Jim's Reviews > The Jungle

The Jungle by Upton Sinclair
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
695116
's review

really liked it
bookshelves: 1audio, 3classics, historical, 2sortof_nonfiction

Somehow I never read this before, but I've heard it was a classic - not just a classic, but one that drove Theodore Roosevelt into attempting to clean up the mess of the Chicago stock yards & eventually led to public exposure & the FDA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jung...

Sinclair wasn't happy with the response & I can see why. About halfway through, I've found the ills of the meat packing industry to be very much a secondary issue for Sinclair. They're awful, but it's obvious that his first & foremost thought is the plight of honest, hard working immigrants. They arrive with stars in their eyes & are soon living in hell. He certainly created (found) a proper setting.

I've always had a soft spot for immigrants. All of my ancestors, a grandfather & the rest of my great grandparents, immigrated to the US in the late 1800's & early 1900's, within decades of this novel's setting 1906. They all landed in NYC & eventually made their fortunes. Some managed to own their own homes out on Long Island, nothing grand, but solidly middle class. They had hard times in Brooklyn, but nothing like what Sinclair describes. The morass that his characters landed in is enough to make anyone with a heart weep.

The naivete & ignorance of the immigrants is compounded by the language barrier. Life was pretty brutal back then, but their lives were crushed by greed, a surplus of workers, lack of unions, decent medicine, & more. IOW, the sheer number of hardships that lines up against them is too long to list. The grinding weight of them is practically unbearable to read about.

This is something for us to remember today when we are facing similar immigration issues. Poor people who are scrounging to live will do just about anything, including turning to crime, & it's hard to blame them. They're desperate. Sinclair shows us that in this novel, although his point is weakened by taking things too far.

After the halfway point, Sinclair felt he had set the stage & started pointing out all the ills of the world. He dwells on corruption in every major industry & rants at how it is all a scheme to plunder the poor worker. His remedy is Socialism & he preaches it relentlessly until the last 1/4 of the book devolved into pure party politics.

His version of Socialism sounded very much like the Communism of Russia, although I'm no expert in or student of gov't types. (Make up your own mind on the label, I don't care.) The world into 2 classes; the workers & the greedy owners. Only one manufacturer of goods is needed, since it is more efficient & there is no need for frills or competition. Prices are set by the amount of work it takes to produce them & everyone is allotted the basics.

I was disappointed in the way the book ended in his political diatribe. The last half wasn't really worth plowing through, especially today, given the historical example of how the Russian's economy worked out under a similar system. Even without that, Sinclair's fanaticism shines through & doesn't make much sense since there is no allowance for any compromise. He sees unions as ineffectual, doomed to failure due to the corruption throughout the entire system.

Upton Sinclair's page in Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upton_Si...
says he believed sex should only be performed during marriage & then for procreation only. I'm glad I read this after the book. I don't much care for fanaticism.

This book has its own Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle

Overall, I was tempted to only give this book 3 stars due to the poor last half, but decided that I'd give it 4 stars & highly recommend the first half to all. Once you feel the book is descending into the depths, cut your losses. There's no real ending to look forward to, just increasing diatribe & idiocy.
29 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read The Jungle.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

October 5, 2014 – Started Reading
October 5, 2014 – Shelved
October 5, 2014 – Shelved as: 1audio
October 5, 2014 – Shelved as: 3classics
October 5, 2014 – Shelved as: historical
October 8, 2014 – Finished Reading
October 21, 2014 – Shelved as: 2sortof_nonfiction

Comments Showing 1-12 of 12 (12 new)

dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Werner (new)

Werner Jim, good review! I've never read The Jungle (or anything by Sinclair), and after reading your review, it's not likely to be on my to-read list, either. (Wallowing in misery isn't my cup of tea where reading is concerned.)

Sometimes the idea that sex is only to be tolerated for procreation is associated with a distorted version of Christianity; but given that Sinclair was against any form of Christianity, that's unlikely in his case. It's possible that his attitude toward sex was, like that of some other "progressive" thinkers in that era and earlier, motivated by concern over overpopulation; in a world with no reliable birth control, I could see why some would advocate that couples should only engage in sex when they wanted to conceive (though I wouldn't be one of those advocates myself!). But his statement that only the birth of a child gives a marriage "dignity and meaning" might suggest a view that's even more off-beam, and the Wikipedia article doesn't explain his thinking in depth. Interestingly, though, it does note that his thinking didn't stop him from cheating on his first wife. (Rolls eyes fervently!)


message 2: by Jim (new) - rated it 4 stars

Jim Understandable, Werner. It does point out some very real issues that are relevant today & historically, but certainly has issues. I generally consider the author separately from his works - the art is not the man, rather it is a distillation of his best. The book is a culmination of his intentions, not his real world actions. I find it rather difficult in this case, though. His attitudes against drinking & gambling were also pretty plain. Considering the language he used describing other races in this book, I don't like to think what their lot would have been under his new system, either.

I don't really want to read anything else by him, although The Brass Check: A Study of American Journalism sounded interesting at one time. I don't think his methods or findings can be trusted any more, though. I certainly don't want to read what his solution to the problem would be since I think the first amendment is one of the finest bits of law conceived to date. I imagine Sinclair's solution would b fairly awful; as naive, ignorant, & intolerant as his proposed political solution.


message 3: by Kelly (new)

Kelly Great review....and good advice. The first half sounds very interesting but sounds like I wouldn't like the "depths" either.


message 4: by Nina (new)

Nina I just finished reading, "Elizabeth Street," a novel but based on fact about the poor Italian immigrants coming into NJ. And the beginnings of the Mafia there. It is heartbreaking what they went through.


Matthew Reagan Here is my dilemna. The first time I read The Jungle was 30 years ago. In the book that I read long ago, Ona froze to death looking for firewood, their daughter died from a childhood disease, and his son left him to find a better life. In this book that I am reading now, none of those things happened. I certainly could not have been reading another book because the characters, the row house and the job are identical. I am aware that I am only halfway through this read, and that possibly what I read before is to come (which would mean that I read a book which started in the middle). But I don't think do. I just do not know how to figure this out. Any input may possibly sort this out for me.....


message 6: by Jim (new) - rated it 4 stars

Jim I don't think you're far enough along yet, Matthew.


message 7: by Nina (new)

Nina Ji, Hard to compare your immigrant ancestors as they were undoubtedly legal as compared with our multitude of illegals.


message 8: by Jim (new) - rated it 4 stars

Jim I disagree, Nina. I know & work or have worked with quite a few illegals & legal immigrants as well as those here on work visas. Our immigration system is so broken that there isn't a lot of difference. Quite a few started off as legal immigrants, work or student visas, wound up illegal & vice versa. There isn't a lot of protection for many no matter what their legal status. It might seem like it on paper, but the reality is quite different.


message 9: by Nina (new)

Nina There are always two sides and no easy answers.


message 10: by Jim (new) - rated it 4 stars

Jim No, there aren't easy answers, but the current system is busted, both immigration & unions. It's all too cumbersome & filled with stupid, strict overreaching rules without any common sense. They've lost sight of their purpose.

Much of the horse industry relies on Mexicans that come here & work for the racing season & then go home to enjoy the fruits of their labors. I knew Americans who used to do the same thing during the fishing season in Alaska. They'd go up there, work like hell & live like dogs for the season canning fish, then come back to Washington state & vacation the rest of the year before doing it again. US citizens doing the same thing that people sneer at illegal immigrants for doing, but that's the nature of seasonal work.

Anyway, many of the Mexicans that have worked for friends with racing stables for decades are suddenly having an awful time getting back across the border due to the recent change in policies. Other families we know have always swapped young people, mostly women, with the UK to work with horses or younger children. I dated one just before I met Marg & a friend of mine married another. His nephew was very interested in another, but she was actually deported due to some weird immigration snafu & couldn't even get a visa to come visit after that. The immigration laws & bureaucracy have grown to truly immense & ridiculous proportions until all common sense is gone.

A neighbor of ours was turned into an illegal over a decade ago. His wife & kids are legal & he works hard, but he couldn't come up with the thousands needed for a lawyer to get another proper hearing, so he just ignores it & seems to be doing fine. He said that if it comes up again, they'll fight it then, but it just doesn't make sense now. He can't afford it.

There are a lot of points that need to be addressed & Sinclair is writing a fictionalized account in a really bad time for labor. Remember that this was just as the unions were gaining traction & they really needed to. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, labor had been exploited very badly in the factories. The cities were often hell holes without modern sanitation & utilities.

One of my grandfathers was a staunch union man who belonged to the pipe fitters union in NYC. He wasn't a big man, about 160 lbs, but his job required him to carry sacks of asbestos cement that weighed almost as much as he did, dump & mix it in big vats. He had some hair raising stories from the 1920's & 30's about how the union had saved the workers of his time & he was proud of them. His parents didn't leave Sweden on a lark. Times were tough. Although he was raised in a 1 bedroom cold water flat in Brooklyn that had 2 families living in it, both he & my great uncle Sven said it was better than where they'd lived in Sweden. Grandpa was a baby when they came over, so his info is second hand, but Uncle Sven was about a decade older.

The pendulum has swung, though. Most of his grandchildren won't have anything to do with unions. One, who built & owns a high steel construction company in NYC, often has fights with them. Similar stories to Grandpa's, but the union is a problem for him, not the solution.

I wouldn't join the carpenter's union - couldn't afford to. I'd have gotten paid a lot more per hour (after going through an apprenticeship program to prove I was the carpenter that I am) but it seemed to me that the union carpenters in Baltimore during the 80's were laid off more than they worked & I know they had ridiculous rules. They couldn't seem to get anything done, but stood around waiting for other unions to get a worker in there to do something first. I worked for nonunion companies & just got the job done. If that meant some plumbing or electrical work too, it was all good.

Anyway, I think I'm in a pretty good position to compare Sinclair's story to my own family's. We're blue collar immigrants who made it, but it hasn't always been easy. Most of the grandkids on that side now do white collar jobs, but we all started off as blue collar workers & struggled for years to get where we are. I was 40 before I started sitting in an office having worked myself off the farm & out of the trades.


message 11: by Nina (new)

Nina Interesting family history Jim. My son married an illegal from Honduras/later paid over twenty thousand to get her and her two children legalized. He is still trying to pay off debts. Lots of red tape and illegal doings both in TX and Honduras but at least they aren't in Honduras cutting sugar cane. Or worse.


message 12: by Jim (new) - rated it 4 stars

Jim That's messed up. Well, at least they're here legally now.


back to top