Third Eye Film Society ~ View topic

Author

Message

< The Third Eye Reading Room ~ East of Eden

yambu

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:09 pm

Joined: 23 May 2004 Posts: 6441 Location: SF Bay Area

So can we talk about Ms.Cathy? A gripping character throughout, yet I don't know what to say about her as a person since she's so deficient in that respect. It's like asking what motivates Hannibal Lecter. What you see is what you get.

_________________
That was great for you. How was it for me?

Marj

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:40 pm

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 10497 Location: Manhattan

Ohhhh! Ms.Cathy. Love her. Sadly, I gotta run and won't be back until later tonight. And do I have a lot to say about Cathy.

Born a monster? I think not! Is this a failing of Steinbeck?

Can't wait to see what all of you think.

Mel,

I'll get back to you as soon as I can. But for now ... Very Happy

Melody

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:13 pm

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 2242 Location: TX

Ms. Cathy. The only fully fleshed-out female character we get in this novel, Steinbeck's embodiment of unadulterated badness, the Eve-il in his Eden. This is how she's introduced in Chapter 8, pp. 71-72:

Quote:

I believe there are monsters born in the world to human parents ... Some balance wheel was misweighted, some gear out of ratio ... There was a time when a girl like Cathy would have been called possessed by the devil ... The one thing that may not be forgiven a witch is her ability to distress people, to make them restless and uneasy and even envious.

Steinbeck -- and most psych ward nurses -- will tell you a person can be inherently evil and never change, no matter the circumstances. But if you've never seen evil up close yourself, you have a hard time believing such a theory.

After writing and erasing many paragraphs on the concepts of good vs. evil, nature vs. nurture, I realize my baseline has shifted just a bit in trying to analyze Cathy. I've always tried to believe in the inherent goodness of people, that people make mistakes, that rehabilitation can really work if you just give 'em one more chance! With Cathy, I'm not so sure anymore.

I think I can make a case later on for a redeeming quality or two in Cathy, but does that negate all the things she's done just in Part One alone??

_________________
My heart told my head: This time, no.

mitty

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:17 pm

Joined: 02 Aug 2004 Posts: 1359 Location: Way Down Yonder.......

yambu wrote:

Ha! I think you have the best take on this lil gal.

I think some people are born without any conscience, its like a birth defect. Some are born without the ability to process emotion. Maybe I am simplifing it too much, but after all if one is not born with the basics, it will spill over into every aspect of life. Birth "defects" after all do not have to be physical, they can be emotional, or mental.
She not only has a deficit in the conscience, she does not comprehend what people "feel". Or why they would bother. Emotional cripple.

Marj

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:19 pm

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 10497 Location: Manhattan

While I agree that there are those who might be considered emotional cripples, I have trouble believing people are born that way.

Funny thing is when I first read EoE years ago, the idea of Cathy being born a monster never hit me as odd. But this time around, I find it troubling. Of course the book was written at a time when plays like "The Bad Seed" were popular.

But this makes me wonder just why, Steinbeck chose to create the monster that is Cathy? Did he do so because he wanted to stick with the evil vs. good theme? IMO, he could have accomplished the same, by having Cathy emotionally scarred by something as a young child. Is this a sign of the times he was writing about, or something about Steinbeck's beliefs? Or is it simply lazy writing?

The fact that this question has troubled more than just a few readers and critics, certainly deserves our consideration. Curious minds and all that!

mitty

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:42 pm

Joined: 02 Aug 2004 Posts: 1359 Location: Way Down Yonder.......

I did not mean that all people that are emotional cripples were born that way. I suspect that most are tortured into it whilst children in some way. But I do believe that there are some/a few that are born that way. From the story, I have to believe that Cathy is one of those few.
Steinbeck uses the term "monster". It may not be too strong a term.

mitty

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:50 pm

Joined: 02 Aug 2004 Posts: 1359 Location: Way Down Yonder.......

Marj

I think that Steinbeck did not want to attach any blame to Cathy's parents for her shortcomings. For her to murder them in such a cold blooded manner had a much stronger impact than if, for example, she had been mistreated in any way. No, Steinbeck wants her character to be an island in itself. No ones fault. Not even her own. After all she cannot be blamed for the way she was born. Totally amoral. No degrees involved. Totally. Ugh. Twisted Evil

Marj

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:02 pm

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 10497 Location: Manhattan

Quote:

But I do believe that there are some/a few that are born that way.

Mitty, I suppose this is something we'll just have to agree to disagree on.

But let's go back to my original question. Do we think that Steinbeck believes this? Or was this a kind of conceit, he was using to further his argument re: good vs. evil. Too many people have had problems with this aspect of the book to sluff off this question. I think if we are sophisticated readers, we need to examine Steinbeck's reasoning. And if it holds up!

Classics are called that because they can be read at any period in time without appearing dated. Considering this aspect of the book, can East of Eden still be called a classic?

yambu

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:12 pm

Joined: 23 May 2004 Posts: 6441 Location: SF Bay Area

I don't really care what the theories re sociopathic behavior were then or are now. Dramatically, I accept that she was born a monster, especially now that Mitty has given me convincing reasons for doing so.

_________________
That was great for you. How was it for me?

mitty

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:29 pm

Joined: 02 Aug 2004 Posts: 1359 Location: Way Down Yonder.......

"EAST OF EDEN (1952), Steinbeck's long family novel, is set in rural California in the years around the turn of the century. In the center of the saga, based partly on the story of Cain and Abel, is two families of settlers, the Trasks and the Hamiltons, whose history reflect the formation of the United States when "the Church and the whorehouse arrived in the Far West simultaneously..." The second half of the book focus on the lives of the twins, Aron and Caleb, and their conflict. Between them is Cathy, tiny, pretty, but an adulteress and murderess. "It doesn't matter that Cathy was what I have called a monster. Perhaps we can't understand Cathy, but on the other hand we are capable of many things in all directions, of great virtues and great sins. And who in his mind has not probed the black water?" His writing process Steinbeck recorded minutely in JOURNAL OF A NOVEL (1969). "But tell me," he wrote to Pascal Covici, his friend, "have you ever been this closely associated with a book before? While it was being written." In his lifetime, Steinbeck wrote thousands of letters, sometimes several a day. To Covici he confessed that he wanted to write the book to his sons, the story of good and evil, love and hate, to demonstrate to them how they are inseparable."

http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/johnstei.htm

I ran across the above, and thought it was neat. I was trying to find Steinbeck's thinking on the subject of Cathy. This is all so far.

mitty

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:31 pm

Joined: 02 Aug 2004 Posts: 1359 Location: Way Down Yonder.......

So, yes, I believe this was Steinbeck's reasoning.

Marj

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:35 pm

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 10497 Location: Manhattan

Quote:

I think that Steinbeck did not want to attach any blame to Cathy's parents for her shortcomings. For her to murder them in such a cold blooded manner had a much stronger impact than if, for example, she had been mistreated in any way. No, Steinbeck wants her character to be an island in itself. No ones fault. Not even her own.

Mitty,

Great point! And I agree that her parent's cold blooded murder would not have been nearly as shocking had they been in any way responsible for her character.

So just for argument's sake, would Cathy have been as strong a character had she been hurt, say by someone else? It has been known to happen, after all.

But you make another good point by saying Steinbeck wanted her to an island unto herself. But ... Why?

mitty

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:44 pm

Joined: 02 Aug 2004 Posts: 1359 Location: Way Down Yonder.......

I am way flying by the seat of my pants, but it seems to me that Steinbeck did not want the reader to be able to attach any blame to her character. Because sometimes terrible things happen and there is not any real reason behind it. He wanted a completely unsympathetic character.

Now Adam seemed to me to be almost a cardboard character. I have to go back and re-read some, but he irritated me. Not only his stupidity regarding Cathy, but more. I have to look again. Just a feeling.

Marj

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:47 pm

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 10497 Location: Manhattan

Thanks Mitty, for that post. I was curious about the journal Steinbeck kept while writing EoE. And unless I am reading him wrong, it appears he is saying it doesn't really matter if Cathy was born a monster or not!? That she is evil is all we need to know.

PS. I'm a slow typist so I posted before seeing your post. Sorry.

I also found a review which felt the book was not as deserving of praise as we tend to give it. I will try to find it and post it later.

mitty

Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:50 pm

Joined: 02 Aug 2004 Posts: 1359 Location: Way Down Yonder.......

I like the way he brings out that maybe we can't understand Cathy.

Ya know, its like my aunt always says, you can never tell what a crazy person will do. In other words, unpredictable. At least by a "sane" person. Yeah, I know, define sane. Laughing

All times are GMT - 5 Hours

View next topic View previous topic Page 4 of 34 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 32, 33, 34 Next Third Eye Film Society Forum Index ~ The Third Eye Reading Room

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum