John Steinbeck's novel The Grapes of Wrath was greeted with some critical acclaim and great popularity, but it was also the target of efforts at censorship and suppression because it told such a stark story about the Depression era and included considerable criticism of American society and government. Many responded to such criticisms by demanding action, asking that the book be banned, which it was for a time in certain places. The novelist clearly meant to provoke a response, for he actively seeks to extend his story beyond the immediate and to write with a certain journalistic flair about a real situation. While the response is not surprising in many respects, it shows a certain failure to understand the nature of free speech in a democratic society.
Authorities and librarians in places like Kansas City and Buffalo removed the book from circulation, stating as their reason its vulgar language, casual sexuality, and graphic portrayal of terrible living conditions. Collier's magazine viewed the book as Communist propaganda. In Congress, Representative Lyle Boren of Oklahoma denounced the book as "a lying, filthy manuscript" that denigrated people from Oklahoma, claiming that they were shiftless. On the other hand, Eleanor Roosevelt extolled the book as supporting the policies of her husband, and the book contributed to a movement leading to a Supreme Court decision in 1941 overturning migrant labor laws in twenty-seven states (Contemporary Literary Criticism, Vol. 59 311).
Oklahoma was not the only state that felt denigrated, for California also responded by criticizing and even banning the book, which painted a devastating portrait of the way migrants were treated once they arrived in the Golden State. The movement to ban the book started in Kansas, when the Kansas City board of Education ordered all copies removed from the city libraries. The leader of this effort claimed that the book portrayed women "living like cat...