Not "There Will Be Blood", 16 Nov 2008
"There Will Be Blood" was a famous film from 2007. It became specially renowned when it helped win the best actor for Daniel Day Lewis. The director said the story was drawn from this book.

In response to the directors comments, I would say that it focuses mainly on the first third of this book, because while the film focuses on the story of a father who pulled himself up by his own bootstraps, the book focuses more on the growth of the son. As the son matures he becomes his own person, so when he is young (as he is in the first third of the book), we see more of the father, because the son is more dependant on him at a young age.

The story also isn't about the growth of an oil firm at the hands of a maniacal of a father (as it seems to be in the film). For while we see the firm grow, Sinclair, the author, was more interested in portraying real life, and how employees are treated by big business at the time.

Had the film been made this year, I'd argue that the film would have a very different focus. Instead of focusing on one mad individual, it could have been a damning indictment of coporate greed and the way it treats its employees, which is something more like what the book is like I think.

In short, if the director had made the book, it would be a lot more challenging for big business to defend the actions of the central characters here, and so it is fair to say that this book is not "There Will Be Blood"

Very different to the film, 05 Apr 2008
Rather than being about Daniel Plainfield and to a lesser extent his "son" HW, the book is told mainly from the perspective of "Bunny" Ross, the actual son of oilman J Arnold Ross. There are very significant roles for two of the Watkins brothers: Eli the Pentecostal preacher, corrupt as in the film, but more believable here to those who know something of Pentecostalism in 1920s California (some of the material clearly influenced by the career of Aimee Semple Macpherson); and a very prominent role for Paul, the politically committed union activist who ultimately becomes a communist, and has a profound influence on "Bunny".

Why three stars? Well, for me three stars means averagely good, four stars is for significantly better than average and only the truly exceptional should get five stars. There is much to admire and enjoy here, but it was written in 1926, and the author's advocacy of socialism/communism, with his enthusiasm for communist Russia seems hopelessly naive and misplaced, given what we have known for many decades now. Human greed is an evil thing, and the capitalist beast needs taming, but communism proved a worse system than America in the 1920s in virtually every respect.

A book that changes one who reads it...The film on the other hand is in shambles, 25 Feb 2008
Sabahattin Ali is said to have commented on this book that whoever reads this book becomes a socialist. This book carefully re-creates the atmosphere of the early periods of United States and the emergence of oil barons. The story revolves around the son of a wealthy oilman and his role model a communist worker. Paul is a very political person in every aspect, he organises the workers, deciphers the US Army's involvement in the Far East part of the Soviet Union. Also in the book is mentioned the Teapot Dome scandal involving the then president Warren Harding-one of the least succesful presidents of the US.

I have already watched the film "There will be Blood" based upon "Oil!". The film has to be watched and judged seperately as it has no connections whatsoever with the book. As an adaptation it is disgraceful to use Upton Sinclair's or Oil!'s name. Only the beginnig of the book is same where we meet the characters. No World War 1, no scandal, no class warfare is mentioned. I like Daniel Day Lewis, and he does a brilliant acting but I think he was used as pawn for the cencors of the original book. For me I can only say that do NOT watch the movie, read the book instead...

An excellent written book by a world famous author., 27 Apr 1998
One of my favorite books of all times. Upton Sinclair is a literary master. The book is intense, and moves through all its nearly 600 pages. It seems that the series Dallas had its origins in this old book. The characters and events are all believable. I highly recommend reading this book and learning about early California oil days.

A Good Historical Novel, 28 Nov 1997
If one can look through the Muckraking Sinclair is doing, the book paints a detailed portrait of the oil industry, movie industry and overall life in southern California in the 1920's.

Not "There Will Be Blood", 16 Nov 2008
"There Will Be Blood" was a famous film from 2007. It became specially renowned when it helped win the best actor for Daniel Day Lewis. The director said the story was drawn from this book.

In response to the directors comments, I would say that it focuses mainly on the first third of this book, because while the film focuses on the story of a father who pulled himself up by his own bootstraps, the book focuses more on the growth of the son. As the son matures he becomes his own person, so when he is young (as he is in the first third of the book), we see more of the father, because the son is more dependant on him at a young age.

The story also isn't about the growth of an oil firm at the hands of a maniacal of a father (as it seems to be in the film). For while we see the firm grow, Sinclair, the author, was more interested in portraying real life, and how employees are treated by big business at the time.

Had the film been made this year, I'd argue that the film would have a very different focus. Instead of focusing on one mad individual, it could have been a damning indictment of coporate greed and the way it treats its employees, which is something more like what the book is like I think.

In short, if the director had made the book, it would be a lot more challenging for big business to defend the actions of the central characters here, and so it is fair to say that this book is not "There Will Be Blood"

Very different to the film, 05 Apr 2008
Rather than being about Daniel Plainfield and to a lesser extent his "son" HW, the book is told mainly from the perspective of "Bunny" Ross, the actual son of oilman J Arnold Ross. There are very significant roles for two of the Watkins brothers: Eli the Pentecostal preacher, corrupt as in the film, but more believable here to those who know something of Pentecostalism in 1920s California (some of the material clearly influenced by the career of Aimee Semple Macpherson); and a very prominent role for Paul, the politically committed union activist who ultimately becomes a communist, and has a profound influence on "Bunny".

Why three stars? Well, for me three stars means averagely good, four stars is for significantly better than average and only the truly exceptional should get five stars. There is much to admire and enjoy here, but it was written in 1926, and the author's advocacy of socialism/communism, with his enthusiasm for communist Russia seems hopelessly naive and misplaced, given what we have known for many decades now. Human greed is an evil thing, and the capitalist beast needs taming, but communism proved a worse system than America in the 1920s in virtually every respect.

A book that changes one who reads it...The film on the other hand is in shambles, 25 Feb 2008
Sabahattin Ali is said to have commented on this book that whoever reads this book becomes a socialist. This book carefully re-creates the atmosphere of the early periods of United States and the emergence of oil barons. The story revolves around the son of a wealthy oilman and his role model a communist worker. Paul is a very political person in every aspect, he organises the workers, deciphers the US Army's involvement in the Far East part of the Soviet Union. Also in the book is mentioned the Teapot Dome scandal involving the then president Warren Harding-one of the least succesful presidents of the US.

I have already watched the film "There will be Blood" based upon "Oil!". The film has to be watched and judged seperately as it has no connections whatsoever with the book. As an adaptation it is disgraceful to use Upton Sinclair's or Oil!'s name. Only the beginnig of the book is same where we meet the characters. No World War 1, no scandal, no class warfare is mentioned. I like Daniel Day Lewis, and he does a brilliant acting but I think he was used as pawn for the cencors of the original book. For me I can only say that do NOT watch the movie, read the book instead...

An excellent written book by a world famous author., 27 Apr 1998
One of my favorite books of all times. Upton Sinclair is a literary master. The book is intense, and moves through all its nearly 600 pages. It seems that the series Dallas had its origins in this old book. The characters and events are all believable. I highly recommend reading this book and learning about early California oil days.

A Good Historical Novel, 28 Nov 1997
If one can look through the Muckraking Sinclair is doing, the book paints a detailed portrait of the oil industry, movie industry and overall life in southern California in the 1920's.

THE JUNGLE, 18 Oct 2005
I had never heard of Upton Sinclair until I stumbled on this book in a charity shop. I found it rivettingly horrible with it's graphic descriptions of a slaughterhouse and the conditions of the meat packing industry in Chicago around 1910. The book goes off the boil later but it's still a great read and like all great books it ushered in change when Theodore Roosevelt read it. I immediately bought another book called OIL! but I didn't find this in the same class as The Jungle. Sinclair seems to carefully research the industry he is writing about and this is what makes the Jungle a great book.

Laissez-faire exposed., 15 Mar 2005
There are without a doubt better novels than "The Jungle". A great novel was not Sinclair's aim however. His aim was to point out the vile conditions that existed among working Americans in the early twentieth century. Conditions that were so awful that a visit to some workers in New York a few years before this book came out began to change young Theodore Roosevelt from a conservative to a progressive. Along the way Sinclair shocked the American public with the filth they were buying as quality meat.

Sinclair heaps horror after horror on Jurgis and his family. Almost to the point of overkill but again this was ment to be a work that shocked America and like "Uncle Tom's Cabin" before it "The Jungle" painted a worse case picture. Unregulated capitalism was exposed as the beast it was and still to an extent is with words like, "there was no place in it where a man counted for anything against a dollar." Sinclair was not out to improve the quality of food but that is what this book is most credited with. His real intent was to promote Socialism and in that to some extent he failed. However fear of the radical change Sinclair was after prompted many progressive reforms. Better a little change than a revolution.

In short, if you are looking for a great novel look elsewhere. Still, one needs to read this book for a look at where unregulated laissez-faire capitalism leads. As the calls increase to do away with government involvement in the regulation of business this book becomes more and more something that every American should read. Greed is a powerful thing and this book shows just how far some people will go in the quest for money. Powerful at times and sometimes a little off course this work by Upton Sinclair should always serve as a reminder of what was and what might be again.

grim grim grim grim grim, 15 Mar 2004
This has got to be the most depressing book I've EVER read. Mind you, it is quite good.

Passionate and heart breaking, 03 Dec 2000
After writing this book Sinclair himself remarked he had aimed for the public's hearts but instead hit their stomacks. This statement is still very relevent today. This book is a condemnation of the cruel and oppressive nature of the capitalist system. At a time when the U.S. was said to be a place full of prosperity, on its way to becoming the leading capitalist nation in the world, the domestic casualties of this are witnessed. The corruption that keeps the wealth in the hands of the rich is also vividly exposed. America "a beacon of democracy", is shown to be instead a ruthless, heartless land where those who are unfortunate are left no alternative but live a life of extreme poverty serving their oppressive masters. Sinclaire allows us to see the hell experienced by the hard working immigrants and then offers an alternative in socialism. I would argue this is not a radical conclusion but the realisation that capitalism has many contradictions which leave most of the world in hellish poverty whilst those with power, using oppressive methods defend ther privilidged position.

Relentless exploitation...unfortunately polemic conclusion, 26 Oct 2000
I was staggered that such conditions existed in any industry even at the time in which the book was set. It strikes me nonetheless, that it was very much a template for the foundation of the wealth of many industrialised and economically powerful nations. Loses a star as the last section has little of the crushing narrative that raises the rest of the book to such eye watering levels.

Not "There Will Be Blood", 16 Nov 2008
"There Will Be Blood" was a famous film from 2007. It became specially renowned when it helped win the best actor for Daniel Day Lewis. The director said the story was drawn from this book.

In response to the directors comments, I would say that it focuses mainly on the first third of this book, because while the film focuses on the story of a father who pulled himself up by his own bootstraps, the book focuses more on the growth of the son. As the son matures he becomes his own person, so when he is young (as he is in the first third of the book), we see more of the father, because the son is more dependant on him at a young age.

The story also isn't about the growth of an oil firm at the hands of a maniacal of a father (as it seems to be in the film). For while we see the firm grow, Sinclair, the author, was more interested in portraying real life, and how employees are treated by big business at the time.

Had the film been made this year, I'd argue that the film would have a very different focus. Instead of focusing on one mad individual, it could have been a damning indictment of coporate greed and the way it treats its employees, which is something more like what the book is like I think.

In short, if the director had made the book, it would be a lot more challenging for big business to defend the actions of the central characters here, and so it is fair to say that this book is not "There Will Be Blood"

Very different to the film, 05 Apr 2008
Rather than being about Daniel Plainfield and to a lesser extent his "son" HW, the book is told mainly from the perspective of "Bunny" Ross, the actual son of oilman J Arnold Ross. There are very significant roles for two of the Watkins brothers: Eli the Pentecostal preacher, corrupt as in the film, but more believable here to those who know something of Pentecostalism in 1920s California (some of the material clearly influenced by the career of Aimee Semple Macpherson); and a very prominent role for Paul, the politically committed union activist who ultimately becomes a communist, and has a profound influence on "Bunny".

Why three stars? Well, for me three stars means averagely good, four stars is for significantly better than average and only the truly exceptional should get five stars. There is much to admire and enjoy here, but it was written in 1926, and the author's advocacy of socialism/communism, with his enthusiasm for communist Russia seems hopelessly naive and misplaced, given what we have known for many decades now. Human greed is an evil thing, and the capitalist beast needs taming, but communism proved a worse system than America in the 1920s in virtually every respect.

A book that changes one who reads it...The film on the other hand is in shambles, 25 Feb 2008
Sabahattin Ali is said to have commented on this book that whoever reads this book becomes a socialist. This book carefully re-creates the atmosphere of the early periods of United States and the emergence of oil barons. The story revolves around the son of a wealthy oilman and his role model a communist worker. Paul is a very political person in every aspect, he organises the workers, deciphers the US Army's involvement in the Far East part of the Soviet Union. Also in the book is mentioned the Teapot Dome scandal involving the then president Warren Harding-one of the least succesful presidents of the US.

I have already watched the film "There will be Blood" based upon "Oil!". The film has to be watched and judged seperately as it has no connections whatsoever with the book. As an adaptation it is disgraceful to use Upton Sinclair's or Oil!'s name. Only the beginnig of the book is same where we meet the characters. No World War 1, no scandal, no class warfare is mentioned. I like Daniel Day Lewis, and he does a brilliant acting but I think he was used as pawn for the cencors of the original book. For me I can only say that do NOT watch the movie, read the book instead...

An excellent written book by a world famous author., 27 Apr 1998
One of my favorite books of all times. Upton Sinclair is a literary master. The book is intense, and moves through all its nearly 600 pages. It seems that the series Dallas had its origins in this old book. The characters and events are all believable. I highly recommend reading this book and learning about early California oil days.

A Good Historical Novel, 28 Nov 1997
If one can look through the Muckraking Sinclair is doing, the book paints a detailed portrait of the oil industry, movie industry and overall life in southern California in the 1920's.

THE JUNGLE, 18 Oct 2005
I had never heard of Upton Sinclair until I stumbled on this book in a charity shop. I found it rivettingly horrible with it's graphic descriptions of a slaughterhouse and the conditions of the meat packing industry in Chicago around 1910. The book goes off the boil later but it's still a great read and like all great books it ushered in change when Theodore Roosevelt read it. I immediately bought another book called OIL! but I didn't find this in the same class as The Jungle. Sinclair seems to carefully research the industry he is writing about and this is what makes the Jungle a great book.

Laissez-faire exposed., 15 Mar 2005
There are without a doubt better novels than "The Jungle". A great novel was not Sinclair's aim however. His aim was to point out the vile conditions that existed among working Americans in the early twentieth century. Conditions that were so awful that a visit to some workers in New York a few years before this book came out began to change young Theodore Roosevelt from a conservative to a progressive. Along the way Sinclair shocked the American public with the filth they were buying as quality meat.

Sinclair heaps horror after horror on Jurgis and his family. Almost to the point of overkill but again this was ment to be a work that shocked America and like "Uncle Tom's Cabin" before it "The Jungle" painted a worse case picture. Unregulated capitalism was exposed as the beast it was and still to an extent is with words like, "there was no place in it where a man counted for anything against a dollar." Sinclair was not out to improve the quality of food but that is what this book is most credited with. His real intent was to promote Socialism and in that to some extent he failed. However fear of the radical change Sinclair was after prompted many progressive reforms. Better a little change than a revolution.

In short, if you are looking for a great novel look elsewhere. Still, one needs to read this book for a look at where unregulated laissez-faire capitalism leads. As the calls increase to do away with government involvement in the regulation of business this book becomes more and more something that every American should read. Greed is a powerful thing and this book shows just how far some people will go in the quest for money. Powerful at times and sometimes a little off course this work by Upton Sinclair should always serve as a reminder of what was and what might be again.

grim grim grim grim grim, 15 Mar 2004
This has got to be the most depressing book I've EVER read. Mind you, it is quite good.

Passionate and heart breaking, 03 Dec 2000
After writing this book Sinclair himself remarked he had aimed for the public's hearts but instead hit their stomacks. This statement is still very relevent today. This book is a condemnation of the cruel and oppressive nature of the capitalist system. At a time when the U.S. was said to be a place full of prosperity, on its way to becoming the leading capitalist nation in the world, the domestic casualties of this are witnessed. The corruption that keeps the wealth in the hands of the rich is also vividly exposed. America "a beacon of democracy", is shown to be instead a ruthless, heartless land where those who are unfortunate are left no alternative but live a life of extreme poverty serving their oppressive masters. Sinclaire allows us to see the hell experienced by the hard working immigrants and then offers an alternative in socialism. I would argue this is not a radical conclusion but the realisation that capitalism has many contradictions which leave most of the world in hellish poverty whilst those with power, using oppressive methods defend ther privilidged position.

Relentless exploitation...unfortunately polemic conclusion, 26 Oct 2000
I was staggered that such conditions existed in any industry even at the time in which the book was set. It strikes me nonetheless, that it was very much a template for the foundation of the wealth of many industrialised and economically powerful nations. Loses a star as the last section has little of the crushing narrative that raises the rest of the book to such eye watering levels.

Turning "The Jungle" back into a call for socialism, 07 Aug 2005
When I read Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" in high school I had to keep reminding myself that that novel was written in 1906, otherwise I would never be able to eat another hot dog the rest of my life. Although muckraking is a term used to describe journalistic exposes, "The Jungle" functioned much the same way by bringing instant notoriety to the American meatpacking industry. In his story of the Lithuanian immigrant Jurgis Rudkus and his family, Sinclair revealed the unsanitary, dangerous, and inhumane conditions that existed in Chicago's stockyards and meat-packing houses. When the novel was published it became front-page news across the nation and President Theodore Roosevelt invited Sinclair to the White House to discuss his book. Because of this book the sales of pre-packed meat in the United States was cut in half and the public outrage would lead to the passage of both the Pure Food and Drug Act and the Beef Inspection Act.

Originally, Sinclair's story was published serially in "The Appeal to Reason," a socialist weekly and was dedicated to "The Workingmen of America." Clearly, Sinclair intended "The Jungle" to be a clarion call to socialism and a plea for the end of wage slavery, and ultimately he was disappointed by the reaction to his novel, writing once, "I aimed at the public's heart and by accident I hit it in the stomach." In this graphic novel adaptation of "The Jungle," artist Peter Kuper and his co-writer Emily Russell (who I believe is his daughter) clearly make an effort to get back to the basics and refocus the story so that this time it hits the heart.

Originally published in 1991 as part of an attempt to revive the Classics Illustrated comic book line, Kuper uses a full-color stencil technique that suggests that particular period but anticipates, so to speak, the political art of the period before World War II. Jurgis Rudkus and the other characters are depicted with an almost doll-like quality, which eerily enhances the tragic story. Sometimes I think he looks like a clownish version of the Frankenstein monster, but I find that underscores the sense that Jurgis is up against a man-made monster in the unfettered capitalist economy that Sinclair depicts. To cut down the original novel to the 44-pages illustrated pages of this graphic novel, the mind numbing and health eroding work in the fertilizer plant is reduce to a couple of pages. This is why the focus in Kuper's version shifts from what Americans were eating to what is happening to Jurigs, as his personal tragedy becomes the heart of the story.

Consequently, I find that this graphic novel version of "The Jungle" is not so much a substitute for reading the original novel as it is an ancillary work. More than with most such adaptations, you really have to have read (and vividly remember) the original work to appreciate what Kuper and Russell have wrought here. Even if consider socialism to be outdated, unnecessary and/or offensive, you have to admit that Sinclair's novel speaks to the historic reality of what life was like for the working class at a time when that meant they were members of the lower class. At the very least, you can appreciate the grand irony that Sinclair's book did as much to forestall a socialist revolution in the United States but spurring the government to actually act on the issues he incorporated into "The Jungle."

Kuper currently illustrated "SPY vs. SPY" each month for "MAD" magazine, but his illustrations and comics have also appeared in "Time," "Newsweek," and "The New York Times." In addition to "The Jungle" he has also illustrated Sinclair's "The Jungle and Sticks and Stones," a wordless graphic novel about the rise and fall of empires, which was awarded the gold medal in the 2004 Society of Illustrators competition in the sequential arts category. He has also done a graphic novel version of "The Metamorphosis" as well as adapted several Franz Kafka short stories in "Give It Up!" So if you are looking for more literary works given the Kuper touch, then check those out as well.

Not "There Will Be Blood", 16 Nov 2008
"There Will Be Blood" was a famous film from 2007. It became specially renowned when it helped win the best actor for Daniel Day Lewis. The director said the story was drawn from this book.

In response to the directors comments, I would say that it focuses mainly on the first third of this book, because while the film focuses on the story of a father who pulled himself up by his own bootstraps, the book focuses more on the growth of the son. As the son matures he becomes his own person, so when he is young (as he is in the first third of the book), we see more of the father, because the son is more dependant on him at a young age.

The story also isn't about the growth of an oil firm at the hands of a maniacal of a father (as it seems to be in the film). For while we see the firm grow, Sinclair, the author, was more interested in portraying real life, and how employees are treated by big business at the time.

Had the film been made this year, I'd argue that the film would have a very different focus. Instead of focusing on one mad individual, it could have been a damning indictment of coporate greed and the way it treats its employees, which is something more like what the book is like I think.

In short, if the director had made the book, it would be a lot more challenging for big business to defend the actions of the central characters here, and so it is fair to say that this book is not "There Will Be Blood"

Very different to the film, 05 Apr 2008
Rather than being about Daniel Plainfield and to a lesser extent his "son" HW, the book is told mainly from the perspective of "Bunny" Ross, the actual son of oilman J Arnold Ross. There are very significant roles for two of the Watkins brothers: Eli the Pentecostal preacher, corrupt as in the film, but more believable here to those who know something of Pentecostalism in 1920s California (some of the material clearly influenced by the career of Aimee Semple Macpherson); and a very prominent role for Paul, the politically committed union activist who ultimately becomes a communist, and has a profound influence on "Bunny".

Why three stars? Well, for me three stars means averagely good, four stars is for significantly better than average and only the truly exceptional should get five stars. There is much to admire and enjoy here, but it was written in 1926, and the author's advocacy of socialism/communism, with his enthusiasm for communist Russia seems hopelessly naive and misplaced, given what we have known for many decades now. Human greed is an evil thing, and the capitalist beast needs taming, but communism proved a worse system than America in the 1920s in virtually every respect.

A book that changes one who reads it...The film on the other hand is in shambles, 25 Feb 2008
Sabahattin Ali is said to have commented on this book that whoever reads this book becomes a socialist. This book carefully re-creates the atmosphere of the early periods of United States and the emergence of oil barons. The story revolves around the son of a wealthy oilman and his role model a communist worker. Paul is a very political person in every aspect, he organises the workers, deciphers the US Army's involvement in the Far East part of the Soviet Union. Also in the book is mentioned the Teapot Dome scandal involving the then president Warren Harding-one of the least succesful presidents of the US.

I have already watched the film "There will be Blood" based upon "Oil!". The film has to be watched and judged seperately as it has no connections whatsoever with the book. As an adaptation it is disgraceful to use Upton Sinclair's or Oil!'s name. Only the beginnig of the book is same where we meet the characters. No World War 1, no scandal, no class warfare is mentioned. I like Daniel Day Lewis, and he does a brilliant acting but I think he was used as pawn for the cencors of the original book. For me I can only say that do NOT watch the movie, read the book instead...

An excellent written book by a world famous author., 27 Apr 1998
One of my favorite books of all times. Upton Sinclair is a literary master. The book is intense, and moves through all its nearly 600 pages. It seems that the series Dallas had its origins in this old book. The characters and events are all believable. I highly recommend reading this book and learning about early California oil days.

A Good Historical Novel, 28 Nov 1997
If one can look through the Muckraking Sinclair is doing, the book paints a detailed portrait of the oil industry, movie industry and overall life in southern California in the 1920's.

THE JUNGLE, 18 Oct 2005
I had never heard of Upton Sinclair until I stumbled on this book in a charity shop. I found it rivettingly horrible with it's graphic descriptions of a slaughterhouse and the conditions of the meat packing industry in Chicago around 1910. The book goes off the boil later but it's still a great read and like all great books it ushered in change when Theodore Roosevelt read it. I immediately bought another book called OIL! but I didn't find this in the same class as The Jungle. Sinclair seems to carefully research the industry he is writing about and this is what makes the Jungle a great book.

Laissez-faire exposed., 15 Mar 2005
There are without a doubt better novels than "The Jungle". A great novel was not Sinclair's aim however. His aim was to point out the vile conditions that existed among working Americans in the early twentieth century. Conditions that were so awful that a visit to some workers in New York a few years before this book came out began to change young Theodore Roosevelt from a conservative to a progressive. Along the way Sinclair shocked the American public with the filth they were buying as quality meat.

Sinclair heaps horror after horror on Jurgis and his family. Almost to the point of overkill but again this was ment to be a work that shocked America and like "Uncle Tom's Cabin" before it "The Jungle" painted a worse case picture. Unregulated capitalism was exposed as the beast it was and still to an extent is with words like, "there was no place in it where a man counted for anything against a dollar." Sinclair was not out to improve the quality of food but that is what this book is most credited with. His real intent was to promote Socialism and in that to some extent he failed. However fear of the radical change Sinclair was after prompted many progressive reforms. Better a little change than a revolution.

In short, if you are looking for a great novel look elsewhere. Still, one needs to read this book for a look at where unregulated laissez-faire capitalism leads. As the calls increase to do away with government involvement in the regulation of business this book becomes more and more something that every American should read. Greed is a powerful thing and this book shows just how far some people will go in the quest for money. Powerful at times and sometimes a little off course this work by Upton Sinclair should always serve as a reminder of what was and what might be again.

grim grim grim grim grim, 15 Mar 2004
This has got to be the most depressing book I've EVER read. Mind you, it is quite good.

Passionate and heart breaking, 03 Dec 2000
After writing this book Sinclair himself remarked he had aimed for the public's hearts but instead hit their stomacks. This statement is still very relevent today. This book is a condemnation of the cruel and oppressive nature of the capitalist system. At a time when the U.S. was said to be a place full of prosperity, on its way to becoming the leading capitalist nation in the world, the domestic casualties of this are witnessed. The corruption that keeps the wealth in the hands of the rich is also vividly exposed. America "a beacon of democracy", is shown to be instead a ruthless, heartless land where those who are unfortunate are left no alternative but live a life of extreme poverty serving their oppressive masters. Sinclaire allows us to see the hell experienced by the hard working immigrants and then offers an alternative in socialism. I would argue this is not a radical conclusion but the realisation that capitalism has many contradictions which leave most of the world in hellish poverty whilst those with power, using oppressive methods defend ther privilidged position.

Relentless exploitation...unfortunately polemic conclusion, 26 Oct 2000
I was staggered that such conditions existed in any industry even at the time in which the book was set. It strikes me nonetheless, that it was very much a template for the foundation of the wealth of many industrialised and economically powerful nations. Loses a star as the last section has little of the crushing narrative that raises the rest of the book to such eye watering levels.

Turning "The Jungle" back into a call for socialism, 07 Aug 2005
When I read Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" in high school I had to keep reminding myself that that novel was written in 1906, otherwise I would never be able to eat another hot dog the rest of my life. Although muckraking is a term used to describe journalistic exposes, "The Jungle" functioned much the same way by bringing instant notoriety to the American meatpacking industry. In his story of the Lithuanian immigrant Jurgis Rudkus and his family, Sinclair revealed the unsanitary, dangerous, and inhumane conditions that existed in Chicago's stockyards and meat-packing houses. When the novel was published it became front-page news across the nation and President Theodore Roosevelt invited Sinclair to the White House to discuss his book. Because of this book the sales of pre-packed meat in the United States was cut in half and the public outrage would lead to the passage of both the Pure Food and Drug Act and the Beef Inspection Act.

Originally, Sinclair's story was published serially in "The Appeal to Reason," a socialist weekly and was dedicated to "The Workingmen of America." Clearly, Sinclair intended "The Jungle" to be a clarion call to socialism and a plea for the end of wage slavery, and ultimately he was disappointed by the reaction to his novel, writing once, "I aimed at the public's heart and by accident I hit it in the stomach." In this graphic novel adaptation of "The Jungle," artist Peter Kuper and his co-writer Emily Russell (who I believe is his daughter) clearly make an effort to get back to the basics and refocus the story so that this time it hits the heart.

Originally published in 1991 as part of an attempt to revive the Classics Illustrated comic book line, Kuper uses a full-color stencil technique that suggests that particular period but anticipates, so to speak, the political art of the period before World War II. Jurgis Rudkus and the other characters are depicted with an almost doll-like quality, which eerily enhances the tragic story. Sometimes I think he looks like a clownish version of the Frankenstein monster, but I find that underscores the sense that Jurgis is up against a man-made monster in the unfettered capitalist economy that Sinclair depicts. To cut down the original novel to the 44-pages illustrated pages of this graphic novel, the mind numbing and health eroding work in the fertilizer plant is reduce to a couple of pages. This is why the focus in Kuper's version shifts from what Americans were eating to what is happening to Jurigs, as his personal tragedy becomes the heart of the story.

Consequently, I find that this graphic novel version of "The Jungle" is not so much a substitute for reading the original novel as it is an ancillary work. More than with most such adaptations, you really have to have read (and vividly remember) the original work to appreciate what Kuper and Russell have wrought here. Even if consider socialism to be outdated, unnecessary and/or offensive, you have to admit that Sinclair's novel speaks to the historic reality of what life was like for the working class at a time when that meant they were members of the lower class. At the very least, you can appreciate the grand irony that Sinclair's book did as much to forestall a socialist revolution in the United States but spurring the government to actually act on the issues he incorporated into "The Jungle."

Kuper currently illustrated "SPY vs. SPY" each month for "MAD" magazine, but his illustrations and comics have also appeared in "Time," "Newsweek," and "The New York Times." In addition to "The Jungle" he has also illustrated Sinclair's "The Jungle and Sticks and Stones," a wordless graphic novel about the rise and fall of empires, which was awarded the gold medal in the 2004 Society of Illustrators competition in the sequential arts category. He has also done a graphic novel version of "The Metamorphosis" as well as adapted several Franz Kafka short stories in "Give It Up!" So if you are looking for more literary works given the Kuper touch, then check those out as well.

Hardship of being a socialist in "the land of democracy", 20 May 2008
Upton Sinclair has a great effect on me I have to confess. After "Oil!" this is his second book and I am really impressed. Like Howard Fast he captures the ordinary life of an ordinary American worker vividly. Jimmie Higgins is a small town worker but he has a feature which haunts him till the last day of his life: he is an ardent Communist! The daily struggles of the socialists are well portrayed in the book. When the big catastrophe of World War 1 arrives, huge differences occur between the immigrant American citizen socialists. Germans side with their government, others try to realize internationalist policies by repudiating the imperialist war. Organising the workers against the bosses who struck deal with German or English arms manufacturers is a tough job. Even punishable with death! When faith or destiny plays its trick upon Jimmie Higgins he finds himself deep in the war he flatly refused to be a part of. He even manages to hold a front against invading Germans all by himself when all the French troops around himself get killed. He even meets the king himself while recuperating from his wounds. He is promoted to the rank of sergeant. The tide of the war begins to turn as the October Revolution succeeds. His regiment is transferred to a Soviet port in the north called Archangelsk. He realises that the reason for their being there is to gain a foothold and maybe become a spearhead against the Bolshevik Power. He contacts the Bolsheviks and begins to make propaganda among the soldiers against war. The ever worrying comrade Kalekin who supplies Jimmie needs not worry for he safely carries his secret...