Daniel Barton
October 27, 2014
Religious Literature
Transient and Permanent Qualities in East of Eden:
The Relationship Between Good and Evil Torben Grodal talked of art film as possessing two basic elements, transient and permanent, but they are also seen in the novel East of Eden. Steinbeck creates scenes that at first have a transient quality, and then purposefully connects to a permanent nature. These permanent qualities, grappled with by the Trask’s and Lee, examine the never ending battle between good and evil. In the novel East of Eden, John Steinbeck constructs scenes that have an initial transient quality, but then persistently associates these with a permanent nature that examines the conflict between good and evil. Steinbeck portrays Cathy as a very evil character, someone who is just inexplicably evil and makes several allusions to her being a monster and devil. When first introducing the reader to Cathy, Steinbeck writes about the creation of monsters, an obvious parallel. He goes on to say that, “monsters are variations from the accepted normal to a greater or a less degree. As a child may be born without an arm, so one may be born without kindness or the potential of conscience” (72). He wastes no time in comparing a monster to Cathy. He believes that Cathy is not an ordinary evil either, but that she is a very abstract form of evil, the exact idea of evil and that she has no good in her body. Steinbeck does not only believe that Cathy is a monster, but also uses Cathy to show that evil can and will exist in the world without having a reason to exist. Cathy has no reason to be evil, she is just born into it, which will fuel the battle between good and evil. When Cathy has now moved to the Salinas Valley with Adam, she meets Samuel for the first time and right away Samuel senses something wrong. Steinbeck uses a dinner scene and writes; “Cathy was chewing a piece of meat, chewing with her front teeth. Samuel had never seen anyone chew that way before. And when she had swallowed, her little tongue flicked around her lips. Samuel's mind repeated, ‘Something—something—can't find what it is. Something wrong,’ and the silence hung on the table” (173). Steinbeck uses this to transiently point out that Samuel, a good and respectful person, knows that something is wrong with Cathy implying that she is evil but he also uses diction to create a permanent nature. He says that Cathy flicks her tongue and only chews with her front teeth, the same way in which a snake eats, flicking its tongue after a meal. Steinbeck now makes an allusion to the Bible and infers that Cathy is in fact Satan from Genesis, a smart and shrewd serpent that tricks Eve into introducing original sin and evil into the world. Good vs. evil is once again referenced permanently by Steinbeck in his use of Cathy but also uses Cal transiently to examine the relationship of good and evil. Steinbeck utilizes Cal to examine if people are good, evil, or both and Cal struggles with the concept but eventually is led to the truth by Lee. At first Cal is very confused and realizes that “one moment he was dedicated and pure and devoted; the next he wallowed in filth; and the next he groveled in shame and emerged rededicated”, but he cannot decide if he is either good or evil because of this (450). When looking at good vs. evil it is easy to see that something is good or evil, but it is hard to see that there is both good and evil, the two traits can be in the same person. The transient level of this scene is that Cal is pondering what he has done with his life, more specifically his relationship with Aron, and whether or not he is evil. The permanent nature that Steinbeck creates in this scene is that there are both good and evil in people and one cannot be simply noted as being good or evil. Therefore, Cal is not all evil and he is not all good, he is both but he does not understand that yet. Lee does try to make sense of it all to Cal and give him the truth. Lee, very assertively, asks Cal if he ever, “‘[thought of himself] as a snot-nose kid—mean sometimes, incredibly generous sometimes? Dirty in [his] habits, and curiously pure in [his] mind. Maybe [he had] a little more energy than most, just energy, but outside of that [he’s] very like all the other snot-nose kids,’” and finally asks Cal if he tried, “‘to attract dignity and tragedy to [himself] because [his] mother was a whore” (570). The transient quality that Steinbeck uses here is Lee saying that Cal is both good and bad and that it is okay, because everyone is like that and he tells Cal to get over himself. The permanent nature of this scene that Steinbeck portrays is that when looking at the relationship between good and evil, the two are sometimes molded together to make humans, and it is human nature that there is both good and evil in everyone. Steinbeck creates scenes with Biblical allusions that have the permanent nature of the struggle between good and evil. Steinbeck uses transient qualities in these scenes such as the Bible to open the doors into the permanent nature of the relationship between good and evil. One of the most famous verses in the Bible is alluded to when Cal tells Aron to go into the army, therefore indirectly killing him, and Adam asks where he is. Cal gives the famed response, “How do I know? Am I supposed to look after him” which is in direct correlation with the Biblical story of Cain and Abel when Cain asks God if he is his brother’s keeper (564). Steinbeck makes the obvious similarities for a reason, when looking at the permanent nature of this scene it is much more than just Cain and Abel. It is once again the struggle between good and evil. Cal knows what he has done and knows that it is evil but it too much of a coward to say it to his father. It seems like evil has prevailed, but Steinbeck makes sure to have one more nugget of truth from Lee to set it all straight. Lee takes a step backwards and questions what he thought of the world and concludes he was stupid in some instances saying, “These were my stupidities: I thought the good are destroyed while the evil survive and prosper” (600). Evil does not always win, even if it may seem like it. There can still be redemption and hope. There is the hope that good will defeat evil in the long run. It all goes back to the Biblical allusion to the different translations of the Bible in which Lee realizes that the Hebrew word Timshel literally means thou mayest. One is able to choose what he or she does and so Cal has the opportunity to be good, and he may defeat evil. In East of Eden, John Steinbeck uses scenes with an initial transient quality, but then accompanies these with a permanent nature that observes the clash between good and evil. Through the Trask’s and Lee, Steinbeck writes about the constant fight of good vs. evil. He almost has it look like evil will win the battle but then Lee concludes that Timshel in the Bible means thou mayest, one is able to choose what to do with their life. The many transient qualities in East of Eden show the permanent nature of the struggle between good and evil in the world and Steinbeck simply ends the novel with the choice to be either good or evil in one word, Timshel.