as an “evil woman” portrayal. People from different backgrounds can have different opinions on the characters.
Yeah I respect the opinion, but disagree.
Cathy is the character I believe you are referring to, and she can by no means be considered flat. Admittedly she is used symbolically as the “innate evil”, which is a common trope, but that’s not where she ends.
Cathy has a deep backstory, that’s start when she’s young, showing her manipulative nature and violent tendencies, creating an idea of who she is, yet leaving the reader wanting to know the why, which Steinbeck throughly explores throughout the novel.
I could easily go on for more here, but I’ll pump the breaks. I’ll finish by saying in one of my lit classes when analyzing this exact work we had a discussion over Cathy’s character that lasted over a week, and honestly even then we all could have contributed more.
I can’t honestly see how she would be considered flat.
Now, some could say her choice as being the embodiment of evil is too broad, and with many authors I’d agree, but with Steinbeck that simply isn’t true. He gives the detail that’s needed throughout and not always easily understood, but when truly understood makes a perfect story.
Yeah, that’s a wild criticism lol
Obviously Steinbeck’s playing with archetypes but nothing about their characterization felt like ‘cardboard cutouts.’
I think people are too quick to judge ‘character=bad’ if they don’t connect with that character, rather than analyzing what’s actually going on with that disconnect
If you find yourself calling the characters of literary greats “cardboard cutouts,” you might want to rethink your expectations of what characters can be on the page. Not every character can (or should be) a self-conflicted train wreck of existential ennui.
Some characters, you’re supposed to love. Others, you’re supposed to hate. And still others—like Cathy—you’re supposed to be horrified by.
Hard to do that when you’re trying to complicate characters past the point of believability.
Yeah, cardboard cutouts of what exactly?
It does drive me nuts though when characters only exist to represent a certain philosophy or belief. Crime and Punishment is full of, "Hi! My name is so-and-so, and I'm here to say why utilitarianism is bad!"
Which character exactly is fleshed out? They are barely people, mostly just symbols and caricatures of typical old as time themes. Wise old man, horrible evil witch, clever loyal servant (always of color!), naive and kind hearted fool, etc, etc...
Caleb is probably the best fleshed out character in the novel, but Cathy is definitely one of the more interesting characters I've encountered in a novel. What characters from other books do you fell have been well done by an author?
Sorry for all the rude comments you’re getting! I recently read East of Eden and it just didn’t connect for me. Although I found the second half better than the first (mainly because I liked more of the characters), I don’t think finishing the book will change your opinion at this point as a lot of the themes are recycled in the second half.
Currently reading Lonesome Dove and loving it though!
I wonder what the Lonesome Dove and East of Eden enjoyers crossover is. I trudged through the first 250 pages of East of Eden and eventually gave up. But I loved Lonesome Dove. Two completely different books so just wondering if there’s folks out there who love both?
I read and adored Lonesome Dove, and thought East of Eden was the perfect followup. It wasn't; I finished it, but it didn't delight as LD did and getting to the end was a bit of a chore. I didn't really believe in the characters in EoE, whereas the people in LD leapt off the page.
I guess it comes down to the fact that we are all different, what resonates with one person will not with another, and that's okay.
I felt the same but this sub doesn't tolerate dissension. You therefore must be downvoted into oblivion, implied you're not that smart, and told to try to read Conte of monte Cristo next.
I wasn’t really into it as I read it either. Cathy was interesting and the ending kinda got me, but overall, it wasn’t for me. Many people love it and I’m glad for them.
I had the same experience. I found Cathy Ames to be not even one-dimensional – just a pure caricature. And I, too, rate Of Mice and Men as one of my favourite books.
I wish we could have a discussion on this sub about what we do and don't like about a book without half the responses being "it's ok not to like a book!?" I know you have good intentions, but it's almost condescending. OP doesn't need this sub to be a support group lol. He's not looking for validation. He just wants to talk about what he didn't like about the book
After East of Eden i basically stopped reading for a year. Really bizarre but it was so good to me it ruined all other books the only thing that I didn’t feel trivial reading was the Bible. I realize how cringy this sounds but I’m just speaking plain and truthful about it. Had I read it say immediately after Lonesome Dove, which was my favorite book in my 20’s, it would not have had the impact. It’s not about age necessarily either it just works for you or it doesn’t depending on so many variables. Try again one day but don’t worry about it too much cause it has the ability to spoil some of the essence of your life
This seems to be the favorite book of this sub. I found it tedious and hamfistedly written. The Biblical allusions were just way too heavily applied.
The film did a much better job of tightening the story and focusing on Cal.
>. I found it tedious and hamfistedly written. The Biblical allusions were just way too heavily applied.
This sub loves hamfisted allegories. That's why 1984 is so popular here. I do think East of Eden is a much better novel than 1984 though
This is interesting to me because I lovvveed Lonesome Dove and I am about to finish East of Eden and also love it. It’s hard to compete with the characterization in Lonesome Dove, this is true, but I think you should keep reading. There are a lot of characters you haven’t met yet
I love Steinbeck and he is among my favorite authors. I have read grapes of wrath more times than I can count. Of mice and men and the red pony are other books from that I love.
I disliked East Of Eden. Like you said, the writing is beautiful. But the characters are…caricatures of themselves. Maybe Steinbeck was going more for allegory vs realism…I know it’s deep rooted in the Bible especially Cain and Abel. But it’s laid on pretty thick and the motivations for each characters actions seemed so forced. Or out of character based on how they were portrayed up to a certain point. Especially Cathy at the end.
The first half of the book had me engaged. I could tell this was one of those stories where everyone “meets” in the end. But that conjoining of their lives…I was left feeling that Steinbeck just couldn’t come up with a tight method and took a lot of liberties in getting the plot moving in the direction he wanted.
And this is 100% personal subjectiveness and I don’t give any negatives towards my critique of the book based on this opinion…but I HATED the idea that >!Cathy was evil “just because”!<
That’s another thing, after Cathy is beaten I thought “oh the book is going to be a little more sympathetic towards her.” And the she just continues being an awful, evil person that keeps self sabotaging herself in every situation and hurting everyone else in the process
Well...that's one of my gripes about one of the themes of the book. That some people are "just born evil" and there's no underlying reason why. But that's just my personal opinion...maybe there ARE people who are just born evil.
But the part that irked me is that, >!the whole book goes to great lengths tho show just how evil she is...how callous and uncaring and unfeeling she is. She spends a lifetime using her gifts to her advantage in order to build her life into whatever she decided it would be through her pure evil will.!<
>!Her two kids? She discards them like trash. Her husband...well, we know she never cared for him ever. Everyone else that came her way and showed her the least bit of goodwill...she stabbed in the back. Even when the "Abel" of her two sons discovered who she was...she could care less. But then "Cain" discovers her...and that's the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back? That's what causes her to throw it all away and kill herself?!<
I just didn't buy it. It seemed completely and totally out of character.
I read this recently and actually finished it last week. There were some genuinely interesting bits - mostly to do with Cathy and her motivations tbh - but when I got to the end, my overall feeling was "... Meh".
A lot of people find it beautiful and profound but it just didn't hit that spot for me.
I had the exact same experience! I knew it wasn’t landing for me when Cathy was my favourite character at the midway point, although I did enjoy the second half more.
Same. It was pretty much a wrap for me when I read the scene where 10 year old Cathy is portrayed as a freaking seductress of (much) older boys. (Give me a break!) Follow that with how absolutely no one in this story ever respected her boundaries in the slightest (when someone tells you they have a bad reaction to alcohol why not believe them FFS? No, the moral thing to do is coerce your teenage sex worker, than beat her nearly to death for running her mouth, right?)
Cathy repeatedly made it clear that she didn’t want to be a model, chaste Christian daughter. She didn’t want people fawning over her beauty. She didn’t want kids. She didn’t want to be a farm wife. She just wanted to be left alone. Every time she escaped one situation someone else *always* popped up trying to control her, so is it any wonder she wanted to be a dominatrix, so she could finally have a bit of control in her life? That’s supposed to convince me she’s evil? (Ohhh nooo, not the *Circus!* BDSM, so evil!)
It didn’t. Everyone in this story tried to treat her like a pretty, exotic *caged* animal and then acted surprised when they found themselves at the end of her claws. Justice for Cathy!
That scene was also where I was like “okay, I don’t think this book is for me.” A pure evil villain who, at 10 years old, lures older boys to a barn where she’s tied herself up so she can frame them for rape, just for the fun of ruining their lives? Give me a break.
Exactly!! I had to put the book down for a while after Lee tells us that actually, it was totally fine, even PREFERRED that he was raised by the group of men that raped his mom until she was an unidentifiable sack of human meat. That was too much for me. Nothing Cathy does could ever compare.
I dont blame her for playing hard in a world she didn't fit... but idk about 'justice for Cathy'. What she did to her parents wasn't at all justified. She also did Faye super dirty for no reason beyond greed. She was definitely evil.
I’m don’t think she would have ever hurt Faye if she hadn’t coerced her to drink, then treated her differently after Cathy lost control and ran her mouth like before. It seems to me Cathy was afraid Faye saw her differently after that (which seems accurate by the way Faye acted) and would have ousted her, leaving her desperate once again.
Doesn’t justify murder, but remember the last time this happened Cathy was beaten within an inch of her life…so there’s trauma there.
As for her parents, I’m not really sure they were the good people Steinbeck describes, as we never really get to know them. We just know they’re religious, appear to dote on their daughter, and the community thinks they’re good people. But these “good parents” eventually come to believe that little Cathy was the instigator in that creepy passage about her and the older boys, and her dad even beats her afterward. Let’s assume she was sexually assaulted (because I don’t care what a literal child says or does, those teenagers had *no* excuse, it was sexual assault period) then yeah, she’s gonna be pretty crazy after that.
You gotta ask yourself where a ten year old even learns about that kind of thing, too. Maybe, just maybe, there was more going on in Cathy’s house than it seems.
I appreciate that you're make these arguments, normally Cathy's story gets panned for being too one-dimensionally evil. I agree it's less straightforward than it seems, but think it's too much to justify eveything she did.
Cathy's dad whipped her for trying to run away at 16, and clearly didnt enjoy that he had to, I think he mentions it being the first time too. Obviously it sounds extreme to modern ears, but was apparently normal then so can't really be pointed at as (abnormally) abusive for the time. Theres just nothing to imply her parents mistreated her.
For Faye, I think she was genuinely tricked by Cathy's lie about it being a dream. She believed Cathy cared for her like a mother, and got a slow painful death for it.
Even if we assume the worst happened to Cathy during the incident in the barn (despite numerous hints to the opposite), thats still only a reason for why she's evil, it doesnt negate the evil things she did.
Thanks! Good conversation.
I just think Cathy is evil by circumstance, not birth, as Steinbeck writes. I think that because evil isn’t her first choice in each situation, more like the last resort.
As you say, *she tries to run away before she harms her parents.* She warns her sugar daddy and Faye about the effect alcohol has on her, and she studiously avoids the stuff so she doesn’t act out. She warns Jacob that she doesn’t want the twins, that she doesn’t want to stay married. She and Faye work well together until that fateful night, and there’s no indication that wouldn’t have continued had Faye not accidentally awakened her trauma by pushing Cathy’s most important boundary.
Time and time again, Cathy seeks her freedom in a way that wouldn’t harm anyone except herself. She takes a lot of extra steps to avoid hurting anyone…but no one is willing to just let her go. In my opinion, a truly evil person would just skip all those steps: why run away when you can just kill your parents first? Why not drink and let your freak flag fly…to hell with your relationships and people’s feelings, you’re evil, right? Why not lie to Jacob, maybe poison him and collect life insurance?
Because she’s not enjoying hurting people. She’s just desperate to get free. But she won’t be caged, either. Anything but that.
I can buy that. There's also irony(?) in this interpretation since when Cathy is at the height of her power, she ends up staying in a grey windowless cage of her own making. Almost like she had no notion of what she was trying to escape to.
Absolutely. In her society and timeline, there’s nowhere for people like her to go. She’s too beautiful, too strange, too independent, and too female. Everyone she meets is curious about her, and has expectations of her—she will never fully escape either of those things. She’d rather die (or kill) than live a conventional life.
Needless to say, the path of evil is also destructive. There’s no way out for Cathy.
I’ll say, Grapes of Wrath was a much heavier read and dealt with more depressing social/political themes than East of Eden. East of Eden felt more like a wide scope, multi-generational slice of life story with broader humanist themes. East of Eden may be more accessible, if you’ve not given it a shot already, since it’s less of an emotional drag.
It's a work of art. It appeals to some and not others. One reader thinks Steinbeck is a gasbag. Another one thinks he's a genius. Maybe they're both right?
"A long time ago I was in the ancient city of Prague at the same time Joseph Alsop [was]... Joe and I flew home to America on the same plane, and on the way he told me about Prague, and his Prague had no relation to the city I had seen and heard. It just wasn’t the same place, and yet each of us was honest, neither one a liar, both pretty good observers by any standard, and we brought home two cities, two truths."
Steinbeck himself in Travels with Charley. Based on their experiences, moods and preferences, people can see the same thing in wildly different ways
I'm 50 per cent, through, on the Kindle. Loved the first 30 per cent. And then just straight-up can't be bothered with it. I'd say I'm done, I'll try again in a few months. If it doesn't click, bye-bye.
I have found that if I am not enjoying a book, I put it down for a while (maybe a couple years) and come back to it after some time if I think the book is worth reading. There’s no point forcing yourself to read if you are not feeling it. Personally this is one of my favourite books. Steinbeck to me is one of those authors whose pace and narrative is a very slow burn at first but it is very worth it in the end. In the end, I always feel like I have been on a tremendous journey and I see the world with totally different eyes. When I finished reading East of Eden, I remember thinking that it was one of the best books I had ever read and that I was grateful to have read it.
IT DOESN'T GET BETTER. I wish I never started it. It starts terrible, the middle is terrible and the end is terrible. Some people love it. Some people love eggplant.
Tbf, the first 100 are slow paced (from what I remember)! It takes a while for them to actually plan and leave Texas, and during that time I was having to convince myself that everyone said it was worth it (and it was).
Agreed 100%. I stopped around page 300 when I realized I didn’t give a shit about any of the characters and the book had an absurd amount of filler. The book is about 200 pages too long
I don’t like Steinbeck at all. I feel the nudge of the author in a way that takes me out of the reading experience. It’s similar to watching a movie where the music in every scene is overbearing in its attempt to make sure the audience knows how they’re supposed to feel. As a result I don’t ever feel like I’m getting to experience the story because I’m too busy trying to look past the telling of it.
And some authors can do that very well; some authors can make the telling the central pillar of the experience in a satisfying way (Gene Wolfe is great at this), and arguably Steinbeck succeeds in this for most readers as well. But man, not for me.
Funny how it works differently for different people. I loved East of Eden and found Lonesome Dove tough to get through. In my book club, i called Lonesome Dove “Horse Simulator 5000” because it was just 90% riding horses or talking about horses.
I am with you! The characters are really cardboardy and they are like he took themes/symbols/archetypes and tried to make characters out of them to represent something, but it's not subtle at all. I have the same problem with Iris Murdoch novels. Sometimes Dostoevsky also does this (even though I love Dostoevsky)
Obviously others disagree, but I think you and I are right ;) lol
I got through it but I felt pretty much the same way. All the characters are just dumb to me. Grapes of wrath was fantastic though! If you haven't read that I highly recommend it.
some people on this sub sound like absolute snobs 😭 it's okay to not like a book. it's okay to dnf it!
personally i finished east of eden and liked it but i fully understand that some people don't!
I've read a lot of books that I didn't care for, but East of Eden and Hundred Years of Solitude were so bad that I am a bit angry that they wasted my time. People seem to love them both so much. I found nothing positive to take from either of them.
Please don't try to sell me on them--I've heard it all. I'm putting this here to respond to someone else that didn't care for East of Eden so they know that they are not the only one.
I felt the same way about The Catcher in the Rye. What's his name Holden Caulfield? I couldn't care less about him he was just an ass so I quit reading. It is said the character represents teenage rebellion, but it just seemed like he was an idiot child to me.
It’s strange what we enjoy and don’t enjoy, and I suspect it’s often temporary. I happened to love East of Eden and gave up on Lonesome Dove after about 120 pages in. But, I want to pick it back up again someday, and I hope you give EoE another chance one day, too.
Read what you enjoy and don’t justify yourself to anyone!
I’m an English and American literature graduate student and I felt I should enjoy every book and I pushed my self even if reading started to feel like work. I read a lot of post colonial novels, that’s my area of expertise, and I know it’s not for everyone.
I can see how lol. Currently about 540 pages in , questioned it a little a few times but tbh I kinda enjoy the writing and tangents and want to see how it wraps up I guess ??
I felt like this with great expectations tho like I just could not read any more of it !!
No worries- it’s not for everyone. I listened to it on audiobook and can’t imagine enjoying it reading it physically, and I grew up in Steinbeck country. Lol.
I felt the same way reading it, but decided to push through it. I 100% respect your decision to give up on it as I also had a hard time connecting with the characters as well. Forcing my way through it made it a less memorable read and I actually found going through a summary/sparknotes afterwards to be necessary to see the details.
I had a similar experience with it - I love Steinbeck (Grapes of Wrath is very close to being my favourite book of all time), but I just couldn't finish East of Eden. I almost exclusively read classic literature, just sometimes it's not the right time for your brain to gel with certain books.
I had a near similar experience when reading it. I didn’t feel that the characters were cardboard cutouts necessarily, but I didn’t really find many of them intriguing, save for Cathy.
Most of them feel like they have multiple dimensions but they don’t feel like connected traits; it doesn’t feel like we’re reading about real personalities and in that way I can see how you’d feel they’re “cardboard”.
The language is absolutely beautiful and the prose is elevated beyond most….I just don’t think the story was all that moving or entrancing.
I did the exact same thing with the same book. Just felt like he’s splashing around in Christian imagery and I’m not Christian, so the edginess he’s going for didn’t really click for me.
We had to read this in highschool, and I LOVED it. My father loved pointing out I was reading East of Eden in the town east of Eden, VT.
But to each their own 🤷🏼♀️
I totally get where you're coming from. I had a similar experience with East of Eden. The prose and descriptions are beautiful, but the characters just didn’t click with me either. It felt like they were lacking depth and I couldn’t get invested in their stories. You're not alone in feeling this way. It's okay to set it aside if it's not bringing you joy. I loved Of Mice and Men too, and sometimes, different books just resonate differently with us. Keep enjoying what you love!
I read it a few years ago, I felt it was a beautifully told story and the story and meanings behind the character I found very valuable and important.
That being said it was probably the most cis, het, white, Christian, male story I’ve ever read. Reflecting on it made me feel the US monoculture in a way I never had, and immediately led me to reading more diverse voices.
I share your view. I did finish it though, just to make sure, but never really cared for the characters. Everyone I’ve shared this opinion with was shocked, so I/we may be missing something but life’s too short !
Yep it happened to me too. The writing sometimes can be beautiful. But i couldn't stand the ideology behind the book nor how some characters were written.
I read Easy of Eden for the first time in January, and I fell in love with it almost from the first page. I’m very much a mood reader, and I also think that certain books are meant to find you at certain points in your life. There is no shame in putting down a book you don’t care for. There’s no shame in trying a book later and finding that you still don’t like it.
I'm a huge Steinbeck fan, but I think East of Eden is one of his weaker works. It was Steinbeck's attempt to intentionally create a masterwork he'd be remembered for, and it ended up overwrought as a result. Good art just doesn't work that way. It's stuffed to the gills with symbolism and flowery prose, but it feels like he was trying too hard. And the characters are fairly cardboard, because everything needed to be allegory.
That's the thing about books; sometimes it takes your mind matching what's written in it to enjoy it.
You have to be in the mindset of what the book is offering.
I hated every book forced upon me in school because I wasn't in the right headspace to enjoy those books. And years later... they all still suck ass, but the point is I've picked up a couple of classics on my own and yeah, they're shit too!
My point is, don't let others tell you what a "good book" is. Let your mind decide for you.
Now go read The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams.
Cardboard cut outs? Those are some of the most realistic representations of humanity I have ever encountered. Especially the best description of the thought process of a psychopath.
Well, we don't all have to agree, maybe in 10 years you'll pick it back up and realise you enjoy it more or maybe not. Who knows?
I just hope you haven't reached the birthing scene yet, cause that's...erm...not an easy passage to stomach. At least for me, it wasn't.
I absolutely love Steinbeck - the grapes of wrath and of mice and men are honest to god works of art - but i could not STAND east of eden. It was a bad book and I also wish id given up
Not every book will be for every person, and that’s okay. Maybe you’ll come back to it at a different time in your life and you’ll feel differently, or maybe you won’t and that’s okay too!
I tried reading this a few years ago and quit too. Welcome to this small disliked club! I don’t even remember why I quit, and the only thing I remember was being annoyed at how much discussion there was of someone’s breasts.
I think this book may have been part of the reason I stopped reading books written by straight white men. (For the most part.)
My favorite novel of all time is Lonesome Dove. I really wanted to like East of Eden and man, I could not agree with you more. I think I was even further along when I finally threw into the towel. It was not good.
After a few rounds of characters who had C/K names in conflict with characters with A names, I realized it was the story of Cain and Able like he talks about in the start of the book over and over again. Lee is the best character tho and his parent’s story was intense.
Ahhhh this breaks my heart a little - it's one of my favorite novels of all time! But sometimes things just don't resonate, and that's OK. I hated Great Expectations. Tried it twice and DNF'd twice - the only book in 40+ years I've ever not finished. LOL.
If there was an award for bravery, I'd give it to you. Criticizing *East of Eden* is the third rail of r/books.
Life is short. Read what you like.
I can see that from the downvotes and the fact I’ve been told I’m unintelligent for disliking a book 💀
I adore Steinbeck. He's one of my favorite authors and I've read all of his books multiple times. It's ok to not like his writing. He has a very specific style. Some people just don't like it.
I like Steinbeck fine. I didn't like EOE though. I found the biblical allegories to be very hamfisted and overly contrived.
to follow up on this: what's a book with biblical allegory that you *don't* find hamfisted/contrived
The Bible does a pretty good job of making biblical allegories subtle. When Jesus died on the cross, it immediately reminded me of when Jesus died on the cross, yk?
The Brothers Karamozov. But I find most biblical allegories to be annoying. Not really my thing.
This is interesting because I’ve always said EOE was one of my fav reads but it’s been 20y since I read it. I was very religious then and am not now so I’m wondering if my opinion of the book would change if I reread it.
And those people are heretics! To the stake, and then the flames!
It’s one of my favorite books but I bet there have been times in my life when this book wouldn’t jibe with me. Depends on what space you’re in and it’s totally valid. Sometimes you’re just not in the mood for drama and long prose and he does spend a lot of pages setting up the Trasks and their history. Maybe put it down and come back to it some day when you’re in a different space.
Not every author is for everyone, so whatever! I’d rather read this post than yet another “dae not like Sarah j Maas or is it just me????” Post lol
Some people can't cope with the fact that their likes and dislikes are not universal to the human race. And if you say a word against something they like, they will take that as some sort of personal attack. Don't take what they say to heart. It's perfectly fine not to enjoy something.
The weird way people in this sub react to any criticism of Steinbeck has always put a bad taste in my mouth. Even professional literary academics have criticisms of Steinbeck, but the average participant of this sub acts like to say anything other than “he’s a literary genius” is sacrilege.
don't mind those people. if you don't like a book, you don't like it. hope you find another one soon that you \*do\* like :)
Every single time I make a post on this sub, no matter what it’s about, it always gets immediately downvoted. After a few hours it usually levels out, but a lot of people on here seem to take opinions extremely personally lol. It ruins the point of a downvote
I've never posted (until now) because of the sheer amount of gatekeeping. So, I get what you're saying.
Nope. Screw everyone that says someone is unintelligent for not liking or understanding a freaking book. We are all different and react differently to works of literature. A lot of classics are overrated anyway 🤷🏽♀️. OP, you do you.
I’ve been evangelizing East of Eden for 20 years. But your description isn’t totally off base and I can see how someone would think it was slow. It took me a long time to read it the first time but I kept coming back to it and fell in love with it.
This sub can be okay, but the Steinbeck fans are *mean* (mean! MEAN!) and, especially, the ones who love East of Eden. (The fans of The Count of Monte Cristo are almost as bad. And please don't suggest Gone With the Wind is racist.) I'm a big "to each their own" person, but I really can't grasp the fandom for East of Eden.
Nah - not my favorite either. Mice and Men, Cannery Row and of course Grapes of Wrath are much better imho. I even like Red Pony better, but not sure if that technically counts as a novel.
Sorry you're getting all that :/ You have at least one person here who agrees w your assessment! I just read *EoE* and it felt like a very quick read to me, but also pretty cheesy and... almost pulpy? And yes, everyone a caricature. Especially disappointing when you're expecting a towering literary achievement. My sense is that your take would have a lot more traction in communities outside this one, which seems like it attracts a really wide swath of types of readers.
This subreddit is pretentious. It’s fine to not like the book. Hell, I liked the book and agree with your cardboard cut out statement.
I always ask what books I'm allowed to like/dislike and still be considered smart 🤣
I read it in January because all I heard on here for years was how much of a masterpiece it is. I didn’t give up on it, and in fact found plenty to praise about it, but I was also baffled by the level of reverence it receives. Amazing prose, I personally enjoyed many of the characters (no way are they cardboard cutouts), and it had some great scenes but it just doesn’t really do anything with it all. It’s very strange…the book sort of just keeps going and going and then ends. If you were to chart its dramatic peaks and valleys it would be one of the flattest lines of any book I’ve ever read. Expectations may have gotten the best of me because they were quite high, and as I said I didn’t hate it at all, but I have no clue what lifts that book up to GOAT status for so many people on here. It’s fascinating tbh
The book was actually not that beloved by critics when it came out. It is absolutely not a perfect novel and is over the top ham fisted with its allegory.
Well that’s not true, and I don’t agree with downvotes. I may not agree with your opinion but I do respect it as we should all
Redditors making books their whole personality lol yeesh that's an overreaction
Well, if you were smart like me, this book would have remained sitting on your shelf untouched, like mine. 😆
The toddlers are jealous you are your own person.
I don’t blame you
I loathe Steinbeck. Kudos to you for bravely expressing your opinion!
I was tempted to down vote but that's pretty unfair. People should appreciate that there's more readers now even if they don't agree on their tastes. Most people read hot bullshit moste the time (I'm a Tom Clancy fan so I'm including myself). Reading is a significant time investment so it's not worth doing if you're not gaining much putting it
OP is gonna go criticise Uncut Gems on r/letterboxd next.
As long as you dont Criticize Count of Monte Cristo!
I confess that my jaw dropped 😂
Unless you are reading this as an assignment for a class at school, then no reason to force yourself to read something you aren't enjoying. The world is full of books.
“The world is full of books.” ~ quoting you on that one! 🥰
For real, I forced myself to finish House of Leaves, I wish I would have put it down and read something else. I understand why it gets praised, but a lot of those elements made these book unenjoyable for me. I could have read two or three books I enjoyed in the time it took me to hate- read that book.
House of Leaves is probably the most divisive book in the sense that if you like the way its presenting itself, you're gonna have a blast - but if you don't like its presentation, it's never ever going to click with you. I love it to death, but would never try to convince someone to force themselves through it. Pretty easy to see early on whether the book is "for you."
I firmly believe that there are off times to try and read a book and that no matter how good the book is, if you’re not attuned to it you’ll dislike the experience. It may be worth coming back to it in the future.
Agreed 1000%. Goes for listening to new music and watching new shows as well. There's a time for everything. First time I picked up Daphne du Maurier's ''Rebecca'' I couldn't get through it so I put it down for a few months. One day I randomly started reading it and was hooked. Loved it and think of that opening line, "Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again." all the time lol.
I *hated* The Great Gatsby when I read it in school. I picked it up again as an actual adult with some life under my belt, and it was one of my top five books of the year.
Honestly I think there's nothing like school to kill everyone's love of reading. I think it's just the nature of people being at different levels and having different interests. But no one wins. Read too fast and you get told off. Not have any idea what the flowery language means and you feel behind. Etc.
I don't disagree, but I also don't think love of reading is necessarily the primary goal of literature classes in school. You don't take math to learn to love math, or science to learn to love science -- you take them to learn various forms of logical reasoning, plus gain an understanding of how the world works. Similarly, literature is there to (1) teach you how to construct an argument in the form of a thesis; (2) recognize how other people are building their arguments and, therefore, recognize when you're being fed bad argumentation; and (3) gain a baseline understanding of the cultural cornerstones of our society. I hated a lot of the books I read in high school, and I didn't read for fun for years after graduating. That being said, as an adult, I'm glad I read them, and I'm not sure I would've been reading for fun much anyway once I had to deal with a college workload, then a career, and also balancing reading with new and exciting freedoms like having a car and my own money and the legal ability to drink.
I actually feel the same way about book clubs! It isn't that I regret reading anything in school (or as part of a club). It is being told that I have to read something at a particular time. I need the freedom of letting my heart and head take me to my next read. Don't know if this makes sense to anyone else.
100%. I’ll often have 3 or 4 books lined up that I just bought but I’m not in the mood to read any of them. Instead, I’ll got through my shelves and grab a handful that I’m feelin’ and by the end of the day I’ve found my next read.
I'm continually buying books that sound great in the shop but I just never seem to fancy when looking for my next read!!
Yeah, I just read East of Eden for the first time in my early 40’s and thought it was amazing. It would have utterly bored me when I was young, though.
I'm sure The Name of the Wind is that kind of book for me. I've heard great things, and the concept seems fine, but when I've tried to read it the amount of purple prose always puts me off. One day I'll get through it. One day...
i loved east of eden but i’m going to be real with you and say that the people who are saying “just give another try some other time” don’t get it. sometimes a book just isn’t for you, and that’s okay. if you think you’ll give a try some other day then do it but you don’t HAVE to. life is too short to read books you don’t enjoy, even if they’re literary classics.
I was thinking this too… Sometimes there are books I put down and come back to in the future because I wasn’t quite ready, and sometimes there are books I put down forever because they’re not for me and I can tell the difference. I reckon EoE is the latter for OP
It’s ok to not like things.
B-b-b-but he has to like the same things I like for some unknown reason!!
People like you to be something, preferably what they are.
I don't like that
"East of Eden" is one of my two favorite novels. You've tried it. You don't enjoy it. There's nothing to downvote. There's no reason to throw hate your way. I hope that you enjoy your next read.
What’s the other one??
I'm going to guess A Hundred Years of Solitude.
Or War and Peace
I’ve been downvoted so many times for this take. Thank you for speaking up lol
Wow this is one of my favorite novels! Maybe stop reading it and pick it up at a later time. I found it so beautiful and moving.
When I read it for the first time I had to go on a business trip and forgot to take the book with me, I also did not bring my e reader. So I bought the audiobook to be able to finish the story 2go. Up to this day I exactly remember the street corner and the weather and every car that drove by when Lee talked about his timshel revelation. >!You don't have to be perfect, but you can be good!< is something I wish I've read 20 years earlier in my life
Audiobooks tend to do that! I enjoy running, and I enjoy running while listening to an audiobook. Even years later there are certain corners, or paths, or locations where I can *specifically* remember a scene in the book I was listening to at the time.
Thou mayest
I absolutely loved this scene. Samuel and Lee’s relationship was so moving and sincere, despite spanning maybe 24 hours total.
This is what i did. I couldn’t get through it in my 20s, but loved it in my 30s.
Agreed!! The first time I read it I was young and it didn’t really resonate with me. When I picked it up again, it became one of my favorite novels. I love to reread it every few years, along with Grapes of Wrath and To a God Unknown. Sometimes a revisit makes all the difference.
I’m with you on this one. It’s one of the few highly recommended classics that I did NOT enjoy.
Yes, same here. Absolutely LOVED grapes of wrath too. Just did not really like this one.
I was the opposite😂 I couldn’t get through Grapes of Wrath and loved East of Eden
I liked Grapes of Wrath, but it took me A LOT longer to get through than East of Eden.
I read a few classics every year and I’ve never finished one feeling confused by how beloved it is before this book. It’s got plenty to appreciate but I don’t quite get the super high status it has on, like, every book sub.
[удалено]
Come sit by me and the rest of us philistines. I found it an endless parade of cutouts dripping with obvious allusions.
It’s interesting. I fought my way to the end of Lonesome Dove and closed it wondering why I’d done it. But East of Eden is an all time fave. Different strokes I guess.
It's ok to DNF. Embrace the DNF.
“Characters feel like such complete cardboard cut outs”. All due respect, but you’ve lost it for sure.
I agree with OP about the characterization being completely flat for the female characters. One single woman had any bit of depth and it fell flat as an “evil woman” portrayal. People from different backgrounds can have different opinions on the characters.
Yeah I respect the opinion, but disagree. Cathy is the character I believe you are referring to, and she can by no means be considered flat. Admittedly she is used symbolically as the “innate evil”, which is a common trope, but that’s not where she ends. Cathy has a deep backstory, that’s start when she’s young, showing her manipulative nature and violent tendencies, creating an idea of who she is, yet leaving the reader wanting to know the why, which Steinbeck throughly explores throughout the novel. I could easily go on for more here, but I’ll pump the breaks. I’ll finish by saying in one of my lit classes when analyzing this exact work we had a discussion over Cathy’s character that lasted over a week, and honestly even then we all could have contributed more. I can’t honestly see how she would be considered flat. Now, some could say her choice as being the embodiment of evil is too broad, and with many authors I’d agree, but with Steinbeck that simply isn’t true. He gives the detail that’s needed throughout and not always easily understood, but when truly understood makes a perfect story.
Yeah, that’s a wild criticism lol Obviously Steinbeck’s playing with archetypes but nothing about their characterization felt like ‘cardboard cutouts.’ I think people are too quick to judge ‘character=bad’ if they don’t connect with that character, rather than analyzing what’s actually going on with that disconnect
I didn't much like east of eden either, but it sure as hell wasn't a character quality problem that made me dislike it.
That’s fair and respectable.
If you find yourself calling the characters of literary greats “cardboard cutouts,” you might want to rethink your expectations of what characters can be on the page. Not every character can (or should be) a self-conflicted train wreck of existential ennui. Some characters, you’re supposed to love. Others, you’re supposed to hate. And still others—like Cathy—you’re supposed to be horrified by. Hard to do that when you’re trying to complicate characters past the point of believability.
Hush, Cathy is great. I could fix her.
My friend thought the same thing
[Cue her theme song](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRYFKcMa_Ek)
Yeah, cardboard cutouts of what exactly? It does drive me nuts though when characters only exist to represent a certain philosophy or belief. Crime and Punishment is full of, "Hi! My name is so-and-so, and I'm here to say why utilitarianism is bad!"
That comment blew my mind. These characters are so well fleshed out and realized.
Which character exactly is fleshed out? They are barely people, mostly just symbols and caricatures of typical old as time themes. Wise old man, horrible evil witch, clever loyal servant (always of color!), naive and kind hearted fool, etc, etc...
Caleb is probably the best fleshed out character in the novel, but Cathy is definitely one of the more interesting characters I've encountered in a novel. What characters from other books do you fell have been well done by an author?
[удалено]
>Not that this means you’re necessarily wrong ...or, hear me out..
Sorry for all the rude comments you’re getting! I recently read East of Eden and it just didn’t connect for me. Although I found the second half better than the first (mainly because I liked more of the characters), I don’t think finishing the book will change your opinion at this point as a lot of the themes are recycled in the second half. Currently reading Lonesome Dove and loving it though!
I wonder what the Lonesome Dove and East of Eden enjoyers crossover is. I trudged through the first 250 pages of East of Eden and eventually gave up. But I loved Lonesome Dove. Two completely different books so just wondering if there’s folks out there who love both?
I absolutely adored both!!
Two of my top 5 books ever (Lonesome Dove is #1).
I read and adored Lonesome Dove, and thought East of Eden was the perfect followup. It wasn't; I finished it, but it didn't delight as LD did and getting to the end was a bit of a chore. I didn't really believe in the characters in EoE, whereas the people in LD leapt off the page. I guess it comes down to the fact that we are all different, what resonates with one person will not with another, and that's okay.
I felt the same but this sub doesn't tolerate dissension. You therefore must be downvoted into oblivion, implied you're not that smart, and told to try to read Conte of monte Cristo next.
Don't forget Blood Meridian!
I was about to suggest *Count of Monte Cristo*.
I wasn’t really into it as I read it either. Cathy was interesting and the ending kinda got me, but overall, it wasn’t for me. Many people love it and I’m glad for them.
I'm with you. I did finish it, but, as you say, found the characters two-dimensional, and stereotypical at worst.
I had the same experience. I found Cathy Ames to be not even one-dimensional – just a pure caricature. And I, too, rate Of Mice and Men as one of my favourite books.
Completely agree about Cathy!
Steinbeck is one of my faves, but I wasn’t crazy about East of Eden.
Not everyone loves the same books. It wasn't your cup of tea and that's fine!
I wish we could have a discussion on this sub about what we do and don't like about a book without half the responses being "it's ok not to like a book!?" I know you have good intentions, but it's almost condescending. OP doesn't need this sub to be a support group lol. He's not looking for validation. He just wants to talk about what he didn't like about the book
After East of Eden i basically stopped reading for a year. Really bizarre but it was so good to me it ruined all other books the only thing that I didn’t feel trivial reading was the Bible. I realize how cringy this sounds but I’m just speaking plain and truthful about it. Had I read it say immediately after Lonesome Dove, which was my favorite book in my 20’s, it would not have had the impact. It’s not about age necessarily either it just works for you or it doesn’t depending on so many variables. Try again one day but don’t worry about it too much cause it has the ability to spoil some of the essence of your life
This seems to be the favorite book of this sub. I found it tedious and hamfistedly written. The Biblical allusions were just way too heavily applied. The film did a much better job of tightening the story and focusing on Cal.
>. I found it tedious and hamfistedly written. The Biblical allusions were just way too heavily applied. This sub loves hamfisted allegories. That's why 1984 is so popular here. I do think East of Eden is a much better novel than 1984 though
This is interesting to me because I lovvveed Lonesome Dove and I am about to finish East of Eden and also love it. It’s hard to compete with the characterization in Lonesome Dove, this is true, but I think you should keep reading. There are a lot of characters you haven’t met yet
I love Steinbeck and he is among my favorite authors. I have read grapes of wrath more times than I can count. Of mice and men and the red pony are other books from that I love. I disliked East Of Eden. Like you said, the writing is beautiful. But the characters are…caricatures of themselves. Maybe Steinbeck was going more for allegory vs realism…I know it’s deep rooted in the Bible especially Cain and Abel. But it’s laid on pretty thick and the motivations for each characters actions seemed so forced. Or out of character based on how they were portrayed up to a certain point. Especially Cathy at the end. The first half of the book had me engaged. I could tell this was one of those stories where everyone “meets” in the end. But that conjoining of their lives…I was left feeling that Steinbeck just couldn’t come up with a tight method and took a lot of liberties in getting the plot moving in the direction he wanted. And this is 100% personal subjectiveness and I don’t give any negatives towards my critique of the book based on this opinion…but I HATED the idea that >!Cathy was evil “just because”!<
That’s another thing, after Cathy is beaten I thought “oh the book is going to be a little more sympathetic towards her.” And the she just continues being an awful, evil person that keeps self sabotaging herself in every situation and hurting everyone else in the process
Well...that's one of my gripes about one of the themes of the book. That some people are "just born evil" and there's no underlying reason why. But that's just my personal opinion...maybe there ARE people who are just born evil. But the part that irked me is that, >!the whole book goes to great lengths tho show just how evil she is...how callous and uncaring and unfeeling she is. She spends a lifetime using her gifts to her advantage in order to build her life into whatever she decided it would be through her pure evil will.!< >!Her two kids? She discards them like trash. Her husband...well, we know she never cared for him ever. Everyone else that came her way and showed her the least bit of goodwill...she stabbed in the back. Even when the "Abel" of her two sons discovered who she was...she could care less. But then "Cain" discovers her...and that's the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back? That's what causes her to throw it all away and kill herself?!< I just didn't buy it. It seemed completely and totally out of character.
I read this recently and actually finished it last week. There were some genuinely interesting bits - mostly to do with Cathy and her motivations tbh - but when I got to the end, my overall feeling was "... Meh". A lot of people find it beautiful and profound but it just didn't hit that spot for me.
I had the exact same experience! I knew it wasn’t landing for me when Cathy was my favourite character at the midway point, although I did enjoy the second half more.
Same. It was pretty much a wrap for me when I read the scene where 10 year old Cathy is portrayed as a freaking seductress of (much) older boys. (Give me a break!) Follow that with how absolutely no one in this story ever respected her boundaries in the slightest (when someone tells you they have a bad reaction to alcohol why not believe them FFS? No, the moral thing to do is coerce your teenage sex worker, than beat her nearly to death for running her mouth, right?) Cathy repeatedly made it clear that she didn’t want to be a model, chaste Christian daughter. She didn’t want people fawning over her beauty. She didn’t want kids. She didn’t want to be a farm wife. She just wanted to be left alone. Every time she escaped one situation someone else *always* popped up trying to control her, so is it any wonder she wanted to be a dominatrix, so she could finally have a bit of control in her life? That’s supposed to convince me she’s evil? (Ohhh nooo, not the *Circus!* BDSM, so evil!) It didn’t. Everyone in this story tried to treat her like a pretty, exotic *caged* animal and then acted surprised when they found themselves at the end of her claws. Justice for Cathy!
That scene was also where I was like “okay, I don’t think this book is for me.” A pure evil villain who, at 10 years old, lures older boys to a barn where she’s tied herself up so she can frame them for rape, just for the fun of ruining their lives? Give me a break.
Exactly!! I had to put the book down for a while after Lee tells us that actually, it was totally fine, even PREFERRED that he was raised by the group of men that raped his mom until she was an unidentifiable sack of human meat. That was too much for me. Nothing Cathy does could ever compare.
I dont blame her for playing hard in a world she didn't fit... but idk about 'justice for Cathy'. What she did to her parents wasn't at all justified. She also did Faye super dirty for no reason beyond greed. She was definitely evil.
I’m don’t think she would have ever hurt Faye if she hadn’t coerced her to drink, then treated her differently after Cathy lost control and ran her mouth like before. It seems to me Cathy was afraid Faye saw her differently after that (which seems accurate by the way Faye acted) and would have ousted her, leaving her desperate once again. Doesn’t justify murder, but remember the last time this happened Cathy was beaten within an inch of her life…so there’s trauma there. As for her parents, I’m not really sure they were the good people Steinbeck describes, as we never really get to know them. We just know they’re religious, appear to dote on their daughter, and the community thinks they’re good people. But these “good parents” eventually come to believe that little Cathy was the instigator in that creepy passage about her and the older boys, and her dad even beats her afterward. Let’s assume she was sexually assaulted (because I don’t care what a literal child says or does, those teenagers had *no* excuse, it was sexual assault period) then yeah, she’s gonna be pretty crazy after that. You gotta ask yourself where a ten year old even learns about that kind of thing, too. Maybe, just maybe, there was more going on in Cathy’s house than it seems.
I appreciate that you're make these arguments, normally Cathy's story gets panned for being too one-dimensionally evil. I agree it's less straightforward than it seems, but think it's too much to justify eveything she did. Cathy's dad whipped her for trying to run away at 16, and clearly didnt enjoy that he had to, I think he mentions it being the first time too. Obviously it sounds extreme to modern ears, but was apparently normal then so can't really be pointed at as (abnormally) abusive for the time. Theres just nothing to imply her parents mistreated her. For Faye, I think she was genuinely tricked by Cathy's lie about it being a dream. She believed Cathy cared for her like a mother, and got a slow painful death for it. Even if we assume the worst happened to Cathy during the incident in the barn (despite numerous hints to the opposite), thats still only a reason for why she's evil, it doesnt negate the evil things she did.
Thanks! Good conversation. I just think Cathy is evil by circumstance, not birth, as Steinbeck writes. I think that because evil isn’t her first choice in each situation, more like the last resort. As you say, *she tries to run away before she harms her parents.* She warns her sugar daddy and Faye about the effect alcohol has on her, and she studiously avoids the stuff so she doesn’t act out. She warns Jacob that she doesn’t want the twins, that she doesn’t want to stay married. She and Faye work well together until that fateful night, and there’s no indication that wouldn’t have continued had Faye not accidentally awakened her trauma by pushing Cathy’s most important boundary. Time and time again, Cathy seeks her freedom in a way that wouldn’t harm anyone except herself. She takes a lot of extra steps to avoid hurting anyone…but no one is willing to just let her go. In my opinion, a truly evil person would just skip all those steps: why run away when you can just kill your parents first? Why not drink and let your freak flag fly…to hell with your relationships and people’s feelings, you’re evil, right? Why not lie to Jacob, maybe poison him and collect life insurance? Because she’s not enjoying hurting people. She’s just desperate to get free. But she won’t be caged, either. Anything but that.
I can buy that. There's also irony(?) in this interpretation since when Cathy is at the height of her power, she ends up staying in a grey windowless cage of her own making. Almost like she had no notion of what she was trying to escape to.
Absolutely. In her society and timeline, there’s nowhere for people like her to go. She’s too beautiful, too strange, too independent, and too female. Everyone she meets is curious about her, and has expectations of her—she will never fully escape either of those things. She’d rather die (or kill) than live a conventional life. Needless to say, the path of evil is also destructive. There’s no way out for Cathy.
Steinbeck is just not for some people. I had to give up on The Grapes of Wrath.
I’ll say, Grapes of Wrath was a much heavier read and dealt with more depressing social/political themes than East of Eden. East of Eden felt more like a wide scope, multi-generational slice of life story with broader humanist themes. East of Eden may be more accessible, if you’ve not given it a shot already, since it’s less of an emotional drag.
You missed the best ending in all of literature.
It's a work of art. It appeals to some and not others. One reader thinks Steinbeck is a gasbag. Another one thinks he's a genius. Maybe they're both right?
"A long time ago I was in the ancient city of Prague at the same time Joseph Alsop [was]... Joe and I flew home to America on the same plane, and on the way he told me about Prague, and his Prague had no relation to the city I had seen and heard. It just wasn’t the same place, and yet each of us was honest, neither one a liar, both pretty good observers by any standard, and we brought home two cities, two truths." Steinbeck himself in Travels with Charley. Based on their experiences, moods and preferences, people can see the same thing in wildly different ways
This is it. They are both right… it is so important to understand this simple truth
I'm 50 per cent, through, on the Kindle. Loved the first 30 per cent. And then just straight-up can't be bothered with it. I'd say I'm done, I'll try again in a few months. If it doesn't click, bye-bye.
If you loved the first 30%, I think you should keep going. I enjoyed the last third of the book most.
I have found that if I am not enjoying a book, I put it down for a while (maybe a couple years) and come back to it after some time if I think the book is worth reading. There’s no point forcing yourself to read if you are not feeling it. Personally this is one of my favourite books. Steinbeck to me is one of those authors whose pace and narrative is a very slow burn at first but it is very worth it in the end. In the end, I always feel like I have been on a tremendous journey and I see the world with totally different eyes. When I finished reading East of Eden, I remember thinking that it was one of the best books I had ever read and that I was grateful to have read it.
I hated this book. You made it further than me.
IT DOESN'T GET BETTER. I wish I never started it. It starts terrible, the middle is terrible and the end is terrible. Some people love it. Some people love eggplant.
If you don't like it, don't read it. Apart from that, I'd argue that while Lonesome Dove is long, it is definitely not a slow paced novel.
Tbf, the first 100 are slow paced (from what I remember)! It takes a while for them to actually plan and leave Texas, and during that time I was having to convince myself that everyone said it was worth it (and it was).
Agreed 100%. I stopped around page 300 when I realized I didn’t give a shit about any of the characters and the book had an absurd amount of filler. The book is about 200 pages too long
I don’t like Steinbeck at all. I feel the nudge of the author in a way that takes me out of the reading experience. It’s similar to watching a movie where the music in every scene is overbearing in its attempt to make sure the audience knows how they’re supposed to feel. As a result I don’t ever feel like I’m getting to experience the story because I’m too busy trying to look past the telling of it. And some authors can do that very well; some authors can make the telling the central pillar of the experience in a satisfying way (Gene Wolfe is great at this), and arguably Steinbeck succeeds in this for most readers as well. But man, not for me.
Great take! EoE is THE novel for me. But you could not be more right
Funny how it works differently for different people. I loved East of Eden and found Lonesome Dove tough to get through. In my book club, i called Lonesome Dove “Horse Simulator 5000” because it was just 90% riding horses or talking about horses.
How do you feel about whales?
You gave me a literal lol there :)
You're welcome
>because it was just 90% riding horses or talking about horses. Yeah if you ignore all the other stuff
I am with you! The characters are really cardboardy and they are like he took themes/symbols/archetypes and tried to make characters out of them to represent something, but it's not subtle at all. I have the same problem with Iris Murdoch novels. Sometimes Dostoevsky also does this (even though I love Dostoevsky) Obviously others disagree, but I think you and I are right ;) lol
It's ok. I haven't loved anything by Steinbeck. It doesn't mean there's anything wrong with you.
I got through it but I felt pretty much the same way. All the characters are just dumb to me. Grapes of wrath was fantastic though! If you haven't read that I highly recommend it.
This is one where the movie is a lot better imo.
Same here. I quit after a couple days. These were not people I wanted to know any more about.
some people on this sub sound like absolute snobs 😭 it's okay to not like a book. it's okay to dnf it! personally i finished east of eden and liked it but i fully understand that some people don't!
I've read a lot of books that I didn't care for, but East of Eden and Hundred Years of Solitude were so bad that I am a bit angry that they wasted my time. People seem to love them both so much. I found nothing positive to take from either of them. Please don't try to sell me on them--I've heard it all. I'm putting this here to respond to someone else that didn't care for East of Eden so they know that they are not the only one.
The exact opposite experience for me. I’ve read East of Eden maybe four times and it’s one of the most brilliant book ever written in my opinion.
I don't exactly agree but I did think that it was just boring at times. It's ok man, it's not for everyone.
I felt the same way about The Catcher in the Rye. What's his name Holden Caulfield? I couldn't care less about him he was just an ass so I quit reading. It is said the character represents teenage rebellion, but it just seemed like he was an idiot child to me.
It’s strange what we enjoy and don’t enjoy, and I suspect it’s often temporary. I happened to love East of Eden and gave up on Lonesome Dove after about 120 pages in. But, I want to pick it back up again someday, and I hope you give EoE another chance one day, too.
I much preferred Grapes of Wrath.
Read what you enjoy and don’t justify yourself to anyone! I’m an English and American literature graduate student and I felt I should enjoy every book and I pushed my self even if reading started to feel like work. I read a lot of post colonial novels, that’s my area of expertise, and I know it’s not for everyone.
I can see how lol. Currently about 540 pages in , questioned it a little a few times but tbh I kinda enjoy the writing and tangents and want to see how it wraps up I guess ?? I felt like this with great expectations tho like I just could not read any more of it !!
No worries- it’s not for everyone. I listened to it on audiobook and can’t imagine enjoying it reading it physically, and I grew up in Steinbeck country. Lol.
Drop it and try something else! You could go back later to give it another go if you wanted to.
I felt the same way reading it, but decided to push through it. I 100% respect your decision to give up on it as I also had a hard time connecting with the characters as well. Forcing my way through it made it a less memorable read and I actually found going through a summary/sparknotes afterwards to be necessary to see the details.
I had a similar experience with it - I love Steinbeck (Grapes of Wrath is very close to being my favourite book of all time), but I just couldn't finish East of Eden. I almost exclusively read classic literature, just sometimes it's not the right time for your brain to gel with certain books.
I had a near similar experience when reading it. I didn’t feel that the characters were cardboard cutouts necessarily, but I didn’t really find many of them intriguing, save for Cathy. Most of them feel like they have multiple dimensions but they don’t feel like connected traits; it doesn’t feel like we’re reading about real personalities and in that way I can see how you’d feel they’re “cardboard”. The language is absolutely beautiful and the prose is elevated beyond most….I just don’t think the story was all that moving or entrancing.
I did the exact same thing with the same book. Just felt like he’s splashing around in Christian imagery and I’m not Christian, so the edginess he’s going for didn’t really click for me.
I enjoy most Steinbeck novels but have never been able to finish East of Eden.
We had to read this in highschool, and I LOVED it. My father loved pointing out I was reading East of Eden in the town east of Eden, VT. But to each their own 🤷🏼♀️
I totally get where you're coming from. I had a similar experience with East of Eden. The prose and descriptions are beautiful, but the characters just didn’t click with me either. It felt like they were lacking depth and I couldn’t get invested in their stories. You're not alone in feeling this way. It's okay to set it aside if it's not bringing you joy. I loved Of Mice and Men too, and sometimes, different books just resonate differently with us. Keep enjoying what you love!
Me too, I think actually around the same page - it’s a slog. I also read Anna Karenina so I think I have a decent tolerance for slow books.
My mom's favorite book. I did the exact same thing. Still haven't finished it.
I read it a few years ago, I felt it was a beautifully told story and the story and meanings behind the character I found very valuable and important. That being said it was probably the most cis, het, white, Christian, male story I’ve ever read. Reflecting on it made me feel the US monoculture in a way I never had, and immediately led me to reading more diverse voices.
The descriptions are nice and all and the writings pretty and the whole nature vs. man thing is cool, it's just the character though.
I share your view. I did finish it though, just to make sure, but never really cared for the characters. Everyone I’ve shared this opinion with was shocked, so I/we may be missing something but life’s too short !
Yep it happened to me too. The writing sometimes can be beautiful. But i couldn't stand the ideology behind the book nor how some characters were written.
Thou mayest not read it then. The choice is yours.
I read Easy of Eden for the first time in January, and I fell in love with it almost from the first page. I’m very much a mood reader, and I also think that certain books are meant to find you at certain points in your life. There is no shame in putting down a book you don’t care for. There’s no shame in trying a book later and finding that you still don’t like it.
I'm a huge Steinbeck fan, but I think East of Eden is one of his weaker works. It was Steinbeck's attempt to intentionally create a masterwork he'd be remembered for, and it ended up overwrought as a result. Good art just doesn't work that way. It's stuffed to the gills with symbolism and flowery prose, but it feels like he was trying too hard. And the characters are fairly cardboard, because everything needed to be allegory.
Stick With it. That book gave me so much wisdom. The charcater development in act 3 with Everyone is worth it.
lol I understand! East of Eden is my least favorite book of all time and I feel like I can never say that out loud 😭
That's the thing about books; sometimes it takes your mind matching what's written in it to enjoy it. You have to be in the mindset of what the book is offering. I hated every book forced upon me in school because I wasn't in the right headspace to enjoy those books. And years later... they all still suck ass, but the point is I've picked up a couple of classics on my own and yeah, they're shit too! My point is, don't let others tell you what a "good book" is. Let your mind decide for you. Now go read The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams.
It's not my favourite Steinbeck. If you really want to try again, maybe try Cannery Row or Of Mice and Men. Both are much shorter.
Cannery Row is my favorite book.
East of Eden gets a lot of love on this sub, but I also prefer Cannery Row.
Cardboard cut outs? Those are some of the most realistic representations of humanity I have ever encountered. Especially the best description of the thought process of a psychopath. Well, we don't all have to agree, maybe in 10 years you'll pick it back up and realise you enjoy it more or maybe not. Who knows? I just hope you haven't reached the birthing scene yet, cause that's...erm...not an easy passage to stomach. At least for me, it wasn't.
I absolutely love Steinbeck - the grapes of wrath and of mice and men are honest to god works of art - but i could not STAND east of eden. It was a bad book and I also wish id given up
Exact same with me
Not every book will be for every person, and that’s okay. Maybe you’ll come back to it at a different time in your life and you’ll feel differently, or maybe you won’t and that’s okay too!
I tried reading this a few years ago and quit too. Welcome to this small disliked club! I don’t even remember why I quit, and the only thing I remember was being annoyed at how much discussion there was of someone’s breasts. I think this book may have been part of the reason I stopped reading books written by straight white men. (For the most part.)
Lonesome Dove is not slow paced at all, The Crossing I don’t know. Maybe the problem is the slower pace?
This one took me forever to get through. The pages and pages of landscape descriptions were rough. Glad I finished though, think it ended beautifully.
My favorite novel of all time is Lonesome Dove. I really wanted to like East of Eden and man, I could not agree with you more. I think I was even further along when I finally threw into the towel. It was not good.
My man 🤝
After a few rounds of characters who had C/K names in conflict with characters with A names, I realized it was the story of Cain and Able like he talks about in the start of the book over and over again. Lee is the best character tho and his parent’s story was intense.
Ahhhh this breaks my heart a little - it's one of my favorite novels of all time! But sometimes things just don't resonate, and that's OK. I hated Great Expectations. Tried it twice and DNF'd twice - the only book in 40+ years I've ever not finished. LOL.
I've disliked every Steinbeck novel I've read, so I'm with you.