There are different ways to communicate messages to an audience, including poems, written stories, and movies. Although these methods can convey similar messages, one method is considered more effective. This can be seen in the ongoing debate about whether books or movies are superior. Popular novels like Harry Potter, Twilight, and The Hunger Games have been made into films, with fans usually favoring one form over the other.
Although people may have their own preferences, there is a general agreement that books are preferred over movies. This is primarily because books can include more detailed and complex storytelling elements that cannot be effectively conveyed through dialogue in films. John Ford’s film adaptation of John Steinbeck’s famous novel, The Grapes of Wrath, demonstrates this difference. While both mediums share a similar plot, the book successfully delivers a more impactful rhetorical message to its readers when compared to the movie.
Both the book and the movie share similar themes, but the book enhances and magnifies the meaning in the text through specific illustrations. These illustrations encompass carefully selected dialogue, visible disparities among various social classes, the significance of familial cohesion, and the advantages of resilience.
While the movie briefly addresses these concepts, it does so passively, which weakens the impact of its message. In Steinbeck’s adaptation of The Grapes of Wrath, the audience is fully immersed in the brutal reality of the Great Depression, creating a comprehensive experience. Within this narrative, four persuasive ideas are effectively communicated to readers. The first idea is conveyed through the characters’ dialogue and their use of language.
The use of dialect in the text provided readers with an authentic portrayal of the time period. The broken English used indicated a low level of education, highlighting that those migrating to the West belonged to the lower class. For instance, in Chapter 20, the excerpt “No. Go on. Ain’t goin’. Gonna res’ here. No good goin’ back. No good to nobody—jus’ a-draggin’ my sins like dirty drawers ‘mongst nice folks. No. Ain’t goin’” serves as a prime example of the language used throughout the book. This use of language clearly demonstrated that these people did not prioritize speaking proper English.
Instead of focusing on being grammatically correct, the people in the book used their energy and intellect to find food for the day. This aspect of the story portrays a different time period when survival was the main concern. Additionally, the book presents a battle that is not against weather or illness but against other humans, emphasizing the concept of survival of the fittest.
After being forcibly displaced from their land by employees of powerful corporations, low-class farm workers were compelled to embark on a journey across the country to California in search of employment opportunities. Exploiting the surge in demand, car salesmen raised prices substantially and deliberately installed faulty components to dissuade these families in the future, as depicted in the quote: “If we sold that bargain at that price we’d hardly make a dime. Tell ’em it’s jus’ sold. Take out that yard battery before you make delivery. Put in that dumb cell” (Chapter 7).
This passage demonstrates the exploitation of one group by another for their own survival and financial gain. The migrant families were compelled to pay excessive prices for low-quality cars in order to commute to work and support their families, resulting in an ongoing cycle of difficulty. Another evident example of this conflict between two groups can be seen in Chapter 24, where men were bribed by the police to provoke a riot at a government-funded camp (a location inaccessible to police without a warrant) during a Saturday dance, enabling the arrest of the Okies, a term used for the migrants.
Despite being unsuccessful, this forced riot serves as an example of Westerners holding a grudge against migrants and attempting to disrupt their lives in order to drive them out of their homeland. Another instance of this is the manipulation of cotton weighing scales by owners to underpay workers. Ultimately, people need money to survive and support their families, and those with more wealth have an advantage. Consequently, these people had to engage in competitive and cunning interactions with each other to ensure their survival. The underlying message is that in order to thrive, individuals had to outwit and outperform one another in a battle of wits. A third idea that aimed to convince readers was the importance of unity. It was most advantageous for the Joad family and all migrating families to remain together and function as a team. Ma Joad consistently emphasized the importance of family cohesion. When the family was leaving in Chapter 10, she insisted that Grandpa accompany them, and she displayed the same sentiment when Tom wanted to leave in Chapter 26, despite it being safer for the family.
Not only was it important for the Joads and everyone else traveling to remain close-knit, but it was also crucial for all to support one another and overcome challenges together. As Steinbeck describes, “In the evening a strange thing happened: the twenty families became one family, the children were the children of all. The loss of home became one loss, and the golden time in the West was one dream” (Chapter 17). This passage highlights the unity and shared resilience that emerged among the migrants. Alongside the concept of survival of the fittest, this unity became their greatest advantage. Moreover, as the book concludes, it becomes clear that being resilient is of utmost importance.
Despite the Joads’ numerous mishaps, deaths, and challenges, they never ceased to assist others. In the face of their ongoing struggles, they consistently displayed resilience and discovered ways to lend support. Upon Ma Joad preparing stew for her family at a new camp, undernourished children watched her attentively. Instead of reserving leftovers for her own family, she selflessly fed the children, instructing them to each take a flat stick and stating, “I will give you what remains. However, there shall be no fighting.” The group dispersed swiftly and silently, suggesting a grave atmosphere.
Children hurriedly searched for sticks” (Chapter 20). A particularly admirable act was performed by Rose of Sharon towards the end of the book, where she nourished a dying, underfed man with her own breast milk, despite her own grief over delivering a stillborn child. Undoubtedly, this final scene serves as an inspiration for readers to seek out the goodness in individuals, particularly those who exhibit the resilience demonstrated by the Joads, who continued to assist others even in the midst of their dire circumstances. Ford’s adaptation of The Grapes of Wrath bore some similarities to Steinbeck’s original novel.
The authentic dialect transported the audience to a time when the lower class had extremely low intelligence. The disconnect between the upper and lower class created a survival of the fittest atmosphere. This was evident throughout, beginning with the arrival of two men in a luxurious black car at Uncle John’s house, informing the family that they must evacuate by seven the next morning. It continued with the police staging a riot in order to arrest innocent individuals.
The movie emphasized the significance of unity, as demonstrated by the Joads who worked together as a family, stayed together, and extended their assistance to others in need. Despite some similarities, the novel and the movie diverged significantly, with several scenes omitted from the film, thus altering the overall narrative.
The text states that certain scenes in the movie were significant in foreshadowing future hardships and highlighting the themes of money and danger. However, the ending differed from the original book, as it portrayed the Joads finding a safe camp instead of showing Rose of Sharon breastfeeding a starving man. Furthermore, the movie failed to convey the chaotic atmosphere of the large number of migrants on Route 66 or depict any farm work being done.
The movie primarily focuses on the Joads rather than the high demand for work among these families. Although there are instances of class division, teamwork, and resilience in the movie, they lack the same impact as in the book. A comprehensive analysis of both texts confirms that the book is superior to the movie. Despite closely following the plot, the movie does so casually.
There were some missing details in the novel: the location of the Wilson family and Rose of Sharon’s pregnancy. However, the movie scenes left the audience satisfied and hopeful, while the book made readers uneasy and concerned about the future. Even though the book provided extensive descriptions, it added realism and made the message more understandable. The movie included the four points discussed earlier, but with less detail and passion, resulting in a lackluster delivery of rhetorical messages.
Steinbeck’s novel provided a more comprehensive depiction of the Great Depression and the challenges faced by families in order to survive. His attention to detail and skill in articulation surpassed Ford’s film adaptation. While it is subjective to determine which text was superior, it is worth noting that Steinbeck’s novel received the prestigious Pulitzer Prize, while Ford’s movie received an Oscar nomination. These differing methods of storytelling in The Grapes of Wrath conveyed separate messages for the audience to interpret.
In comparing the success of conveying messages to the audience, it is important to consider which text was more effective. The novel had a greater impact with its detailed and realistic portrayal, making the messages more profound compared to the movie’s more optimistic tone. Both Steinbeck and Ford had the same storyline and goal in mind, yet Steinbeck engaged readers to a greater extent by incorporating authentic dialogue, background information from a narrator, and a raw conclusion in the novel.
The combination of themes involving the wealth gap, family unity, and resilience in Steinbeck’s work was more successful than in Ford’s. Despite both pieces being widely recognized and respected, the movie provided a pleasant but somewhat inaccurate portrayal of the Great Depression. John Steinbeck’s novel, The Grapes of Wrath, effectively allows readers to comprehend and experience the emotions conveyed in the story.
Work Cited: Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Viking, 1939. Print.
