The Grapes of Wrath (1940)

Directed by: John Ford

Written by: Nunnally Johnson

Starring: Henry Fonda, Jane Darwell, John Carradine, John Qualen 

Rated: PG

Of the great American films "The Grapes of Wrath" is possibly the most quintessential. Based on the landmark novel penned by John Steinbeck, starring the gifted Nebraskan, Henry Fonda, and directed by the most American of American directors, John Ford, this film not only presents what it means to be from and of the United States, but in the film's very being it encompasses those qualities. 

In the world of history, of which I reside in only slightly, the Dust Bowl is often taught in a clumsy and dismissive way. Normally it is presented as nothing more than sideshow act, an amusing note to give when discussing the causes and results of the great, big Depression. There is a wonderful book called The Worst Hard Time, by Timothy Egan, who explains with vivacity the deep causes of the Dust Bowl. It went back very far--much farther than most people know--and its repercussions were devastating. But of course, nature can't outdraw economics and so the tale is rarely told. 

We know now in greater detail the roots of the Great Depression (though we have learned very little from it), but Steinbeck's story is so moving because it was written just years after the events, the film made not long after, and the characters are as ignorant as contemporary politicians. It tells the harrowing tale of Tom Joad, a paroled killer who returns to his family's farm only to learn that it is being repossessed by the bank. The sharecropping families of generations passed have ended and people are being forced out. By whom? They don't know. It's all one ugly web of "Who's to Blame?" The twelve Joad's pile into the family jalopy and head west toward California and the American Dream, only to learn that that dream is as tangible as the economy.    

Probably better than any other movie, this speaks to the transformative power of the road. Old folks die, babies are born, a family threatens to split at the seam, and the only two people holding it together are Tom (Fonda) and Ma (Jane Darwell). But that adhesive is weak, especially when the food pot is low and funds are running dry. Finally completing the journey from Oklahoma to California, the family is met with nothing more than hateful stares, unfriendly cops and no jobs to be found. One problem leads to another and it seems as though the Joad's might be done for. 

They are, really. After all, though the takeaway message may be that home is where the heart is, in the end that little family on their truck is as about as useless as the land they ruined. Given the overt Socialist messages of the script I would have to say that that was never Steinbeck's intention, and perhaps that's my own lack of heart not allowing me to see the forest for the trees, but in the end there were just too many mouths to feed, and too many greedy spiders in that web to make them of any great consequence. Tom is the everyman and we only remember his name because Steinbeck decided to write it. 

Told with soul and the right balance of humor and pathos, Ford has made a film that will last and be studied. It is the perfect example of a movie that can be read as historical text, for it shows how a public artist interpreted the events surrounding him. Ma and Tom are the hearts of the American public, the downtrodden that is spoken of on the Statue of Liberty, and they go unheeded. They are left in the dust. 

It makes me wonder about the final scene, though. I read the novel maybe eight or ten years ago--I was far too young--and of all the scenes that I recall, the final one remains freshest. Ahead lies a spoiler for the book, though not necessarily for the film: This very controversial scene involves Tom's sister, the pregnant Rose of Sharon, who breastfeeds a starving man with a mysterious smile on her face. Throughout the book and the film an argument is made that this untouchable government has transformed good, honest men into animals, and this scene completes that picture. Rose must then represent the triumph of a common person who with grace and dignity helps those who need her most. 

Ford omits this scene, instead ending the film with Tom leaving the family and Ma delivering a stirring monologue about the enduring American spirit. The image may have been too startling for Ford's audience and that is perfectly reasonable, but then where is the heart? One of the cornerstones of the family abandons them and the family is still left without work, and now with one less pair of working hands. They have sacrificed all and gained nothing, and Tom decides to spare them his presence. That doesn't make much sense to me. 

I could go on, but what's the point? This is a blog intended to critique, not to analyze. The film is undoubtedly great, and all the more important because it is worth being analyzed. I suppose much of the credit is owed to Steinbeck, but Ford deserves no small amount of praise by offering a tough book with strong political messages to a wider audience, and doing so with that special talent that he possessed.

4/4