Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

The Moon Is Down by John Steinbeck is our May 2023 Short Story/Novella Read.

This discussion will open on May 1

Beware Short Story Discussions will have Spoilers

I just started today. The opening is promising and well written. I think, this will be a good one.

It made me think of The Remains of the Day.

It was published in 1942, and Steinbeck received the Norwegian King Haakon VII Freedom Cross for it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moo...

I read this book recently. It was being discussed by friends on Goodreads. What I find amazing is the interaction of the characters. They are so polite and matter of fact although the situation is in no way polite or matter of fact.

I started this too, and agree it will be a good one. I find the matter-of-factness startling too, Lynn, but believable. Sort of a coping mechanism, perhaps. Steinbeck seems to be exploring human nature in a fascinating way here.

It has been frequently performed as a play, apparently, and reads that way. I found it helped that when the occupiers were introduced, and Steinbeck gave them each very specific traits, I noted their names and identifiers down for myself. In a play, you'd recognize them when they come back on stage, but I was liable to get them confused when reading. It has helped!

Kathleen wrote: "I started this too, and agree it will be a good one. I find the matter-of-factness startling too, Lynn, but believable. Sort of a coping mechanism, perhaps. Steinbeck seems to be exploring human na..."

I also read somewhere that during WW2 this was widely read in Europe especially by members of the military.

One thing I think makes this so compelling is that the characters are drawn realistically. They retain their humanity and never descend into caricatures. Still there were a few sections which did sound like wartime propaganda - rally the troops sentiments. Nothing sounded out of line with what the authorities of the Allied Forces might approve.

I have my copy, and I'm ready to go. Very intrigued based on your comments Lynn, Kathleen, and J BlueFlower. I often find myself taking little notes when I'm reading, and I'll definitely do that with this one based on your tip Kathleen.

Although I agree with their historical positions, there were several writers whose WWII propoganda works might not have lived up to their usual standards, like the poet Edna St. Vincent Millay's unfortunate The Murder of Lidice for instance. But I'm thinking this piece might be interesting. I'm looking forward to it!

I've read several by Steinbeck, and I'm suspecting that this one is going to be a little bit different, which will be some fun for me in discovering a new side of his work.

I have started re- reading this book and from what I remember it is a wondeful short story.
Steinbeck wrote the book as a propaganda tool to support the Allies against Hitler. as the USA had not joined the war It was rejected initially by publishers but after Pearl Harbour in 1942 the book was finially circulated but met with mixed reviews - it was thought that Steinbeck had portrayed the Nazi's too nicely
In Europe the book was banned by the Nazi's but it was circulated successfully by the underground particularly in Norway where it was thought the book was staged although Steinbeck does not state this

I read this short work last year and found it excellent. I enjoyed it so much that I wrote a poem in tribute! :)

I have only read the beginning. That part sounds like Denmark to me: Overrun in a matter of hours after sporadic fighting:

The alarm was sounded at 04:17, and the first Danish troops were dispatched at 04:35. ..... The Danish government .... formally capitulated at 08:34 in exchange for retaining political independence in domestic matters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_...

Searching I found this :
"Clues as to the location: In January, it's dark by 3pm; there are avalanches in nearby mountains".

Denmark: No mountains, sundown at around 16:00 in January.

I have finished my re read of this book and it is as good as I remembered. It was written at a time when the Nazi's seemed invincible. Steinbeck explores the relationship between the conquerers and the conquered and how the small town faces Nazi evil land betrayal from withinits own community.
Steinbeck delves into the motivations and emotions of both sides and discovers unsettling truths about war and its effect on human nature on both sides of the conflict.
Unfortunately there is not a happy ending albeit not fully disclosed - did it or did it not happen? No Spoilers!

I finished my reading of this earlier today with the audiobook read by George Guidall, who did a very good performance as usual. This was my tenth (!) book written by Steinbeck- I read a lot of his novels in the 80's and I'm still a fan- this was very good writing. At the conclusion of the audiobook story there is an essay about the history of the book also read by Guidall, which is quite interesting.
Steinbeck was actually working for the intelligence agency OSS (Office of Strategic Services) in World War 2 when he wrote this. "Homemade" translated copies, many done on old mimeograph machines, were widely circulated in occupied countries of Europe and even in China- it was probably bootlegged more than any novel in US history, but that is just what Steinbeck hoped for.
Some critics said he made the occupier officers too nice, but he evidently knew what he was doing. It was made into a US film a year after publication.
They said the title came from a line in Macbeth when Banquo asks his son "How goes the night boy?" And Fleance replies "The moon is down; I have not heard the clock." This line in the play represents evil descending on the kingdom when there is only darkness.

Kathleen wrote: "I started this too, and agree it will be a good one. I find the matter-of-factness startling too, Lynn, but believable. Sort of a coping mechanism, perhaps. Steinbeck seems to be exploring human na..."

I like this Kathleen.

I'm only on the second chapter, but it's fascinating - by focusing on the commonplace details of the hour by hour after occupation, he shows how local authorities might have fallen in as "sympathizers," even though they wouldn't have wished it. I can see how the argument Captain Col Lanser uses could sway the mayor who is clearly out of his depth: "It is your duty to protect them from harm. They will be in danger if they are rebellious." Now, I will see what happens next.

George P. wrote: "I finished my reading of this earlier today with the audiobook read by George Guidall, who did a very good performance as usual. This was my tenth (!) book written by Steinbeck- I read a lot of his..."

Great information George! I love the quotation from Shakespeare with the explanation.

Thank you to whoever nominated it. I love reading historical important fiction.

The Moon is Down was widely distributed in Denmark as illegal printing during WW2. I found a few photos of these prints:





This webpage has cover and first page of yet another illegal print:
https://anet.auction2000.online/auk/w...
It is an auction house. This copy wasn’t sold, so there is unfortunately no price on it.

George P. wrote: "...This was my tenth (!) book written by Steinbeck..."

As a reward you get to list them all in order of liking. Any chance you read A Russian Journal ?

About halfway done now - pleasantly surprised that (view spoiler)[the mayor rose to the occasion; he turned out to be a man of courage! It moved me very much when he spoke to the condemned man and told him that he wanted him to know that he wouldn't collude in the man's execution. (hide spoiler)]

Such profound simplicity and decency in the way the villagers relate to each other in this fraught moment!

It really fun to see how well the book mirror the historical development in Denmark. The Moon is Down was written in 1942, before most of these things happened:

9. april 1940: Denmark was invaded in a matter of hours.

August 1943: General Strikes in most of the country. “Adolf Hitler heard the rumor about the riots and the result was that the German authorities issued an ultimatum to the Danish government regarding, among other things, introduction of the death penalty. The government refused, after which the occupying power introduced a state of military emergency.“
https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto...

1944-1945: “The railway sabotage mainly took place in the last year of the war, in 1944 and especially 1945. The purpose here was mainly to prevent German troop transports from Norway and Denmark to the fronts to the south. Most of the railway sabotage was carried out in collaboration with the Western Allies, who not only supplied the explosives, but also sent intelligence from London about the German troop movements.”
https://danmarkshistorien.dk/vis/mate...


This one is from 1943, though.
https://www.jernbanen.dk/forum2/index...

A very clever fictional account on the difference between invading and holding.

It is something that get mentioned now and then in relation to Ukraine: Even if the Russians fully invade Ukraine they will likely not be able to hold it because the local resistance is so strong. US easily invaded Iraq; at least far easier than Russia in Ukraine, but even they could not hold the country.

A little detail: (view spoiler)[At the end the major talks on about Socrates and his possibly coming death penalty. I understand what Steinbeck is trying to do, but the analogy doesn’t work too well: The story is about how strong a democracy can be compared to a dictatorship. But Socrates was condemned to death by a democracy. (hide spoiler)]

J_BlueFlower wrote: "It really fun to see how well the book mirror the historical development in Denmark. The Moon is Down was written in 1942, before most of these things happened:

9. april 1940: Denmark was invaded ..."

So fascinating J_BlueFlower!

There is a somewhat similar French book The Silence of the Sea / Le Silence de la mer.

"Published secretly in German-occupied Paris, the book quickly became a symbol of mental resistance against German occupiers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Sile...

Some of us have also been reading The Year of Jubilo by Howard Bahr as a Buddy Read. It is about the Union Army occupying a community in Mississippi after the end of the American Civil War. There are many parallels in the stories, including the characters of Bendick and Burduck who are both reluctant commanders. So it is a good companion book, although the Bahr book is much longer. I finished The Moon is Down but haven’t quite gotten through The Year of Jubilo. I am so glad I could fit this in because it added to my appreciation of both.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "George P. wrote: "...This was my tenth (!) book written by Steinbeck..."
As a reward you get to list them all in order of liking. Any chance you read A Russian Journal ?"

I haven't read A Russian Journal. I'll tell you my 3 favorite: Grapes of Wrath, Of Mice and Men and Cannery Row.
A couple I haven't read and may read some day are In Dubious Battle or The Wayward Bus.

I really liked The Moon Is Down book. It was my first John Steinbeck book to read that doesn't describe the desperate and forlorn lives of those, especially in the agricultural Central Valley and ocean fishing communities of California and the midwest.
My favorite philosophical thread through The Moon is Down is the ongoing question of who is the conquered vs. the conquerer. The book was so influential and considered propaganda that anyone [in the Axis, not the Allies] caught with this book during WWII would be shot!
There was also a movie (found it on YouTube) made in 1943, the book was published in 1942. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0036170/
I think the movie follows the book very well, although, the ending is a bit different.

Also, for Steinbeck fans in CA, I would recommend "Steinbeck House" and "The Steinbeck Center" in Salinas, California; I just visited in April. They have a great exhibit of his most popular books, with background for inspiration and history of the times they were written. They have a great book store with almost all of his books, including some old and rare editions.

EvenB wrote: " The book was so influential and considered propaganda that anyone [in the Axis, not the Allies] caught with this book during WWII would be shot! ..."

Do you have a source for that?

That was not the case in Denmark:

In Denmark ".... it was illegal to write, reproduce and distribute illegal writings. The police issued fines. Some received short prison terms. .... After September 1944, it was the German authorities who fought the illegal press. However, it did not happen in a zealous manner, as the fight against sabotage took precedence. Possession of illegal magazines was not illegal even after September 1944."
source: https://danmarkshistorien.dk/vis/mate...

I doubt Norway would be much different.

BTW It is liberation day today. Exactly 78 years since English troops liberated most of Denmark. Bornholm was later liberated by Russian troops.

My book cover states "In Fascist Italy, mere possession of a copy of the book was punishable by death," so maybe your information was referring to that, EvenB?

I also liked the conquered versus conqueror theme, particularly the line "Flies conquer the flypaper."

And happy liberation day to Denmark! My uncle was killed in WWII, and is buried in the Netherlands American cemetery, so I feel a small connection to our story.

Perhaps this quote in the introduction in my copy helps explain why punishments were laxer in Denmark and some other occupied countries:

"At the time, Nazis regarded Denmark as a 'model protectorate' and were eager to mollify its citizenry. Staffeldt turned that attitude to his advantage. On several occasions when loyal Danish students came to his bookstore to pick up disguised bundles of The Moon is Down and other forbidden titles for delivery to various distribution centers, Staffeldt stepped out of his store, summoned passing Gestapo officers, and enlisted their aid in loading the anti-Nazi literature. 'Don't just stand there,' he would scold; 'help these kids!' The enemy's secret police invariably responded by scrambling about in unwitting service to the Danish resistance."

This thing with the bookseller brazenly fooling the Gestapo officers is really surprising! And the fact that the officers were willing to help the bookseller deliver his books says a lot about the the Germans' eagerness to preserve calm there.

Kathleen wrote: "My book cover states "In Fascist Italy, mere possession of a copy of the book was punishable by death," so maybe your information was referring to that, EvenB?

I also liked the conquered versus co..."

Yes, I read the book cover about being "punishable by death" if in possession of the book and how it was considered propaganda. I think it was also in the introduction of the edition I read. Although, I have passed my copy on to a friend, so I can't confirm that.

Greg, that is a very interesting quote from the intro. It doesn’t seem to be in line with what we know typical Nazi treatment to be. But, possibly it is less horrific due to the fact that Denmark had been conquered? Does anyone know if other cities such as Paris were given such lenient treatment once conquered? It doesn’t seem likely. But I am no expert here. I just like to understand the why.

I have finished chapter 2 and see what the niceness of the soldiers is all about. I thought Steinbeck did a marvelous job of giving each person a unique persona and showing those qualities throughout their actions. I can certainly understand Col Lanser’s issue of “I’m tired of people who have not been at war who know all about it.”
Like Correl trying to tell him what’s best for him to do instead of Correl doing what he’s told.
And the part about defeat was poignant. Defeat is only momentary and doesn’t last.

Lori wrote: "Greg, that is a very interesting quote from the intro. It doesn’t seem to be in line with what we know typical Nazi treatment to be. But, possibly it is less horrific due to the fact that Denmark h..."

I was shocked as well; it's such a different depiction than what I'm used to.

Glad to have finally read this. I imagine who was in charge of the conquering army made all the difference. If Loft had been in control instead of Lanser, I believe the punishments would have been handed out more frequently and much less reluctantly. Lanser would have liked to have avoided the very situation that his conquering army created. Every town must have differed a bit, but in the end, as in the end of this story, the soldiers were trapped, just as the citizens were, in the inevitable struggle.

The most despicable characters, to me, are always the traitors. I would have hated Corell much more than Lanser if I had been a citizen of this town.

Sara wrote: "Glad to have finally read this. I imagine who was in charge of the conquering army made all the difference. If Loft had been in control instead of Lanser, I believe the punishments would have been ..."

That's true Sara, but it's still so different than other depictions!

I imagine a lot might have had to do with how many people in a particular population the Nazis considered racially, religiously, sexually, morally, or politically undesirable? Separating and extracting those people for camps must have been massively traumatic for the whole population where they undertook it and probably destroyed any semblance of preserving calm. In smaller homogenous towns like the one in The Moon Is Down, there might not have been as much cause for the sorts of events in Fugitive Pieces, The Book Thief, and numerous other depictions.

The person in charge would have had a huge impact, but I imagine the latitude that even they could exercise in what to do (or not to do) would've been far from infinite.

Absolutely. I did not mean to imply otherwise, only that Steinbeck had portrayed a reluctant Colonel, while most of the Nazi's were anything but reluctant. It also would have made a major difference to have a more homogenized population. While horrible in every instance, what actually happened in places like Norway differed greatly from what happened in places like Poland.

Sara wrote: "Absolutely. I did not mean to imply otherwise, only that Steinbeck had portrayed a reluctant Colonel, while most of the Nazi's were anything but reluctant. It also would have made a major differenc..."

Makes sense Sara.

And I do like that Steinbeck portrayed a reluctant, intelligent German officer. I'm sure that just as in many conflicts, a number of combatants are reluctant or at least deeply ambivalent.

Acknowledging that lifts the story above propaganda. Sure, it worked as propaganda, but it also approaches some human truths as well. And I feel like human truths are often what touch the heart most deeply because we recognize them.

It is easy to see a war from only the one side, and particularly a war such as this one, when so many seemed to be both enthusiastic and eager to commit atrocities that the rest of us can barely endure reading about. Yet there are always many soldiers who hate what they are doing, fight horrific battles and only want to go home to their families and peace. It was so interesting to me to read All Quiet on the Western Front and see WW1 from the viewpoint of an ordinary German soldier.

What Steinbeck did here was much more likely to sway uncommitted people than a painting of every German as Snidely Whiplash would have done, and I think this was widely distributed to people under attack to encourage them to be strong and to resist. Also, we need to remember this was written in 1942, much of the horror being done was not common knowledge, although the British did warn about what was happening as early as June 1942.

Propaganda has such a negative connotation, as if you were trying to make people believe what isn't really true....I know this is classified as propaganda, but I think this was more a revelation, since Steinbeck had been serving as a journalist and had met many refugees fleeing occupied territories. If anything, this piece softened things rather than exaggerating them. Makes me very sad to think we knew about the concentration camps by mid 1942 and it was 1944 before we officially condemned them. Think how many perished in that two year period.

Sara wrote: "Absolutely. I did not mean to imply otherwise, only that Steinbeck had portrayed a reluctant Colonel, while most of the Nazi's were anything but reluctant. It also would have made a major differenc..."

I also think we are seeing the mere beginnings of an occupation in this book. There was a hint that things would only deteriorate over time as both the conquerors and the conquered became more worn down.

Good point, Lynn. After the end, it is guaranteed that things will only deteriorate.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "George P. wrote: "...This was my tenth (!) book written by Steinbeck..."

As a reward you get to list them all in order of liking. Any chance you read A Russian Journal ?"

I have read A Russian Journal! I checked out the audiobook from my library and loved it. I also picked up an electronic copy, so as to be able to look at the photographs by Robert Capa. Here's an article with the photos, one of which is a striking photo of Steinbeck:
https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-cul...

**
I found a thesis on The Moon Is Down online on the University of Oslo library website. The author, Merete Ruud, suggests that in Europe, the book was read as being set in Norway:
"Though the country described in the novel is nameless, it has at all times been read as a portrait of Norway in 1940. To illustrate that, as well as hint at the novel's continued relevance, we need just look at two examples, 60 years apart: one of the many illegal Danish editions, from 1944, Maanen har gaaet ned, is subtitled roman fra felttoget i Norge (8), whereas a 2004 article, “Iraq: the moon is down, again!”, takes as its starting point the “story of a German invasion of a small town in Norway in 1940” to illustrate its points about “the integral interaction between occupiers and those being occupied” in relation to the American involvement in Iraq."

The thesis also suggests -- this makes perfect sense! -- that the various translations differed: "In the clandestine Norwegian edition, as will be demonstrated below, choices are made that aid the explicature – “the inference or series of inferences that enrich the under-determined form produced by the speaker to a full propositional form" – through choosing “overly Norwegian” solutions over more neutral expressions where both could be said to be acceptable."

https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/hand...

JenniferAustin wrote: " one of the many illegal Danish editions, from 1944, Maanen har gaaet ned"

That title is not Danish. It sounds Swedish. (It could be Norwegian, though, I am not sure.) The Danish title was "Maanen er skjult". There may have been another title from another translation, but it would have been in Danish.

Location: It says directly in the story that it is it's dark by 3pm in January. It is also a town occupied by the Germans, so it must be Norway. I don't think Steinbeck intended it to be somewhere specific.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "JenniferAustin wrote: " one of the many illegal Danish editions, from 1944, Maanen har gaaet ned"

That title is not Danish. It sounds Swedish. (It could be Norwegian, though, I am not sure.) The D..."

Interesting!

I got curious about this. It looks as if there were indeed two Danish translations in circulation, in quite a few editions.

For anyone else curious about the history, John Steinbeck As Propagandist: The Moon is Down Goes to War by Donald V. Coers (author of the introduction to the current Penguin edition) is short and an interesting discussion.
https://archive.org/details/johnstein... (see especially pages 78-82).

The Royal Danish Library catalog does describe Maanen er gaaet ned : Roman as being in Danish
https://soeg.kb.dk/discovery/fulldisp...

... and offers a digitized copy. (Is it indeed Danish?)
https://www.kb.dk/e-mat/dod/130020169...

Coers notes 3 editions of Maanen er gaaet ned, in contrast to "at least sixteen" of Maanen er skjult. Perhaps fewer editions because the translation was odd?

It does sound in Coers as if translation and publication during the war was much, much less controlled!

J_BlueFlower wrote: "JenniferAustin wrote: " one of the many illegal Danish editions, from 1944, Maanen har gaaet ned"

That title is not Danish. It sounds Swedish. (It could be Norwegian, though, I am not sure.) The D..."

I also thought Norway. I somehow got the idea from the fishing and the fish in the diet.

JenniferAustin wrote: "J_BlueFlower wrote: "JenniferAustin wrote: " one of the many illegal Danish editions, from 1944, Maanen har gaaet ned"

That title is not Danish. It sounds Swedish. (It could be Norwegian, though, ..."

The PDF in the link is in Danish. Maanen er gaaet ned, is Danish. Maanen har gaaet ned, is not.

I read a bit here and there of the PDF and it seemed an OK translation. The paper must have been super thin. You see the letters of the next page too

I can see the appeal for the European readers. I like that Steinbeck gave this a somewhat generic location and tone. It reminded me of WWaiting for the Barbarians J.M. Coetzee in that universal style. I find the book more propaganda than literature but enjoyable propaganda.

Sam wrote: " I find the book more propaganda than literature but enjoyable propaganda..."

I finished and I too found it to be very enjoyable propaganda, which Steinbeck intended it to be. However, I have found much of the better Steinbeck to be propaganda, albeit social rather than political propaganda. I'm mainly thinking of two of my favorites, The Grapes of Wrath and In Dubious Battle. All three of these Steinbecks work well primarily because they just tell a good story with well-written characters. This novella succeeds with me primarily because of its more nuanced portrayal of the German occupying officers, which is the same aspect that some of the books critics, such as James Thurber, cite as reasons why it made for poor propaganda. While I can't really evaluate this work's effectiveness as propaganda, I thought it made for a compelling and entertaining fictional story; so even if ineffective propaganda, it's enjoyable propaganda. I do note, though, that the stories about how and where the book was read during the war appear to support its effectiveness as propaganda..

My review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

I agree with others - a great story. I love John Steinbeck's novels. This one too.

And thank you, George P., for the quotation from Shakespeare!

Hmmmm, The Grapes of Wrath was last read in 2017....

I decided to download this from my digital library because this is such a great discussion, and I am a fan of John Steinbeck (my favorites being The Grapes of Wrath which is tied with East of Eden at the top of the list). The introduction in my copy, which has been referred to I think in other posts, did mention that Steinbeck originally wrote the story located in small town in America. The publisher didn't think it would be successful with an American focus, and so had Steinbeck take out all references to specific geographical location. After that, each invaded town in Europe felt they were the subject of the plot, but most particularly it seems Norway took it to heart.

On another note, I think the definition of "propaganda" has been sabotaged a little since the 1950s, the "red scare" and McCarthyism. Since then it has been interpreted as lies and misleading mis-information to fool and manipulate people, probably politically. But that's not its history, and my feeling was that it was meant to persuade, and that in fact we all dabble in a little propaganda because we tend to want people to share our point of view, so we present persuasive conversation and communication. I never thought it necessarily had to do with deception. Here's the Merriam-Webster definition. The second and tertiary definitions are along the lines of persuasion, and not necessarily political deception, although it can be that too...

1
capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions
2
: the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3
: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause
also : a public action having such an effect

Such an interesting point, Janice. Reading the definitions, it seems we lately use this word only to mean "injuring" and "damaging" rather than the positive side.

Janice (JG) wrote: "I decided to download this from my digital library because this is such a great discussion, and I am a fan of John Steinbeck (my favorites being The Grapes of Wrath which is tied wi..."

I agree that definitions are slippery things. I always think of propaganda as words used to persuade.

I was pretty impressed by this book. The writing was very good. The story was thoughtful and engaging all the way through. Certainly the way the story plays out is a bit of a fantasy, even though it doesn't have a happy ending: I would expect that the repression techniques of the invading force would quell a lot more of the resistance in reality. But that doesn't affect my appreciation for the book. I was glad that the invading officer who got the most attention was portrayed as reluctant, and having a clear understanding; I think this decision helped to make this a more thoughtful, somewhat philosophical story.

I have only read one Steinbeck before, and that was many years ago. I really enjoyed the writing in this book, and feel more inspired to try some of his others.

Wobbley wrote: "Certainly the way the story plays out is a bit of a fantasy..."

Try read message #17.