Underwhelmed and disappointed by East of Eden :(

I once read a review which goes like this: If you expect subtlety, East of Eden will not be your thing.

Having finished the book, I must say that I agree. East of Eden is not subtle. Everything is laid out openly, certain features are mentioned repeatedly (why does the narrator keep on reminding us how cat-like Cathy is, how entrepreneurial Will is, how fat and rich Will has become, ad nauseam?), and the biblical allusions are used very overtly. I understand the appeal and the merit of this book, I see how loved it is, and though I’ll probably get tons of backlash for this, I just… could not like this book — which is a shame, because I had been so so excited to read it before I actually read it, and because I enjoyed Of Mice and Men and had pleasant memories of it.

The narration feels inconsistent: sometimes it mimics a biblical cadence evoking a meditative, authoritative quality, other times the narration is plain and folksy, and some times its raw and self-inserted. It’s as if Steinbeck takes his biblical mask off and is popping in and out of the narration (I struggle to find a more precise and appropriate explanation).

East of Eden is labelled as a realist novel, but some of its scenes are unrealistic and unbelievable. Some examples: as much as I wanted to enjoy the book, I could not be persuaded that a group of grown-up adult siblings (adult as in they all have their own children already), all upon coming home and discovering that their dad is getting old and frail, immediately jumped to the conclusion that Tom, the only son who was living with him, was to blame. Aren’t they adults? Why were they blaming Tom for their father’s old age? Another example: the dynamic between Abra and Aron — if they were a sixth grader, why were they talking about marriage, and why is the talk of marriage actually taken to be a real thing until Aron goes to college? I don’t think it’s an accurate portrayal of the consciousness of a 12 year old to a 18 year old — it’s unbelievable, to the point that it’s slightly awkward. I found many of the scenes to be too melodramatic and/or overly sentimental.

Another thing that bugged me is how everything is so exposed. Steinbeck gives us scenes, but then proceeds to comment at and decode the scenes for us. He does show, but he tells more than he shows. Sometimes it over-explains as if it’s trying to justify the reason for scenes. Maybe some people prefer this style where everything is explained, but in my opinion this loosens the mystery and tension that we otherwise might feel if the narrative is less explanatory.

The plot itself is pretty engaging, despite being a bit messy and meandering. As is written in the introduction to the Penguin Black Classics edition, Steinbeck himself, when writing East of Eden, worries whether he had not too often “stopped the book and gone to discussions of God knows what”, of which he answers himself: “Yes, I have. I don’t know why. Just wanted to.”

Digressions aside, the narrative voice feels moralizing, which stems from its belief of moral absolutes (again, this might be some people’s preference but I am skeptical of books with moral absolutes). It’s too sure of its own morality. There is little to no room for tension and ambiguity.

The characters were okay for me — I didn’t really care for any of them; Cathy was initially interesting but ultimately predictable. Lee’s arc seem to be the wise advisor, he has a pretty set and solid role in the book to guide and advise others. Some of his words were pretty illuminating, some were cliched, and some were pompous and awkwardly self-satisfied. Adam felt mostly lifeless, Samuel felt one-dimensional, and Tom was just okay. The other Hamiltons felt like filler background characters. Cal’s characterization was pretty intriguing, but his transition from being a self-interested, power exercising schemer to an altruistic, self-torturing boy felt so abrupt.

Surely I can’t be the only one who feels this way…