Yonnondio: From the Thirties by Tillie Olsen

Yonnondio: From the Thirties by Tillie Olsen is one of my new favorite books. I just finished reading it for my Social Protest Literature class. Although it is an unfinished novel, it is worth the read because the author focuses more on depicting the realities from different perspectives than she does on where the story is going. In fact, I never found myself wishing something more exciting would happen because the descriptions and minute everyday tasks needed for survival written in a way that gave them so much depth and revealed the weight of capitalism and exploitaton. Actually, in some ways, it is more interesting becuase it is unfinished because it requires me to ask questions: Why did Tillie Olsen stop writing the novel? What made her decide to piece it together 30-40 years after not touching it? There are also scraps and drafts of parts that are not published with the full story. I have not read them yet but I hope to soon!

The book is different from the other proletarian literature that I've read so far because it is written with an experimental style. Different passages are written in different voices and Olsen uses flowery and poetic language to describe the the evils of capitalism and corporations. It is interesting to me that the book seems to become less experimental and more realistic toward the second half. I'm not sure why Olsen does this. 

The following are my comments on Olsen's depiction of the structure of the family in the novel, based on Barbara Foley's talk that she gave my class:

A central theme in Yonnondio by Tillie Olson is how the institution of the family coerces the exploited into adhering to capitalism. According to Barbara Foley, the family institution consists of the following: the father, who on the micro level represents the boss at home while producing paid labor to materially support the family; and the mother, who is responsible for the reproduction of labor both by taking care of food and home and by raising the next generation of laborers. Of course, the mother's labor is unpaid, and therefore not thought of as valuable by society and usually her own family--she is essentially a slave.

This structure of the family is seen in several passages in Yonnondio. The opening passage of the book shows how Jim believes women are inherently made for the home (2). Jim's behavior not only limits the collectivity and solidarity of his family and society on a larger scale, but also, according to Barbara Foley, hurts himself. This is evident in his strained relationship with his wife and children shown throughout the book.

Another passage where the structure of the family benefits capitalism is the scene where Jim rapes Anna, who is clearly sick (75). This shows that, in a patriarchal system, men believe that women should be their property, like a slave. In this passage, the structure of the family benefits capitalism because it reproduces the hierarchy of exploitation and prevents Jim from seeing Anna as his equal in terms of class and potential. If everyone in the town could understand how patriarchy divides the family and society, they would work together and have cooperative collective that would no longer require the meat packing plant and the corporations.

A final passage is at the end of the book, when Anna is working all day in the heat. Jim comes home and falls asleep, while Anna continues working. This shows how her labor goes unrecognized and is seen more as a duty. Meanwhile, Jim's hours are set. An interesting aspect of this passage that I noticed is how, if Anna does not take care of the house, food or children, then her children will die. Meanwhile, Jim's labor can be easily replaced, and his coercion to work is more overt. Also, Anna is required to multi-task and use her own intellect to solve any problems and obstacles; Jim's work is mindless and the tasks and tools are laid out to him. This shows that Anna's unrecognized and unpaid labor requires tremendous amounts of skill, endurance, and intellect--something that Tillie Olsen depicts well that other authors, such as Thomas Bell gloss over.

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.