Nov 17, 2009
The American Dream in the Jungle
The portrayal of the American Dream in Sinclair’s The Jungle creates an ideological critique. The two parts of our definition of an ideology were the beliefs and the customs and traditions that went along with the beliefs. In The Jungle, the primary motivation of the immigrant characters was “The American Dream,” “the wonderful dreams of wealth that had been haunting Jurgis” (Sinclair 22). This is the belief portrayed in The Jungle, that capitalism would bring happiness and economic prosperity. The traditions and customs of the ideology though are less admirable. To gain the wealth that they desired, men become greedy, such as the captains of industry that ran the inhumane stockyards. Poor men also were victim, such as Jurgis in his endeavor to quickly purchase a house. This system of greed is the underlying idea of capitalism that is supposed to end up providing the most efficient and substantial wealth for the most people. But, the ideology breaks down when the greed begins to hurt everybody, not only with the horrible working conditions, but the horrible products. For example Kristoforas died supposedly of “tuberculosis pork” in his “smoked sausage he had eaten that morning” (Sinclair 117). No one, not even the very rich, were able to obtain safe meat. So, the greed’s taking over everything had very negative consequences. This lack of providing for the well being of most people is contradictory to the basic tenets of capitalism, and therefore is used as a critique of the ideology of capitalism.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Adrienne, I think you have brought up a very interesting and accurate point. Especially when you mention the critique regarding capitalism. It is true that the characters thought "capitalism would bring happiness and economic prosperity," but they were not prepared to be part of the grand scheme or bigger picture.
ReplyDeleteThe characters started their lives in America naive, and without a plan. They trusted that capitalism would grant them a prosperous life of which they always dreamed. However, after they suffered uncountable hardships and were exposed to the extremely corrupt side of politics, Jurgis began to see the lights of socialism.
Therefore, by portraying socialism in such a positive manner, there is a clear critique of the capitalistic government in America. It explains how socialism would take into account all people and not just the wealthy. In addition, it discusses how equality would prevail. This is incredibly appealing to those in the working class, such as Jurgis and his family.
Melissa, I hadn’t thought about how the portrayal of socialism aided the critique of capitalism, and I think that this is true in the second set of chapters that we read. But, as the novel progresses, the similarities between capitalism and socialism become apparent because they are both corrupted systems.
ReplyDeleteFor example, Jurgis’ aquaintance, Harper, “was in in reality drawing a salary of twenty dollars a week from the packers for an inside report of his union’s secret proceedings” (Sinclair 237) This shows how even the unions, the organization for the purpose of furthering the well being of the workers, were overwhelmingly corrupted.
The other main point that I think that we can draw from Sinclair’s writing is that being corrupt is the only way to survive in the world. For example, Jurgis only really begins to be able to survive when he joins the league of Duane. Before reconnecting with Duane, Jurgis describes himself as “a beggar and a tramp” (Sinclair 226). But, he begins to draw a large, regular salary through is criminal escapades, largely with Tom Cassidy. “It was Cassidy who was to blame for the unpaved street in which Jurgis’s child had been drowned; it was Cassidy who had put in office the magistrate who had first sent Jurgis to jail; it was Cassidy who was principal stockholder in the company which had sold him the ramshackle tenement, and then robbed him of it” (Sinclair 238). The irony of Jurgis’ alliance with Cassidy shows that Sinclair isn’t making a critique of Jurgis’s actions so much as he is critiquing the corruption that exists.
Based on the last set of chapters that we have read, I’ve concluded that not only is Sinclair critiquing capitalism, but he is critiquing what he sees as inevitable corruption in government and business.