Cash Cow

In the most recent edition of his occasional column in which he "reconsiders notable and/or neglected books," Jonathan Yardley finds himself not only somewhat disappointed by Steinbeck's Cannery Row but he also questions why Steinbeck continues to be popular today:

But why do adults continue to read Steinbeck in such numbers? Four decades after his death, his books are cash cows for his publisher; he is to Viking Penguin what Khalil Gibran is to Knopf, an endless source of revenue, some of which presumably underwrites riskier books of a more literary nature. From "Cup of Gold" (1929) to "America and Americans" (1967), Steinbeck's books remain in print, along with various posthumous volumes of letters, collected miscellany and so forth. My copy of "Cannery Row" is part of a "Steinbeck Centennial Edition" issued by Penguin in 2002, a handsome paperback complete with jacket flaps, looking for all the world like a European publication. This centennial edition clearly is aimed at adult readers, and clearly it is reaching them; at this writing, its Amazon.com sales rating is far higher than that enjoyed by most recent, well-received books.

Probably the explanation for this will forever be a mystery. It cannot have much to do with the Nobel Prize in Literature that Steinbeck won in 1962; if Nobel Prizes sent American readers into bookstores, they'd still be reading Pearl Buck and Sinclair Lewis. Nor can it have much to do with relevance to the country today, since his books mostly are period pieces. Grace of literary style would send no one to his books, as they have precious little of it.

Why do people still read Steinbeck today while his contemporary William Saroyan ("The Human Comedy," "My Name Is Aram," Pulitzer Prize-winning play "The Time of Your Life") is almost completely forgotten? The two writers were remarkably similar in their affection for ordinary people, their belief in the United States and their persistent sentimentality, and in their day both were hugely popular, yet now probably no more than one reader in 25 would be likely to recognize Saroyan's name. The only reason I can come up with for the high esteem in which Steinbeck is still held is his transparent sincerity. It has long been my pet theory that in the popular marketplace, readers instinctively distinguish between writers whose work draws on genuine feeling and those who rely on art or artifice, and that they reward the former while repudiating the latter. From Jacqueline Susann to Danielle Steel, from James Michener to James Patterson, readers have recognized the sincerity of feeling beneath the utter lack of literary merit, and have rewarded it accordingly.

Comments

[Bill Ectric]

I think it has something to do with high schools, colleges, public libraries, book stores, varoius book organizations, and publishers, collaborating to orchestrate big Steinbeck events.

I'm not being sarcastic. I thinks it's great!

It helps to have a lot of books made into movies. A Steinbeck film festival can include the classic John Ford movie, The Grapes of Wrath (1940); East of Eden (1955) with James Dean, and Of Mice and Men (1939 and/or 1992). Then an interesting speaker tells how Bruce Springsteen and Rage Against the Machine both reference Tom Joad, from Grapes of Wrath. High School teachers like The Pearl because it teaches a moral lesson.

[Corey V.]

Or maybe it's because, regardless of what an individual reviewer may think, his books are pretty wonderful.

[Dan Wickett]

I, too, think Yardley may be missing something in Steinbeck's writing. I read most of his work as an adult, albeit a younger adult, and enjoyed it quite a bit.