The Winter of Discontent - John Steinbeck

This is the third Steinbeck I read after 'The Grapes of Wrath' and 'Of Mice and Men' and am in awe of how he writes. I finished reading the novel and went back to read it again and was amazed at how tightly he set it up, how deep his understanding of human psychology is and how well he articulates the subtle in such few words. 

So we enter the world of Ethan Hawley, happy in his unfortunate circumstance of having to work as a clerk in a store he once owned. Ethan has made peace with losing his family's legacy and riches and in the end even losing the store in a building he owned. But he remains honest and true to his values. Happy with his wife Mary and his two children, Mary and Allen. Steinbeck, the matter of a few taut opening pages introduces us to Ethan, his boss, a migrant Sicilian Marullo, his wife Mary and her friend Margie, the banker Baker and his assistant Joey. Conversations turn towards some money Mary has received from her dead brother's estate which the others feel should be invested. Ethan however says its her money and should be left alone.

Margie, a fortune teller of sorts and someone who is living off her husband's alimony, tries to seduce Ethan, just as a supplier tries to bribe him but Ethan sticks true to his values. But then Margie tells Mary that Ethan will come into fortune, Joey tells him how to loot a bank and not get caught and Baker tells him he should make money. Ethan slowly changes and tips off the authorities about Marullo's immigrant status  and acquires the store, pushes his friend Danny to drink and death and gets his estate and even tries to loot the bank which does not happen. In the end Ethan is disgusted with himself and tries to kill himself but his daughter, sensing his mood, stops him. The scene where she says she wants to go with him when he says he has to go out is so beautiful and heart rending. Steinbeck ends the novel with hope which was a relief to me.

One para he wrote stayed with me and rings true even today - 

'Now, a slow, deliberate encirclement was moving on in the town and it was set in motion by honorable men. If it succeeded they would be thought not crooked but clever. And if a factor they had overlooked moved in, would that be immoral or dishonourable? I think that would depend on whether or not it was successful. To most of the world success is never bad. I remember now, when Hitler moved unchecked and triumphant, many honorable men sought and found virtues in him. And Mussolini made the trains run on time and Vichy collaborated for the good of France, and whatever else Salin was, he was strong. Strength and success, they are above morality, above criticism. It seems then that it is not what you  do, but how you do it, and what you call it. Is there a check in men, deep in them, that stops or punishes? There doesn't seem to be. The only punishment is for failure. In effect no crime is committed unless a criminal is caught.'

How true it is even today. Its a human thing and will never go away.

Steinbeck is up there among my favorite authors. Now to read 'East of Eden'.