Friday, November 6, 2009

The Octopus by Frank Norris

For today’s reader, this novel might best be summed up as “the more things change, the more they stay the same”. Set in the final years of the 19th century in the San Joaquin Valley of California, farmers, with thousands of acres of wheat under cultivation, are totally dependent on the railroad for transporting their crops to market. The railroad’s corporate greed and corruption, whose long arms extend to law enforcement, the courts, and government, are pitted against the farmers, who represent the American sense of independence, entrepreneurs who are working hard and think they are in charge of their own destiny. The result is inevitable disaster. By today’s standards, Norris’s writing seems very idealized. The character of Vanamee is more a symbol than a real character. After his young love is raped and killed, he spends his life wandering, yearning for his lost love, and has endless conversations attempting to describe the ineffable, until his final scene in a cemetery calling up her spirit. I found this very hard to get through. The farmers were a more interesting lot, from “The Governor” Magnus Derrick, a highly principled man who thinks honorable men always win, to Annixter, a wealthy farmer who spends his time reading Charles Dickens. It is interesting that Norris represents the railroad as almost a force of nature, a movement that cannot be stopped. He doesn’t really hold the officials to any moral standard. I suspect that this novel is primarily read today for historical interest.

2 comments:

  1. What made you chose this book to read? It would be helpful if you would tell when it was originally published. One bio of him said "... A man of contrasts, born in the East, Norris would soon adopt the West as his spiritual home, a member of the Bohemian Club of San Francisco during the days of the Gold Rush..." This is funny because he was born in CHICAGO in 1870, and I guess you in OR would call that east, but I'm from New England :) As far as I can tell the book is from 1901, a time period I'm very interested in. I just HATE it when things like amazon never indicate a book is old, only give the date of that particular edition. I have always wondered how that is permitted anyway - isn't a book copyrighted when first published?? I've had kids astonished when I tell them something like "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn" is from the 1940s because their copy from school says published last year, no other date - makes me mad! Um, sorry to get off track - I'll be looking for this book to read myself.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I actually read this book because it was the selection of a book group I belong to on Librarything. You make a good point about mentioning the original publishing date. I have had a problem with finding the date as well. It seems like publishers used to always list the original date but I see that less and less. Thanks for the comments!

    ReplyDelete