>Sinclair’s novel alerted consumers to the barbarity of meatpacking plants.

That wasn't his intention. Sinclair was a socialist; he was trying to show the barbarity of capitalism, the corruption and abuses that are inherent in such a system. Sinclair opposed the legislation on the grounds that the taxpayers and small meatpacking companies would bear most of the burden for it, while it served as a boon for the larger corporations who could more easily comply with it. (Socialists in the 19th century actually cared about things like that back then.)

Uncle Tom's Cabin was boosted by the northeastern industrial elites as a means of stirring up agitation against agrarian southerners, while convincing them that their own form of slavery, wage slavery, might not be so bad in comparison. It was the Handmaiden's Tale of its era.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/lit/

Thread:

What happened to novels sparking social change?