Travels with Steinbeck

An American classic offers a subtle and prescient account of the dangers of expanding corporate power.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


While protesters and police clashed in Canada over the weekend of April 20, I was comfortably ensconced on a sunny urban rooftop reading “Travels With Charley: In Search of America,” Nobel Prize-winner John Steinbeck’s 1962 memoir of his cross-country trip with his standard poodle. It was hardly the escapist read I had hoped might take my mind off the controversial Summit of the Americas.

Many of the protesters in Quebec City may hear the name John Steinbeck and think of high school term papers and Cliff’s Notes. But unlike many of the other authors of the dusty American-lit classics in Gen X and Y’s classrooms, Steinbeck was writing until just a decade or two before today’s youthful rabble-rousers were born. And he was one of the first prominent thinkers to openly question the effects of corporate power during the post-war boom. Much of Steinbeck’s fiction — “The Pearl” is perhaps the best example — focused on the corrosive influence of greed, and Steinbeck himself was a good friend and frequent correspondent of left-wing icon Adlai Stevenson.

In “Travels With Charley,” Steinbeck outlines the dangers of corporatization — from the tyranny of megaretailers to the subjugation of the environment and labor rights to the almighty dollar. In 1961, long before Barnes & Noble, WalMart, or Home Depot appeared, he saw the beginnings of the cultural erosion they would bring:

“The hamlet store, whether grocery, general, hardware, clothing, cannot compete with the supermarket and the chain organization. Our treasured and nostalgic picture of the village general store, the cracker-barrel store where an informed yeomanry gather to express opinions and formulate the national character, is rapidly disappearing.”

Of Seattle, circa 1961, he wrote:

“Everywhere frantic growth, a carcinomatous growth. Bulldozers rolled up green forests and heaped the resulting trash for burning. The torn white lumber from concrete forms was piled beside gray walls. I wonder why progress looks so much like destruction.”

Steinbeck sensed that in the new culture he saw taking shape, the fundamentals of work — who did it, and for whom — would change. He took note of the influx of immigrants from Mexico to work the fields for independent farmers and eventually major corporate agribusiness companies, a trend that didn’t catch the attention of most Americans until Cesar Chavez founded the United Farm Workers, just a year after “Travels With Charley” was written. “It occurs to me,” he wrote, “that just as the Carthaginians hired mercenaries to do their fighting for them, Americans bring in mercenaries to do our hard and humble work.”

What he could not have foreseen was that eventually — under the guise of free and unfettered trade, á la NAFTA, GATT and other treaties — America would begin to export the “hard and humble work”, and the jobs associated with it, to places only beginning to taste the kind of progress that “looks so much like destruction.”

Bits and Pieces

FOLLOW THAT STORY

The superintendent of schools in Hamilton County, Indiana, was surprised when he was suddenly flooded with emails from outside the district, demanding that a new high school be named Ronald Wilson Reagan High School. The emails appear to have come from supporters of the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project, which we profiled back in March.

FOR WHOM THE CELL PHONE RINGS

So you think you’ll have to throttle someone if you hear one more electronic gizmo play “Fur Elise.” But before you program your own cell phone to alert you with “The Thong Song,” you might be wise to think of what happened with Napster. Yes, copyright cops are on the prowl for tune thieves among the wired set.

BEWARE OF ROBO-DOG
Police dogs in some municipalities are being fitted with fancy new titanium teeth to “improve their bite — and their grip — on anyone trying to escape the law.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate