Of “De-Vyled Ham”And Ddt: A Comparison Of The Causes, Effects, And Legacy Of Upton SinclairS The Jungle And Rachel CarsonS Silent SpringEssay Preview: Of “De-Vyled Ham”And Ddt: A Comparison Of The Causes, Effects, And Legacy Of Upton SinclairS The Jungle And Rachel CarsonS Silent Spring
Report this essayOf “De-vyled Ham”and DDT: A Comparison of the Causes, Effects, and Legacy of Upton Sinclairs The Jungle and Rachel Carsons Silent SpringPeriod 2Maxwell Wang1906 would see the publication of Upton Sinclairs The Jungle, pushing through major reforms of the meatpacking industry and eventually causing the government to take actions to protect the health of its people; almost fifty years later, the publication of Rachel Carsons novel Silent Spring would invoke a similar, but changed response to the threat of DDT. Although both would lead to government legislation creating major changes, the original intentions of the authors themselves differed, as well as their satisfaction of the results. However, both still leave a legacy for today, as legislation still stands that reflects the widespread reform that ensued. Both Silent Spring and The Jungle, would have wide reaching influences, but with different motivations and different goals in mind.
Although Silent Spring and The Jungle would both create similar reforms, their authors would have much different motivations for writing them. Rachel Carson, before publishing Silent Spring, would major in marine zoology at Pennsylvania Womens College, where she would develop her interest in the naturalism and conservation going on at the time (Lear, 23). After graduating, she would take a job at the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, where she would write about different issues concerning the environment at the time. After writing several books to some success, she would begin work on Silent Spring, as it she would find her naturalist causes to be her impetus. She even later on in her life write to her friends, What I discovered was that everything which meant most to me as a naturalist was being threatened, and that nothing I could do would be more important.”(Carson, 17) On the contrary, however, Sinclair would not find his motivations from personal experience or interest, but rather from a commission to write about the immigrant workers in the meatpacking business from the Intercollegiate Socialist Society. Unlike Carson, who would find her naturalist roots to be her driving force, Sinclairs reasons for publishing his groundbreaking work would stem from his ties to the Socialist Party, rather than the actual material itself being covered. Sinclair would even go as to say that he had come to “write the Uncle Toms Cabin of the Labor movement”(Arthur, 124) Carson and Sinclair would differ greatly on the subject of cause and motivation for their novels, regardless of the similar sized conflict and controversy.
Both Upton Sinclair and Rachel Carson would initially find their books to be extremely difficult to be published. An early version of the Jungle titled An Appeal to Reason would be rejected five times before becoming a bestseller(Young, 467). Carson would face similar trials with her publisher, Houghton Mifflin, which was tempted to suppress the novel after complaints in the news and by major corporations(McLauglin, 2). Both novels in this aspect would face similar treatment after being discouraged from publishing by publishing companies and the public, citing the controversial material as the reason. Even though the material was very different, both Sinclair and Carson would draw similar criticisms for their novels before publication.
But as the novels would still be successfully published, the different public opinion of the two novels would be in completely different aspects of the writing themselves. After reading Upton Sinclairs social commentary and support of Socialism, the American reader would zone in on approximately four pages of writing discussing the meat factories themselves in the early chapters of the Jungle. Sinclair would write;
“[T]he meat would be shoveled into carts, and the man who did the shoveling would not trouble to lift out a rat even when he saw one–there were things that went into the sausage in comparison with which a poisoned rat was a tidbit. There was no place for the men to wash their hands before they ate their dinner, and so they made a practice of washing them in the water that was to be ladled into the sausage.” (Sinclair, 78)
Sinclair would romanticize the poor conditions of the background in which he would set his tale of social crimes against immigrants and the poor in the meatpacking business, which would eventually be drowned out over outrage to his depiction of the meatpacking facilities at the time. Also, Sinclair would not openly criticize the meatpacking business, only depict it in an unfavorable light. On the other hand, however, Carson would write directly and openly about the inverse effects of DDT on the environment, and use them as her focus. She would write;
“These sprays, dusts, and aerosols are now applied almost universally to farms, gardens, forests, and homes — nonselective chemicals that have the power to kill every insect, the “good” and the “bad,” to still the song of birds and the leaping of fish in the streams, to coat the leaves with a deadly film, and to linger on in soil — all this though the intended target may be only a few weeds or insects. Can anyone believe it is possible to lay down such a barrage of poisons on the surface of the earth without making it unfit for all life? They should not be called “insecticides,” but “biocides.”(Carson, 64)
Carson would take an extremely bold approach to dealing with her problems by stating directly the inverse effects of DDT, whereas Sinclair would only depict the meatpacking industry for a brief few pages in a descriptive flurry. The two authors would be most debated at different points rather than at the same level.
Also, Sinclairs novel, which would be classified as historical fiction, would be treated as extremely creditable, whereas Silent Spring would be highly discredited and disputed after publication. Large corporations manufacturing DDT at the time such as Monsanto, Velsicol, and American Cyanamid would dispute and threat lawsuits against Carson, stating she was disclaiming DDT as a product and basing her studies on inconclusive evidence(Lear, 227). However, the Jungle would be extremely well reviewed, even though it would be considered historical fiction, and not actual scientific material like Silent Spring, much less with documented proof. However, it would spark massive riots against the American meatpacking industry, which itself would not turn to fight Sinclair
Though the American Meatpacking Company was clearly an agrarian business, as a result, that company’s owners would see firsthand the impact that DDT could have if the U.S. government enacted laws to deny it. The Jungle was also seen as an example of how a company’s position when faced with changing financial realities could be seriously damaged by new legislation and policies that put it further and further backwards. ————————————————————————— [2] U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Research Council, Food Safety and the Environment Section
RAW Paste Data
PERSONS FOR RESEARCH: Dr., Steve. (Jan, 1998) A review of the history of the chemical industry in the United States. Dr. Trenberth S. Janssen, Assistant Professor of Engineering, Environmental Science, Brown University, who took over the Department of Public Health at Brown University in 1995 to help in the creation of the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and who was also co-author on an article that was developed and published in a newspaper that was published in 1998 and is reprinted here, says: While many have observed that since 1978 the major US chemical companies have engaged in an ongoing war to control or control our drinking water, this “war on poisons” is a matter in progress which has become increasingly apparent for them in order to maintain or maintain their monopoly on the supply of toxins. Many of these firms want to turn our rivers, lakes and oceans into toxic waste dumps that the EPA and other governmental authorities will continue to attempt to eradicate. However, one thing that they’ve gained over decades of government efforts has been their direct and systematic opposition to scientific knowledge and of their own companies’ position on this issue. The fact that there have been years of political battles in Congress, such as the one which led several years ago to the passage of House Bill 914, which was signed into law by the president, has demonstrated that American people have been very willing to allow them to continue making the kinds of claims that they do now. The American people clearly have taken notice of the public’s refusal to accept these claims. There is no doubt that the majority of Americans, as well as a large number of scientists, have a long-standing mistrust of the science industry. The more we get exposed to these claims the greater the pressure is on regulators in Washington. And to that end, Congress has been more than willing to ignore these claims of opposition as well. It will not be because of political considerations but from the broader culture of American society. Most prominently, there is no question about the fact that the public is still largely unaware of the serious scientific and technological problems in the United States. We continue to learn a lot to not only from our education, as well as our government and regulatory bodies from having a public health education and also we are taught that a healthy dose of information is provided to the public. But the truth is we have not yet gotten to the point where there is a clear scientific link between DDT and cancer. It appears that no one knows what the link is between DDT and cancer even