Previous
Similes
Chapter 4
Explanation and Analysis—Breaking Parole:
When Tom hitchhikes back to his hometown of Sallisaw, Oklahoma, after a four-year stint in prison, he encounters former preacher Jim Casy, who asks him about his time in prison. In his response, Tom tells a brief story saturated with situational irony:
“They was a guy paroled,’’ he said. “ ’Bout a month he’s back for breakin’ parole. A guy ast him why he bust his parole. ‘Well, hell,’ he says. ‘They got no conveniences at my old man’s place. Got no ’lectric lights, got no shower baths. There ain’t no books, an’ the food’s lousy.’ Says he come back where they got a few conveniences an’ he eats regular. He says it makes him feel lonesome out there in the open havin’ to think what to do next. So he stole a car an’ come back.’’
While in prison, Tom claims, he met a man who was “paroled” but then returned to prison a month later “for breakin’ parole.” When asked why he violated the terms of his parole agreement, the man suggests that he was, ironically, unsatisfied with life outside of prison, as there were no “conveniences” at his “old man’s place,” including “'lectric lights” and “shower baths.” Further, he had no access to books outside of prison and regarded the food as “lousy.” In contrast, he “eats regular” in prison and finds life altogether more comfortable and less “lonesome.” Hoping to return to prison, he “stole a car” just to “come back.” This anecdote is notably ironic, as the man prefers the conditions of imprisonment, which are intended to be unpleasant and punitive, to freedom. Through this ironic anecdote, Steinbeck underscores the difficult nature of life for many during the Great Depression.
Related Themes:
Chapter 6
Explanation and Analysis—The Limits of Knowledge :
While talking to Casy about his experiences in prison, Tom recounts an anecdote that ironically suggests that learning about the legal system only leads to greater confusion. Describing a man in McAlester prison who is very intelligent and spends most of his time reading, Tom states that:
He’s sec’etary of the warden—writes the warden’s letters an’ stuff like that. Well, he’s one hell of a bright guy an’ reads law an’ all stuff like that. Well, I talked to him one time about her, ’cause he reads so much stuff. An’ he says it don’t do no good to read books. Says he’s read ever’thing about prisons now, an’ in the old times; an’ he says she makes less sense to him now than she did before he starts readin’ [...] He says for God’s sake don’t read about her because he says for one thing you’ll jus’ get messed up worse [...]
The warden’s secretary is, Tom notes, “one hell of a bright guy,” and he spends his time reading about the law. When Tom talks to the man, however, he is surprised to hear the man insist that “it don’t do no good to read books.” Ironically, the man claims that the law “makes less sense to him now” than it did before he began to learn about it. He warns Tom not to read about the law, because it will leave him “messed up worse” than he was before. Tom’s anecdote about the warden’s secretary suggests that the legal system is so complicated and convoluted that learning about it only raises more questions and leads to greater confusion.
