Out of This Furnace by Thomas Bell

Below is an essay that I wrote for my Social Protest Literature class. The novel is based on the history of Thomas Bell's family who immigrated to the United States from Slovakia in the late 1800's. It depicts the harsh working conditions in the mills in western Pennsylvania and how the workers responded to these conditions. Each generation of the family progresses further in achieving union rights and gaining class consciousness.

In my opinion, this book is definitely worth reading. While it is not an overtly revolutionary novel, it allows the reader to draw connections between the workers' movement and the need for a movement that will finally liberate the entire working class. It would be a great novel for starting discussions between the agency of the individual in society versus to the interconnectedness of the workers with the economic system.

____________________________

A common theme in Out of this Furnace is the use of various forms of propaganda in upholding the company’s interests. The propaganda that is issued by the company, paid-for advertisements, and newspaper editors utilizes common themes of patriotism and anticommunism to discredit the workers in the union and their purposes, while justifying the company’s greed and attacks against unions.  

The first passage, on page 187, deals with the use of company propaganda. Here, the company uses propaganda to intimidate the workers into voting for Taft, the Republican candidate. The company’s use of intimidation is found in the subtle threat on one of the posters—the threat that if a “black-bearded anarchist” gets into office, the factories will close and there will be no more jobs. The ad itself is ludicrous in that it seems to equate any non-Republican candidate to an anarchist. This goes along with the idea that any political views contrary to those of the company are not patriotic—similar to how anarchism was considered unpatriotic at the time. The company is therefore defining patriotism and telling the workers who to vote for at the same time. Many workers were uneducated and perhaps eager to be regarded as “American”—so they were likely to fall victim to this form of propaganda during the election. This piece of propaganda upholds the company’s interests because it keeps the workers in fear of losing their jobs and sends them the message that if they vote Republican, they will not have to worry about losing their job.

A second example, found on page 243, describes how propaganda, in the form of newspaper advertisements, dealt with a strike, predicting its failure and portraying the unions and striking workers as greedy. The propaganda is clearly directed toward an immigrant audience (the advertisements were printed in six or seven languages), which is likely to be conscious about being patriotic “American” citizens. The propaganda uses the immigrants’ vulnerability to its advantage by, once again, equating the strikers with foreigners, anarchists, radicals, and even Bolsheviks. The anti-communism, referred to as “Bolsheviks,” used here is meant to drive readers into fear of the strikers and their evil and unpatriotic attempts to seize power. Additionally, the advertisements portrayed the union leadership as greedily robbing money from the new members’ dues. Finally, the advertisements declare that the strike was a failure before it even ended—thus probably confusing readers and workers alike into thinking it had ended and causing workers to go back to work. It is definitely in the interests of the company that the workers go back to work and that the public is opposed to the union because it allows the company to continue exploiting as it has always done without people questioning its actions. This propaganda upholds the interests of the company because it accuses the workers, rather than the company owners and supervisors, as greedy. This distracts the readers from the true cause of the problem—the company’s greed and massive profits that were gained at the cost of the workers’ safety and lives.

A final passage, on page 405, reveals how newspaper editors strip the workers of their collective bargaining achievements by praising the company for its charitable decision of giving the S.W.O.C. a contract. Once again, patriotism is tied in with the propaganda: the company is praised as being patriotic and charitable to the workers; while the SWOC is scolded for not having proper etiquette (presumably by greedily demanding recognition and improvements from their kind and charitable company owners). This shows how the owners are portrayed as “good,” and the unions are portrayed as “bad” and greedy for asking more of the company. Additionally, the newspaper completely ignores the union’s struggle and victory. While the reason that the company gave in to the workers’ demands is clear to any member of the union who participated in the struggle it sends a different message to the outside audience. It sends a message that if workers treat their company well, it will reward them. However, this is completely incorrect. Additionally, the fact that the company gave in to the demands before the Labor Board came to an official decision shows that the company wanted the credit for allowing its workers to unionize; this is much better than having a story circulating about how the Labor Board forced the company to recognize the S.W.O.C. because of the company’s unfair and intimidating practices. This shows how the company owners collaborate with the newspaper writers—whether directly or indirectly—to have the storys written sympathetically to the company.

Whether the propaganda artists in the novel are directly tied to the company—through personal relationships and conflicts of interest—or indirectly connected through a common ideology favoring capitalism and business interests, the propaganda clearly serves its purpose in shaping the ideology of the poor and the rich alike.