T1 112008112 Full text
THE UNSUCCESSFUL CLASS STRUGGLE AS REPRESENTED BY KINO’S
EXPERIENCE IN JOHN STEINBECK’S “THE PEARL”
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Rut Arsari Christy
112008112
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2013
THE UNSUCCESSFUL CLASS STRUGGLE AS REPRESENTED BY KINO’S
EXPERIENCE IN JOHN STEINBECK’S “THE PEARL”
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Rut Arsari Christy
112008112
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2013
ii
iii
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any courses or
accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my
knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by any
other person except where due reference is made in the text.
Copyright@2013. Rut Arsari Christy and Lany Kristono, M. Hum
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the
permission of at least the copyright owners or the English Department, Faculty of Language
and Literature, Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga.
Rut Arsari Christy:
iv
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION
As a member of the (SWCU) Satya Wacana Christian University academic community, I
verify that:
Name
: Rut Arsari Christy
Student ID Number
: 112008112
Study Program
: English Education
Faculty
: Faculty of Language and Literature
Kind of Work
: Undergraduate Thesis
in developing my knowledge, I agree to provide SWCU with a non-exclusive royalty free
right for my intellectual property and the contents therein entitled:
The Unsuccessful Class Struggle as Represented by Kino’s Experience in John
Steinbeck’s The Pearl.
along with any pertinent equipment.
With this non-exclusive royalty free right, SWCU maintains the right to copy, reproduce,
print, publish, post, display, incorporate, store in or scan into a retrieval system or database,
transmit, broadcast, barter or sell my intellectual property, in whole or in part without my
express written permission, as long as my name is still included as the writer.
This declaration is made according to the best of my knowledge.
Made in
: Salatiga
Date
:
Verrified by signee,
Rut Arsari Christy
Approved by
Thesis Supervisor
Thesis Examiner
Lany Kristono, M. Hum
Purwanti Kusumaningtyas, M. Hum
v
THE UNSUCCESSFUL CLASS STRUGGLE AS REPRESENTED BY KINO’S
EXPERIENCE IN JOHN STEINBECK’S “THE PEARL”
Rut Arsari Christy
ABSTRACT
Anyone who gets a fortune will most probably be rich. However, The Pearl, depicts Kino, a
pearl hunter who found a fortune; i.e. the biggest pearl ever, to remain poor. Kino should be
able to have a better life because if he sells the pearl, he will get a lot of money. Therefore, it
is quite surprising that Kino and his family are depicted to remain poor at the end of the story.
Since The Pearl doesn‟t portray an economically homogenous society, such a society fits
Marxist ideas, which divides a society into two big groups, i. e. the rich and the poor. The
study tries to find out why Kino failed to improve his life although he had already owned the
biggest pearl ever. The finding of this research is to explain about the facts of class struggle.
Through this research, it will be known that one‟s success is not only determined by
individual efforts, but also by external forces. A society may not support a lower class‟s
struggle to go to the higher class, and that individual attempts to fight against the domination
of the powerful group will be mostly useless.
Keywords: class struggle, oppression
INTRODUCTION
People often argue that money is the root of all evils. However, in reality,
everyone needs money to survive so that people make much effort to get money. Many
people even value and; thus, pursue wealth. Generally, there are several ways to gain wealth;
first, the person inherits a fortune from his/ her family. Second, that person has a good job
that enables him/ her to earn a lot of money. Third, he/ she gets a lottery or fortune.
However, those ways are not absolute. Take for example, most Papuans still live
in poverty although they inherit the biggest gold mine in the world. Ponco and Alam wrote in
Kompas.com, that the Papuan local governments don‟t have any stocks of Freeport. Since the
gold mine is not managed by the Papuan government, the Papuan can‟t enjoy their own
natural resources. They can not claim that the product belongs to them, because the gold mine
is managed by foreign company. The Papuans are only the workers; they work for the foreign
company that manages the gold mine. Despite its valuable natural resources, the province
remains one of the most left-behind in Indonesia. This condition is similar with Marx
explanation about "alienation" in his 1844 essay:
“The worker becomes poorer the more wealth he produces, the more his
production increases in power and extent. The worker becomes an ever cheaper
commodity the more commodities he produces ... the object that labour
produces, its product, stands opposed to it as something alien, as a power
independent of the producer.”
The Papuans are controlled by the foreign company by working in Freeport. The more
products they produce, the wealthier the people who manage the company. So, the one who
gets benefit from the gold mine is the company.
The facts about Papua reminded the researcher of what happened to Kino, the
protagonist of John Steinbeck‟s novel, The Pearl. As a pearl hunter who found a fortune; i.e.
the biggest pearl ever, Kino should be able to have a better life because if he sells the pearl,
he will get a lot of money. Therefore, it is quite surprising that Kino and his family are
depicted to remain poor at the end of the story. Therefore the researcher would like to find
out why Kino failed to improve his life although he had already owned the biggest pearl ever.
In other words, this research would aim to analyze the reasons behind Kino‟s failure in
getting a better life.
It is written in the novel that there are two different groups of society; people who
lives in the brush houses and people who live in the city of stone. People who live in the
brush houses are the poor pearl hunters, while people who live in the city of stone are the rich.
It shows that the novel doesn‟t depict an economically homogenous society. Such a society
fits Marxist ideas, which divides a society into “the have” and “the have not”. As Tyson
wrote, “…between the “haves” and the “have- not” between the bourgeoisie…- and the
proletariat (54). Therefore, Marxism would be an appropriate tool to analyze the novel.
2
Society in Marxist Perspective
Marxists divide a society into two big categories; i. e. the poor (proletariat) and
the rich (bourgeoisie) (Tyson 54), and Marxism tries to explain the relationship between the
poor and the rich. Implied in the existence of a class-divided society is an unequal power
relationship represented by the dominating and dominated groups. As Bressler says, “…A
Marxist approach seeks to oppose the dominant class, to demonstrate how the bourgeoisie‟s
ideology controls and oppresses the working class, and to highlight the elements of society
most affected by such oppression.” (221).
Marxism exists to reveal the ideology that is made by the dominant class. If
ideology is made by the dominant class, it means that the dominant class controls the
dominated class people under their control by using the ideology. Because of the control of
the dominant class to the dominated class, there is a conflict between them. As Bressler‟s
states,”…there‟s an ongoing conflict between social classes, it is caused by various ways the
members of society work and use their economic resources.” (219).
Marxist view sees that the root of the class conflict is economic differences,
which divides the society into two economic- based poles.
Class Struggle
According to Fulton, class struggle is, “….the economic fight for the
improvement of the position of the workers and the political one for the extension of the
rights of the people” (89). In other words, it is the economic struggle of the working class
people to get better economic condition as well as political power, so that they can get a
better life. Marx explains that the proletariats live by working for the bourgeoisie. Being the
employers, the bourgeoisie is the one who decides the wage. Based on Marx statement, the
3
researcher makes a conclusion that the bourgeoisie defines how much money the proletariat
gets. As a result, the proletariat will not earn more than the bourgeoisie, because the
proletariats are just employees. Because of the control of the wage from the bourgeoisie,
there is a class struggle from the proletariat.
Another reason why a class struggle happens is proposed by Marx and Engels. In
The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels state that the lower and middle class fight
against the bourgeoisie to save their existence as fractions of the middle class from extinction
(19). Implied is the proletariat is not consent with their life as it is. They strive not only for a
better life, but also for their position in the society. Marx says that the dominant class controls
the working class economically, but there is another way of the dominant class controlling
the working class, which is through ideology.
Ideology
Ideology is a conscious instead of unconscious process. People are aware of
the notion of ideology; and they realize that it is bad or good. However, their awareness is a
“false consciousness”. As Engels maintains:
“Ideology is a process accomplished by the so- called thinker,
consciously indeed but with a false consciousness. The real motives impelling
him remain unknown to him, otherwise it would not be an ideological process at
all. Hence he imagines false or apparent motives. Because it is a process of
thought he derives both its form and its content from pure thought, either his
own or that of his predecessors.” (qtd. in Williams 65).
Similarly, Storey explains ideology as a false consciousness by using holiday or
Christmas celebration as an example. The working class people think that holiday is the time
for relaxing and releasing their burden. However, actually it is to make them refreshed so that
when they get back to work they will work harder and ready for being oppressed again (5).
4
Althusser defines ideology as a system (possessing its logic and proper rigour) of
representations (images, myths, ideas or concepts according to the case) endowed with an
existence and an historical role at the heart of a given society (qtd. in Barry 163). Similarly,
Tyson explains that ideology is a belief system, and all belief systems are products of cultural
conditioning (56). Therefore, as Althusser and Tyson argue, ideology includes ideas, belief
system, and culture. Althusser also maintains that:
“Ideology expresses a will, a hope or nostalgia, rather than describing a
reality, it is fundamentally a matter of fearing and denouncing, referencing and
reviling, all of which then sometimes gets coded into a discourse which look as
though it is describing the way things actually are.” (qtd. in Williams19).
Althusser proposed another meaning of ideology; i. e. a representation of the
imaginary relationship of individuals to the real conditions of existence. Ideology is no longer
seen as body of ideas, but as a lived, material practice – rituals, customs, patterns of behavior,
ways of thinking taking practical form – reproduced through the practices and productions of
the ISAs (Ideological State Apparatuses) (Storey 117).
The bourgeoisie‟s domination as reflected in their creating a hegemony, which
represents how their supremacy is accepted without any physical force. However, the
bourgeoisie also use physical force to make the proletariat obeys the bourgeoisie. The
bourgeoisie has some apparatuses that work by force to make the proletariat obeys the
bourgeoisie. Althusser called it Repressive State Apparatus (RSA) (Wolff 225).
Hegemony
It was in the Prison Notebooks that Gramsci developed the concept of hegemony
(qtd in Litowitzaq 4):
“to describe a condition in which the supremacy of a social group is
achieved not only by physical force (which Gramsci called “domination” or
“command”) but also through consensual submission of the very people who
5
were dominated (a phenomenon that Gramsci variously called “leadership,”
“direction,” or “hegemony”)”.
The words “through consensual submission” here means that the lower class
people become submissive to the dominant class people without being forced. The lower
class people willingly obey the dominant class people.
Gramsci argues:
“hegemony is a concept which at once includes and goes beyond two
powerful earlier concepts: „culture‟ as a „whole social process‟…‟ideology‟…in
which a system of meanings and values is the expression or projection of a
particular class interest.” (qtd. in Williams 108).
It can be said that hegemony can‟t be separated from culture and ideology. There
are many ideologies inside one particular culture or ideologies live inside a culture. Usually,
people don‟t realize that they are controlled by the ideologies inside the culture. Therefore,
without realizing it and; thus, without being forced, the lower class people are already led by
the dominant class people. In other words, hegemony implies the lower class‟ willingness to
obey the dominant class. To maintain ideology and hegemony in the society, the oppressors
need apparatuses. Althusser proposes another terms which are Repressive State Apparatus
(RSA) and Ideological State Apparatus (ISA) (Wolff: 224).
Repressive State Apparatus (RSA) and Ideological State Apparatus (ISA) by Althusser
Althusser argues that certain ideologies and their apparatuses supported the class
structure of capitalist societies (Wolff 224). Althusser distinguished between two sets of
apparatuses. The first was political and comprised the state and most of its various activities
and branches: the Repressive State Apparatus (RSA) (Wolf 225). Second is:
“… a different set of apparatuses - much less well examined or
understood in the Marxist tradition – played a parallel role in sustaining
capitalist class structures.” He named that set the Ideological State Apparatus
(ISA). The RSA worked mostly by force; while ISA works mostly by ideology
(Wolff 225).
6
The RSA maintained and wielded a monopoly of the means of force in capitalist
societies and applied that monopoly to support capitalist class structures (Wolff 225). By
repressing the threats to capitalist class structures that it recognized, the state‟s branches,
activities, and officials constituted a repressive state apparatus. The apparatuses that can be
considered as RSA are government, administration, court, prisons, police and army (Cole 30).
Althusser includes among ISAs the schools, the family, religions, and religious
institution, and the mass media. These worked less by power and politics and more by
ideology (qtd. in Wolff 225). They inculcated children and adults with specific ways of
imagining- thinking about and thus understanding- their places within and relationship to the
societies within which they lived (Wolff 225) so that they would think in specific ways and
act according to the ideologies.
DISCUSSION
The Society in The Pearl
As Tyson maintains that Marxists divide the society into the poor and the rich
(54), The Pearl also describes these two economically contrasting groups in the society. The
poor is represented by Kino and the other pearl hunters; whereas the rich is represented by the
pearl buyers, the doctor, and the priest. The story depicts a society by a big economy gap.
“They came to the place where the brush houses stopped and the city of
stone and plaster began…” (Steinbeck 10)
The writer of the novel uses the word “place where the brush houses stopped” and “city”.
From these words, the writer of the novel already told the reader that the poor and the rich
don‟t belong to each other. The rich live in the city, and the poor live somewhere not in the
7
city. The passage above emphasizes that the poor and the rich live in a completely different
place.
The two classes, which are the poor and the rich, are also portrayed differently.
The big differences are represented by their houses, their properties, and their food.
The first difference between the poor and the rich is reflected in the physical look
of their houses, the place where they live.
“They came to the place where the brush houses stopped and the city of
stone and plaster began, the city of harsh outer walls and inner cool gardens where
a little water played and the bougainvillea crusted the walls with purple and brickred and white.” (Steinbeck 10)
The paragraph above reflects the definition of “the haves and the have not”. The poor (Kino
and other pearl hunters) live in the brush houses that are made of brush, simple materials, and
don‟t require much money to build. On the other side, the rich live inside the stone walls.
They even have beautiful gardens that decorated with colorful flower. The stone wall houses
show that the owners are rich people.
The second difference between the poor and the rich is reflected in their
properties. The poor almost doesn‟t have any valuable thing. For Kino and his family, the
most valuable thing he has is his canoe.
“Kino and Juana came slowly down to the beach and to Kino‟s canoe,
which was the one thing of value he owned in the world. It was very old. Kino‟s
grandfather had bought it from Nayarit, and he had given it to Kino‟s father, and
so it had come to Kino.” (Steinbeck 19)
“…It was at once property and source of food, for a man with boat can
guarantee a woman that she will eat something. It is the bulwark against
starvation.” (Steinbeck 19)
The canoe isn‟t originally Kino‟s. It is a legacy from his grandfather. Even though it is old, he
still uses it and treasures it, because he doesn‟t have anything valuable other than the canoe.
Kino can‟t afford to buy a new canoe, because it will cost much money.
8
The canoe is not only property for Kino, but also the source of food, particularly
because he is a pearl hunter. As Marx and Engels proposed in The Communist Manifesto, the
lower class people struggle to maintain their lives in the society (19). If by any chance Kino
loses the canoe, he will not be able to feed his family or in other words he can‟t maintain his
life and his family‟s.
The canoe seems to be the most valuable goods for not only Kino, but also his
grandfather and his father, who were all pearl hunters, because it is the only thing mentioned
have been inherited from generation to generation. It means that they have been poor people
for generations. They can‟t have a better job, because they don‟t have other skill and
knowledge. They only know how to find a pearl in the sea.
Kino doesn‟t have any expensive goods in his house. He didn‟t have a bed, only a
mat for him and his wife to sleep, and a hanging box for his child.
“Kino‟s eyes opened… he looked at the hanging box where Coyoti slept.
And last he turned his head to Juana, his wife, who lay beside him on the
mat…” (Steinbeck 1)
The last difference between bourgeoisie and the proletariat in this novel is reflected in the
food they eat.
“Kino squatted by the fire pit and rolled a hot corncake and dipped it in
sauce and ate it. And he drank a little pulque and that was the breakfast. That
was the only breakfast he had ever known….” (Steinbeck 5).
Kino is described to eat a hot corncake and a little pulque (a fermented milky drink made
from the juice of certain species of agave in Mexico) all his life. From Wikipedia, one of the
sites in the internet, it is explained that agave is certain of plant that similar to aloe. It has
nectar and pulque is made of the agave nectar. The Mexican people already made it for
generations. If it is compared with milk, pulque is not a healthy drink. It contains alcohol, and
9
the taste is sour yeast-like taste. That is the only breakfast that he knows or he can eat. It
shows that he is really poor that can‟t afford to buy more nutritious food.
Kino‟s condition is really different with the doctor‟s; which is the bourgeoisie.
The doctor has many properties.
“Beside him on a table was a small Oriental gong and a bowl of cigarette.
The furnishings of the room were heavy and dark… The pictures were
religious…” (Steinbeck 14)
Unlike Kino who only has primary goods, the doctor has many expensive and luxurious
goods. He even has mistress (Steinbeck 14).
The doctor which represents the bourgeoisie has really different breakfast. Unlike
the poor, he has much money, so he could buy delicious food, which is expensive.
“He poured his second cup of chocolate and crumbled a sweet biscuit in
his finger.” (Steinbeck 14)
The doctor‟s food is really different with Kino‟s. The doctor ate sweet biscuit, while Kino ate
corncake. The doctor drank two cups of chocolate; Kino only drank a little pulque. As Tyson
maintains (54), “the have” and “the have-not” are vividly different. Money makes people have
proper and delicious meal.
It is clear that there‟s a big social gap between the proletariat and bourgeoisie and
there‟s class- divided society in the novel, The Pearl.
The Struggle of the Lower Class as Represented by Kino
To pearl hunters, pearl is very valuable. First, they feed their families from the
money they get from selling the pearls. Second, it is very difficult for them to get pearls. As
Steinbeck describes:
“But the pearls were accidents, and the finding of one was luck, a little
pat on the back by God or the gods or both.” (Steinbeck 22)
10
Since finding a pearl is luck, it can be inferred that most pearl hunters are not rich despite the
fact that pearl is a valuable jewel.
Moreover, when a pearl hunter is quite lucky to find the jewel, it‟s the pearl buyer
who is really lucky. The pearl hunters get the lowest price they could stand; while the pearl
buyers get the most profit they could earn (Steinbeck 29). Such practice reflects the status of
the pearl hunters and buyers in the society, which is constituted of the proletariat and the
bourgeoisie. According to Marx, the proletariat maintains their lives by working for the
bourgeoisie, and the bourgeoisie defines how much money the proletariat gets (qtd. in Fulton
90). As a result, the pearl hunters would most probably remain poor the rest of their lives.
Kino was also one of the pearl hunters. He and his family lived in poverty for
generations. Fulton states that the lower social class people struggle to get a better life (class
struggle) (89). It means that the poor don‟t want to remain poor. Their desire to have a better
life implies their intention to move to the higher social class. Similarly, when Kino as a lower
class member found the pearl, he dreamed to use the money to do the following: getting
married in church, buying clothes for him and his family, buying a rifle, and sending his son
to school (Steinbeck 31- 33). What Kino would like to do reflects what Fulton says about the
lower class‟ desire to get a better life.
It is interesting that the first thing he wants to do after he has sold the pearl is
getting married in church.
“…In the pearl he saw Juana and Coyotito and himself standing and
kneeling at the high altar, and they were being married now that he could pay.”
(Steinbeck 31)
The quotation above implies that to be wed in church one must have money. Therefore, only
the rich can afford it. By being married in church, Kino and his family can be considered as
the rich.
11
The second thing he will do after he gets the money from the pearl is he will buy
clothes for him and his family (Steinbeck 32). Clothes are a symbol of social status. Through
clothes, people can be differentiated between the rich and the poor. Since what one wears
reflects the person‟s social class. Clothes can show someone‟s means or power. By wearing
police or army uniform, people can show to others that they have power in military. Then by
wearing luxurious and expensive clothes, people show that they are rich. Buying new clothes
shows that Kino is not a poor guy anymore.
The third thing he will buy is a rifle (Steinbeck 32). A rifle is a symbol of
manliness and power. Being a poor Indian, Kino is doubly powerless. First, he is powerless
because of his poverty. Second, he is powerless due to his skin- color. As depicted in the
novel, only the bourgeoisie, who are identical with the white, have guns.
“In the distance he could see three figures, two on foot and one on
horseback.” (Steinbeck 95)
“…Behind them, on a horse, was a dark man, his nose covered with a
blanket, and across his saddle a rifle gleamed in the sun.” (Steinbeck 96)
The hunters have power to kill Kino. Horse and rifle become a symbol of power. Kino is
powerless compare to them. He doesn‟t have rifle, and moreover he runs with his wife and
his son; it makes his moves slower. The three hunters are all men (Steinbeck 107), and one of
them rides horse; it makes them move faster than Kino. If Kino has a rifle, it‟s not only to
show his manliness, but also to show his power. Gun can give a sense of security to its owner,
and it also can take a life. By having a rifle that can give him power, Kino can be considered
as a bourgeoisie. It is because he can make people obey him; he can oppress people using the
rifle. If the people do not obey Kino, he can shoot them. Kino has the power to take
someone‟s life with the gun. However, what makes Kino powerless is not simply the rifle, but
from the beginning he is already powerless because of his social status. By buying the rifle
shows that he wants to get power, so that he can be considered as the bourgeoisie.
12
The fourth thing is Kino will send his son, Coyotito, to school. He hopes by
sending his son to school, his son will become smart and know everything.
“…And my son will make numbers, and these things will make us free
because he will know- he will know and through him we will
know…”(Steinbeck 33)
Kino seems to realize that he did not know anything besides searching the pearls
in the sea. He was not an educated person, he did not know how to read or count (illiterate).
However, Kino seems to believe what Engels assures that “education could contribute to
increase awareness” (qtd. in Cole 30). By sending his son to school, Kino assumes that his
son will be aware of the oppression. Oppression here means the oppression from the rich in
economy, education, ideologies and hegemony in the society. If an educated proletariat is
aware about the oppression, it can make him free from the oppression. Therefore, the words
“make us free” mean freeing Kino‟s family from the bourgeoisie oppression. By sending
Kino‟s son to school, it will also make him be able to “make numbers”. It means that Kino‟s
son will know how to count and he will know the value of money. As Steinbeck states that
the pearl buyers always give the pearl hunters the lowest price for the pearls (29). If Kino‟s
son goes to school, he will know the real price of the pearls. He will be able to make them
free from the economic oppression.
Oppression through ideology and hegemony is also rooted in church.
“But there was a price below which they dared not to go, for it had happened
that a fisherman in despair had given his pearls to the church.” (Steinbeck 29)
The word “they” refers to the pearl buyers. Because the pearl buyers offer the pearl hunter the
lowest price, they do not give the pearls to the pearl buyers. They would give the pearls to
church submissively rather than selling it at a low price (Litowitzaq 4). It is their belief
system (Tyson 56); they believe that although they didn‟t get the money, it is better off to
give the pearl to the church rather than give it to the pearl buyer with a low price. As the ISA
13
agent, church works most by ideology, not force (Wolff 225). It makes the congregation obey
its ideological rules by using the name of God. The pearl hunters are aware that giving the
pearl to the church is the right thing to do. However, as Engels said, their awareness is a
“false consciousness” (Williams 65). The proletariats (pearl hunters) are unaware that they are
controlled by such instance with its ideology. By manipulating the poor using ideology, the
rich makes the poor being the oppressed. If by any chance there is someone who wants to be
free from the oppression, his struggle will bring danger to himself.
Kino‟s struggle to get a better life makes himself and his family in danger. Even
though he and his family are in danger, he will not give the pearl to anyone.
“This pearl has become my soul,” said Kino. “If I give it up I shall lose my
soul. Go thou also with God.” (Steinbeck 87)
It is a strong statement which explains that Kino will fight for the pearl to the end. It is also
supported by his struggle against someone who wanted to take his pearl, and because Kino
did not want to lose the pearl, Kino killed him (Steinbeck 73). Kino‟s determination to own
the pearl reflects his strong desire to reach his dreams, which will finally change his and his
son‟s life. His strong will may also represent a lower class‟ desire to move to a higher social
class, which will be possible if he can realize the four things he would like to do with the
money he will get from selling the pearl. In short, Kino will not let the pearl go from him
because it is a means for him to be free from the sufferings of being a lower class member.
Kino has been occupied with material, so his life becomes meaningless (alienated). He does
not aware that if he can realize the four things he wanted, the one who would get the benefit
is the bourgeoisie (false consciousness). For an example is if he can sell the pearl to the pearl
buyer, the pearl buyer can sell it to someone else with higher price. The one who would get
more benefit is the bourgeoisie. Although Kino becomes rich, it doesn‟t mean he will move
14
to the upper class. He will not become a doctor, a pearl buyer, or a priest who represent the
upper class people; he is still a pearl hunter.
Kino‟s endless struggle finally stopped when he lost his only son.
“…And in the surface of the pearl he saw Coyotito lying in the little cave
with the top of his head shot away.” (Steinbeck 117)
By losing his son, he can not get one of his dreams, i.e. to send his son to school. His inability
to send his son to school means that he can not make his family free from the rich‟s
oppression. It is impossible for Kino and his family to get a better life. Because he realizes
that he can not get his dreams, he throws his pearl into the sea.
“And Kino drew back his arm and flung the pearl with all his might. Kino
and Juana watched it go, winking and glimmering under the setting sun…”
(Steinbeck 117)
Kino‟s losing Coyotito and throwing the pearl back to the sea characterize the failure of the
proletariat in getting a better life. Instead of getting a better life, he lost everything; his house,
his canoe (Steinbeck 84), and his son (Steinbeck 117) and the pearl, which will enable him to
be successful in his class struggle. It is clear that the struggle from the poor against the rich is
impossible, as Gramsci clearly maintains that no oppressed class in history had yet succeeded
in liberating themselves from the dominant group hegemony (qtd. in Kolakowski 3: 242).
The Society’s Response
As previously discussed, the society in The Pearl is divided into two big groups, i.
e. the rich and the poor. Both react to Kino‟s finding the biggest pearl ever in a similar way.
They do not really care about Kino, who got the pearl, or how he got it; they only care about
the pearl and the money may bring it. Even the priest who should not put himself in any
groups gives the same response.
15
“It came to the priest walking in his garden, and it put a thoughtful look
in his eyes and a memory of certain repairs necessary to the church.” (Steinbeck
28)
The word “it” in the quotation refers to the pearl. It explains that the priest, who should not
belong to any class, also wants the money from the pearl for the church benefit. He did not
even think of how Kino‟s life should improve from selling the pearl. Instead, he asked Kino
to give an offering to the church.
“I hope thou wilt remember to give thanks, my son, to Him who has given
thee this treasure, and to pay for guidance in the future.” (Steinbeck 36)
Instead of stating what was actually in his mind while he was walking in his garden, the priest
uses God to remind Kino to give an offering to church. Therefore, what the priest says is
ideological. As Wolff maintains, as an Ideological State Apparatus, church uses ideology and
hegemony to control the congregation (225). By mentioning that the pearl is a gift of God, the
priest clarifies that Kino should give thanks. If Kino does not do it, he will behave improperly.
Although Kino intended to be married in church after he has got the money from selling the
pearl, the priest actually does not really care about Kino‟s intention. The priest only cares
about how the church may benefit from the pearl.
The news that Kino has found the biggest pearl ever has changed people‟s
attitudes toward Kino. Besides the priest, the doctor now treats Kino differently. Before Kino
got the pearl, the doctor did not want to examine Kino‟s son who was bitten by the scorpion.
He even did not want to meet Kino, who was at his door (Steinbeck 15). However, after Kino
had got the pearl, the doctor came to Kino‟s house to examine his son (Steinbeck 39). He
even gave the medicine to Kino‟s son. The doctor changed his mind because he wanted to get
the money from the pearl too.
“…And when it was made plain who Kino was, the doctor grew stern and
judicious at the same time. “He is a client of mine,” the doctor said. “I‟m
treating his child for a scorpion sting”…He remembered the room he had lived
16
in there as a great and luxurious place…he saw himself sitting in a restaurant in
Paris and a waiter was just opening a bottle of wine.” (Steinbeck 28)
It is clear that the doctor considers Kino as his client only after he has known who Kino is. At
the same time, he was thinking of having the money from Kino; he will get the luxury he
used to have. People, including the priest and the doctor treat Kino differently. To the doctor
and the priest Kino exists now because of the pearl. It will be a benefit for them. The pearl
has made Kino financially useful for them; to fund the cost of repairing the church and to pay
for the doctor‟s lifestyle.
It is not only the priest and the doctor who wanted Kino‟s pearl for their benefit,
but the pearl buyers also wanted to get it. They even said that Kino‟s pearl is a like a “fool‟s
gold”.
“”You have heard of fool‟s gold.” The dealer said. “This pearl is like
fool‟s gold.” It is too large.” (Steinbeck 64)
Fool‟s gold means any of various pyritic minerals resembling gold (Merriam Webster). It
means that it is not genuine. By claiming that the pearl is like fool‟s gold because it is too
large, the pearl buyers are instilling a false consciousness into Kino‟s understanding to make
him believe that it was a fool‟s gold that is valueless.
Such a false consciousness is solidly built because all pearl buyers will express
the same idea. As Steinbeck describes:
“Now there was only one pearl buyer with many hands…” (Steinbeck 54)
The quotation explains why all pearl buyers agree about the pearl. Actually, there was only
one pearl buyer, but he/ she has many agents. So, whenever Kino goes, he will not
successfully sell his pearl at a high price. These pearl buyers already compromise one another
that they will buy the pearl at a low price. The rich will not let Kino gets much money from
the pearl. If Kino gets much money from selling the pearl, he will become rich. If Kino
17
moves to higher social class, Kino will know that actually the pearl buyers lie to the pearl
hunters about the real price of pearls. Being one of the rich will make Kino free from the
oppression. Therefore, the rich cannot let Kino get much money from his pearl.
Instead of obeying the pearl buyers, Kino does not want to let the pearl go
(Steinbeck 74). Kino even would go to the cities in the north to find the right price for his
pearl (Steinbeck 86). Since the rich do not want Kino to find out the right price for the pearl,
and they do not want Kino to get a better life despite the false consciousness they have tried
to instill in Kino, they do not use ideology anymore to oppress him, but violence.
“Kino lay on the ground, struggling to rise, and there was no one near
him…But the evil was all about, hidden behind the brush fence…” (Steinbeck 73)
“He stumbled toward the beach and he came to his canoe. And when the
light broke through again he saw a great hole had been knocked in the bottom.”
(Steinbeck 80)
“He saw a little glow ahead of him, and then without interval a tall flame
leaped up in the dark with a crackling roar… Kino broke into a run; it was his
brush house, he knew. And he knew that these houses could burn down in very few
moments.” (Steinbeck 81)
“They were the trackers, they could follow the trail of a bighorn sheep in the
stone mountains.” (Steinbeck 96)
After the use of ideology and its agents (ISA) has proved to be useless, the rich use threat and
violence (RSA) to control Kino (Cole 30). First, someone attacked Kino. He wanted to take
Kino‟s pearl, but Kino struggled and saved the pearl. Second, Kino‟s canoe was ruined. It is a
threat from the rich, to make Kino gives up his peal. However, Kino still does not want to
give up his pearl. Because of that, they burned down Kino‟s house. Kino keeps persistent not
to give up his pearl. He even went to the north to find cities there and to get the right price for
his pearl (Steinbeck 86). It makes the rich use fiercer way to take his pearl. The more
determined Kino is, the crueler the rich‟s reaction to his attempts to reach his dream.
18
Kino‟s struggle against the rich shows that there has always been a conflict
caused by class struggle (Bressler 219). In the conflict between Kino and the rich, as
represented by the pearl buyers and those who want to take his pearl, other people did not
help Kino at all. It proves that even they believe that being poor is their fate. Or, they are
afraid of what happen to Kino may happen to them. They are afraid if they help Kino, the rich
will take their lives too. Even Kino‟s brother was afraid to help him.
“And Kino… saw deep worry come into his brother‟s eyes and he forestalled
him in a possible refusal.” (Steinbeck 84)
The statement above describes that Kino‟s brother is afraid to help Kino and Kino knows it.
However, he helped Kino. He let Kino stayed in his house until the night had come
(Steinbeck 84). That is the only thing that Kino‟s brother could do for Kino.
Not only the rich want to take advantage of Kino‟s finding the pearl, but also the
poor. The shopkeepers hoped that after Kino got the money from the pearl, it would bring
profit to them (Steinbeck 28). It is because they thought that Kino would buy their clothes if
he got the money. Even the beggars wanted to get some money from Kino.
“….and it made them giggle with pleasure, for they knew that there is no
almsgiver in the world like a poor man who is suddenly lucky.” (Steinbeck 29)
Almsgiver means people who give something (as money or food) given freely to relieve the
poor (Merriam Webster). The beggars think that Kino will give them a lot of money after
Kino gets money from selling the pearl. Everyone wanted to get Kino‟s fortune. People only
look for the money they will get after Kino has sold the pearl. They do not care about Kino‟s
dreams. They want the pearl for their own benefit. Although the rich already have much
money, they still want to get richer. The richer they get, the more power they will gain. As
Fulton says that economic struggle is not only to get a better life, but also to get a political
power (89).
19
It is like that there‟s no way for Kino to get rich. In other words, it is difficult for
the poor to get rich. Even the people from the same class do not help Kino.
“…Every road seemed blocked against him. In his head he heard only the
dark music of the enemy…” (Steinbeck 71)
The quotation implies that Kino struggles alone. He struggles because he wants to
get a better life. He is the only one who is aware of the oppression, because he is the only one
who has the initiative to move into the higher social class. The quotation above strengthens
the argument that there‟s no way for Kino to get rich, or the poor to get rich. So, it is not a
guarantee if poor people get a big fortune, they will get rich. There are many difficult things
that the poor will face in their struggle, whether it comes from the rich or the same social
class. The rich will oppress the poor, and make sure the poor do not move to the higher social
class; while those of the same class do not want to help him because they are afraid if they
oppose the rich, something bad may happen to them.
CONCLUSION
The discussion reflects that in a society which is characterized by a big economic
gap, both the rich and the poor struggle. The rich would like to maintain their domination;
whereas the poor try to move to the higher class. In The Pearl, the lower class‟ struggle to
enter the higher social class is represented in Kino‟s efforts to get a better life.
As a pearl hunter who found the biggest pearl ever, Kino should be able to have a
better life because if he sells the pearl, he will get a lot of money. It is quite surprising that
Kino and his family are explained to remain poor at the end of the story. Therefore the
researcher would like to find out why Kino failed to improve his life although he had already
owned the biggest pearl ever. In other words, this research would aim to analyze the reasons
20
behind Kino‟s failure in getting a better life. It can also be seen that the struggle from the
poor to get a better life will face many difficulties. To liberate from the rich‟s hegemony and
ideology is almost an impossible thing to do. It is because not all the poor are aware about the
oppression through ideology; and even though they are aware of it, they will face many
difficulties in liberating themselves. Kino assumes by getting married in church, buying new
clothes and rifle, and sending his son to school can make him get a better life or moves to the
upper class. He might be considered as the member of the upper class and get a better life, but
it does not mean he becomes one of the upper class people. Although he gets much money
from selling the pearl and he can realize those four things, his job is still a pearl hunter. He
will not become a doctor, a priest, or a pearl buyer who represent the upper class people. The
other people of the same social class do not help him because they are afraid of the
consequences they will get if they oppose the rich. It is a proof that although the proletariat
gets a big fortune, it does not mean he can gain wealth and power from it or he can move to
the higher social class.
From the discussion, it is clearly explained that one‟s success is not only
determined by individual efforts, but also by external forces. A society may not support a
lower class‟s struggle to go to the higher class, and that individual attempts to fight against
the domination of the powerful group will be mostly useless. Another significance this
research offers is the readers will learn that an individual‟s attempt to fight against the
domination of the powerful group will be mostly useless if she/ he fights individually.
21
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express the greatest gratitude to Jesus Christ for His amazing
miracle and power working in my life, so that I can finish my thesis. I wish to express sincere
appreciation to Ibu Lany Kristono, M. Hum for her invaluable supervision, advice and
guidance in helping me finishing my thesis; and also Ibu Purwanti Kusumaningtyas, M. Hum,
my second reader. This thesis would have never been completed without the encouragement
and devotion of my family, especially my mother and my younger sister who always support
me. Special credits I give for Danielle Donelson-Sims, M.A. for sharing information and
sources, Mbah Anik and Mbah Yang for giving me a second home in Salatiga, EDers 2008
for the wonderful togetherness. I will not forget to say thank you to my special friends:
Bravicky Franchrista Lova (QQ), Vicky Soficana (Je Pik), Dwitya Ari, Febrika P (Temon),
Tunggul Laras (Yayas), Daniel Setiyadi (Kimpul), Damaris Fajar, Rieka Ayu (Berry), and
Andhini Silvi (Sipul). Thank you for being my new family, guys.
22
REFERENCES
Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory: Marxist criticism. New York: Manchester University Press,
2002. Print.
Bressler, Charles. E. Literary Criticism : An Introduction to Theory and Practice 2nd edition .
New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1998. Print.
Cole, Mike. Marxism, Postmodernism, and Education. New York: Rouledge. 2008. Print.
Davis, Robert Con and Ronal Schleifer. Contemporary Literary Criticism. New York and
London: Longman. 1989. Print.
Fulton, Robert Brank. Original Marxism Estranged Offspring. Boston, U.S.A: The
Christopher Publishing House.1960. Print.
Kolakowski, Leszek. “Main Currents Of Marxism. The Founders”. 1st Volume. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1978. Print.
Kolakowski, Leszek. “Main Currents Of Marxism. The Golden Age”. 2nd Volume. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1978. Print.
Kolakowski, Leszek. “Main Currents Of Marxism. The Breakdown”. 3rd Volume. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1978. Print.
Litowitzaq, Douglas. Gramsci, Hegemony, and Law. 2000. Web.
Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels. The Communist Manifesto. New York: International
Publisher. 2007. Print.
Marx, Karl. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1841. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
1959. Web.
23
Ponco, Antonius A. and Aziz Nasru Alam. Pemkab Mimika Incar Saham Freeport. Nasional
Kompas. 2 November 2011. Web.
Storey, John. An Introductory Guide to Cultural Theory and Popular Culture . Great Britain:
Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993. Print.
Tyson, Louis. Critical Theory Today, a User- Friendly Guide. New York: Rouledge, 2006.
Print.
Williams, Raymond. Marxism and Literature. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.
Print.
Wolff, Richard D. Ideological State Apparatuses, Consumerism, and U. S. Capitalism:
Lesson for the Left. 2005. Web.
24
EXPERIENCE IN JOHN STEINBECK’S “THE PEARL”
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Rut Arsari Christy
112008112
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2013
THE UNSUCCESSFUL CLASS STRUGGLE AS REPRESENTED BY KINO’S
EXPERIENCE IN JOHN STEINBECK’S “THE PEARL”
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Rut Arsari Christy
112008112
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2013
ii
iii
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any courses or
accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my
knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by any
other person except where due reference is made in the text.
Copyright@2013. Rut Arsari Christy and Lany Kristono, M. Hum
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the
permission of at least the copyright owners or the English Department, Faculty of Language
and Literature, Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga.
Rut Arsari Christy:
iv
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION
As a member of the (SWCU) Satya Wacana Christian University academic community, I
verify that:
Name
: Rut Arsari Christy
Student ID Number
: 112008112
Study Program
: English Education
Faculty
: Faculty of Language and Literature
Kind of Work
: Undergraduate Thesis
in developing my knowledge, I agree to provide SWCU with a non-exclusive royalty free
right for my intellectual property and the contents therein entitled:
The Unsuccessful Class Struggle as Represented by Kino’s Experience in John
Steinbeck’s The Pearl.
along with any pertinent equipment.
With this non-exclusive royalty free right, SWCU maintains the right to copy, reproduce,
print, publish, post, display, incorporate, store in or scan into a retrieval system or database,
transmit, broadcast, barter or sell my intellectual property, in whole or in part without my
express written permission, as long as my name is still included as the writer.
This declaration is made according to the best of my knowledge.
Made in
: Salatiga
Date
:
Verrified by signee,
Rut Arsari Christy
Approved by
Thesis Supervisor
Thesis Examiner
Lany Kristono, M. Hum
Purwanti Kusumaningtyas, M. Hum
v
THE UNSUCCESSFUL CLASS STRUGGLE AS REPRESENTED BY KINO’S
EXPERIENCE IN JOHN STEINBECK’S “THE PEARL”
Rut Arsari Christy
ABSTRACT
Anyone who gets a fortune will most probably be rich. However, The Pearl, depicts Kino, a
pearl hunter who found a fortune; i.e. the biggest pearl ever, to remain poor. Kino should be
able to have a better life because if he sells the pearl, he will get a lot of money. Therefore, it
is quite surprising that Kino and his family are depicted to remain poor at the end of the story.
Since The Pearl doesn‟t portray an economically homogenous society, such a society fits
Marxist ideas, which divides a society into two big groups, i. e. the rich and the poor. The
study tries to find out why Kino failed to improve his life although he had already owned the
biggest pearl ever. The finding of this research is to explain about the facts of class struggle.
Through this research, it will be known that one‟s success is not only determined by
individual efforts, but also by external forces. A society may not support a lower class‟s
struggle to go to the higher class, and that individual attempts to fight against the domination
of the powerful group will be mostly useless.
Keywords: class struggle, oppression
INTRODUCTION
People often argue that money is the root of all evils. However, in reality,
everyone needs money to survive so that people make much effort to get money. Many
people even value and; thus, pursue wealth. Generally, there are several ways to gain wealth;
first, the person inherits a fortune from his/ her family. Second, that person has a good job
that enables him/ her to earn a lot of money. Third, he/ she gets a lottery or fortune.
However, those ways are not absolute. Take for example, most Papuans still live
in poverty although they inherit the biggest gold mine in the world. Ponco and Alam wrote in
Kompas.com, that the Papuan local governments don‟t have any stocks of Freeport. Since the
gold mine is not managed by the Papuan government, the Papuan can‟t enjoy their own
natural resources. They can not claim that the product belongs to them, because the gold mine
is managed by foreign company. The Papuans are only the workers; they work for the foreign
company that manages the gold mine. Despite its valuable natural resources, the province
remains one of the most left-behind in Indonesia. This condition is similar with Marx
explanation about "alienation" in his 1844 essay:
“The worker becomes poorer the more wealth he produces, the more his
production increases in power and extent. The worker becomes an ever cheaper
commodity the more commodities he produces ... the object that labour
produces, its product, stands opposed to it as something alien, as a power
independent of the producer.”
The Papuans are controlled by the foreign company by working in Freeport. The more
products they produce, the wealthier the people who manage the company. So, the one who
gets benefit from the gold mine is the company.
The facts about Papua reminded the researcher of what happened to Kino, the
protagonist of John Steinbeck‟s novel, The Pearl. As a pearl hunter who found a fortune; i.e.
the biggest pearl ever, Kino should be able to have a better life because if he sells the pearl,
he will get a lot of money. Therefore, it is quite surprising that Kino and his family are
depicted to remain poor at the end of the story. Therefore the researcher would like to find
out why Kino failed to improve his life although he had already owned the biggest pearl ever.
In other words, this research would aim to analyze the reasons behind Kino‟s failure in
getting a better life.
It is written in the novel that there are two different groups of society; people who
lives in the brush houses and people who live in the city of stone. People who live in the
brush houses are the poor pearl hunters, while people who live in the city of stone are the rich.
It shows that the novel doesn‟t depict an economically homogenous society. Such a society
fits Marxist ideas, which divides a society into “the have” and “the have not”. As Tyson
wrote, “…between the “haves” and the “have- not” between the bourgeoisie…- and the
proletariat (54). Therefore, Marxism would be an appropriate tool to analyze the novel.
2
Society in Marxist Perspective
Marxists divide a society into two big categories; i. e. the poor (proletariat) and
the rich (bourgeoisie) (Tyson 54), and Marxism tries to explain the relationship between the
poor and the rich. Implied in the existence of a class-divided society is an unequal power
relationship represented by the dominating and dominated groups. As Bressler says, “…A
Marxist approach seeks to oppose the dominant class, to demonstrate how the bourgeoisie‟s
ideology controls and oppresses the working class, and to highlight the elements of society
most affected by such oppression.” (221).
Marxism exists to reveal the ideology that is made by the dominant class. If
ideology is made by the dominant class, it means that the dominant class controls the
dominated class people under their control by using the ideology. Because of the control of
the dominant class to the dominated class, there is a conflict between them. As Bressler‟s
states,”…there‟s an ongoing conflict between social classes, it is caused by various ways the
members of society work and use their economic resources.” (219).
Marxist view sees that the root of the class conflict is economic differences,
which divides the society into two economic- based poles.
Class Struggle
According to Fulton, class struggle is, “….the economic fight for the
improvement of the position of the workers and the political one for the extension of the
rights of the people” (89). In other words, it is the economic struggle of the working class
people to get better economic condition as well as political power, so that they can get a
better life. Marx explains that the proletariats live by working for the bourgeoisie. Being the
employers, the bourgeoisie is the one who decides the wage. Based on Marx statement, the
3
researcher makes a conclusion that the bourgeoisie defines how much money the proletariat
gets. As a result, the proletariat will not earn more than the bourgeoisie, because the
proletariats are just employees. Because of the control of the wage from the bourgeoisie,
there is a class struggle from the proletariat.
Another reason why a class struggle happens is proposed by Marx and Engels. In
The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels state that the lower and middle class fight
against the bourgeoisie to save their existence as fractions of the middle class from extinction
(19). Implied is the proletariat is not consent with their life as it is. They strive not only for a
better life, but also for their position in the society. Marx says that the dominant class controls
the working class economically, but there is another way of the dominant class controlling
the working class, which is through ideology.
Ideology
Ideology is a conscious instead of unconscious process. People are aware of
the notion of ideology; and they realize that it is bad or good. However, their awareness is a
“false consciousness”. As Engels maintains:
“Ideology is a process accomplished by the so- called thinker,
consciously indeed but with a false consciousness. The real motives impelling
him remain unknown to him, otherwise it would not be an ideological process at
all. Hence he imagines false or apparent motives. Because it is a process of
thought he derives both its form and its content from pure thought, either his
own or that of his predecessors.” (qtd. in Williams 65).
Similarly, Storey explains ideology as a false consciousness by using holiday or
Christmas celebration as an example. The working class people think that holiday is the time
for relaxing and releasing their burden. However, actually it is to make them refreshed so that
when they get back to work they will work harder and ready for being oppressed again (5).
4
Althusser defines ideology as a system (possessing its logic and proper rigour) of
representations (images, myths, ideas or concepts according to the case) endowed with an
existence and an historical role at the heart of a given society (qtd. in Barry 163). Similarly,
Tyson explains that ideology is a belief system, and all belief systems are products of cultural
conditioning (56). Therefore, as Althusser and Tyson argue, ideology includes ideas, belief
system, and culture. Althusser also maintains that:
“Ideology expresses a will, a hope or nostalgia, rather than describing a
reality, it is fundamentally a matter of fearing and denouncing, referencing and
reviling, all of which then sometimes gets coded into a discourse which look as
though it is describing the way things actually are.” (qtd. in Williams19).
Althusser proposed another meaning of ideology; i. e. a representation of the
imaginary relationship of individuals to the real conditions of existence. Ideology is no longer
seen as body of ideas, but as a lived, material practice – rituals, customs, patterns of behavior,
ways of thinking taking practical form – reproduced through the practices and productions of
the ISAs (Ideological State Apparatuses) (Storey 117).
The bourgeoisie‟s domination as reflected in their creating a hegemony, which
represents how their supremacy is accepted without any physical force. However, the
bourgeoisie also use physical force to make the proletariat obeys the bourgeoisie. The
bourgeoisie has some apparatuses that work by force to make the proletariat obeys the
bourgeoisie. Althusser called it Repressive State Apparatus (RSA) (Wolff 225).
Hegemony
It was in the Prison Notebooks that Gramsci developed the concept of hegemony
(qtd in Litowitzaq 4):
“to describe a condition in which the supremacy of a social group is
achieved not only by physical force (which Gramsci called “domination” or
“command”) but also through consensual submission of the very people who
5
were dominated (a phenomenon that Gramsci variously called “leadership,”
“direction,” or “hegemony”)”.
The words “through consensual submission” here means that the lower class
people become submissive to the dominant class people without being forced. The lower
class people willingly obey the dominant class people.
Gramsci argues:
“hegemony is a concept which at once includes and goes beyond two
powerful earlier concepts: „culture‟ as a „whole social process‟…‟ideology‟…in
which a system of meanings and values is the expression or projection of a
particular class interest.” (qtd. in Williams 108).
It can be said that hegemony can‟t be separated from culture and ideology. There
are many ideologies inside one particular culture or ideologies live inside a culture. Usually,
people don‟t realize that they are controlled by the ideologies inside the culture. Therefore,
without realizing it and; thus, without being forced, the lower class people are already led by
the dominant class people. In other words, hegemony implies the lower class‟ willingness to
obey the dominant class. To maintain ideology and hegemony in the society, the oppressors
need apparatuses. Althusser proposes another terms which are Repressive State Apparatus
(RSA) and Ideological State Apparatus (ISA) (Wolff: 224).
Repressive State Apparatus (RSA) and Ideological State Apparatus (ISA) by Althusser
Althusser argues that certain ideologies and their apparatuses supported the class
structure of capitalist societies (Wolff 224). Althusser distinguished between two sets of
apparatuses. The first was political and comprised the state and most of its various activities
and branches: the Repressive State Apparatus (RSA) (Wolf 225). Second is:
“… a different set of apparatuses - much less well examined or
understood in the Marxist tradition – played a parallel role in sustaining
capitalist class structures.” He named that set the Ideological State Apparatus
(ISA). The RSA worked mostly by force; while ISA works mostly by ideology
(Wolff 225).
6
The RSA maintained and wielded a monopoly of the means of force in capitalist
societies and applied that monopoly to support capitalist class structures (Wolff 225). By
repressing the threats to capitalist class structures that it recognized, the state‟s branches,
activities, and officials constituted a repressive state apparatus. The apparatuses that can be
considered as RSA are government, administration, court, prisons, police and army (Cole 30).
Althusser includes among ISAs the schools, the family, religions, and religious
institution, and the mass media. These worked less by power and politics and more by
ideology (qtd. in Wolff 225). They inculcated children and adults with specific ways of
imagining- thinking about and thus understanding- their places within and relationship to the
societies within which they lived (Wolff 225) so that they would think in specific ways and
act according to the ideologies.
DISCUSSION
The Society in The Pearl
As Tyson maintains that Marxists divide the society into the poor and the rich
(54), The Pearl also describes these two economically contrasting groups in the society. The
poor is represented by Kino and the other pearl hunters; whereas the rich is represented by the
pearl buyers, the doctor, and the priest. The story depicts a society by a big economy gap.
“They came to the place where the brush houses stopped and the city of
stone and plaster began…” (Steinbeck 10)
The writer of the novel uses the word “place where the brush houses stopped” and “city”.
From these words, the writer of the novel already told the reader that the poor and the rich
don‟t belong to each other. The rich live in the city, and the poor live somewhere not in the
7
city. The passage above emphasizes that the poor and the rich live in a completely different
place.
The two classes, which are the poor and the rich, are also portrayed differently.
The big differences are represented by their houses, their properties, and their food.
The first difference between the poor and the rich is reflected in the physical look
of their houses, the place where they live.
“They came to the place where the brush houses stopped and the city of
stone and plaster began, the city of harsh outer walls and inner cool gardens where
a little water played and the bougainvillea crusted the walls with purple and brickred and white.” (Steinbeck 10)
The paragraph above reflects the definition of “the haves and the have not”. The poor (Kino
and other pearl hunters) live in the brush houses that are made of brush, simple materials, and
don‟t require much money to build. On the other side, the rich live inside the stone walls.
They even have beautiful gardens that decorated with colorful flower. The stone wall houses
show that the owners are rich people.
The second difference between the poor and the rich is reflected in their
properties. The poor almost doesn‟t have any valuable thing. For Kino and his family, the
most valuable thing he has is his canoe.
“Kino and Juana came slowly down to the beach and to Kino‟s canoe,
which was the one thing of value he owned in the world. It was very old. Kino‟s
grandfather had bought it from Nayarit, and he had given it to Kino‟s father, and
so it had come to Kino.” (Steinbeck 19)
“…It was at once property and source of food, for a man with boat can
guarantee a woman that she will eat something. It is the bulwark against
starvation.” (Steinbeck 19)
The canoe isn‟t originally Kino‟s. It is a legacy from his grandfather. Even though it is old, he
still uses it and treasures it, because he doesn‟t have anything valuable other than the canoe.
Kino can‟t afford to buy a new canoe, because it will cost much money.
8
The canoe is not only property for Kino, but also the source of food, particularly
because he is a pearl hunter. As Marx and Engels proposed in The Communist Manifesto, the
lower class people struggle to maintain their lives in the society (19). If by any chance Kino
loses the canoe, he will not be able to feed his family or in other words he can‟t maintain his
life and his family‟s.
The canoe seems to be the most valuable goods for not only Kino, but also his
grandfather and his father, who were all pearl hunters, because it is the only thing mentioned
have been inherited from generation to generation. It means that they have been poor people
for generations. They can‟t have a better job, because they don‟t have other skill and
knowledge. They only know how to find a pearl in the sea.
Kino doesn‟t have any expensive goods in his house. He didn‟t have a bed, only a
mat for him and his wife to sleep, and a hanging box for his child.
“Kino‟s eyes opened… he looked at the hanging box where Coyoti slept.
And last he turned his head to Juana, his wife, who lay beside him on the
mat…” (Steinbeck 1)
The last difference between bourgeoisie and the proletariat in this novel is reflected in the
food they eat.
“Kino squatted by the fire pit and rolled a hot corncake and dipped it in
sauce and ate it. And he drank a little pulque and that was the breakfast. That
was the only breakfast he had ever known….” (Steinbeck 5).
Kino is described to eat a hot corncake and a little pulque (a fermented milky drink made
from the juice of certain species of agave in Mexico) all his life. From Wikipedia, one of the
sites in the internet, it is explained that agave is certain of plant that similar to aloe. It has
nectar and pulque is made of the agave nectar. The Mexican people already made it for
generations. If it is compared with milk, pulque is not a healthy drink. It contains alcohol, and
9
the taste is sour yeast-like taste. That is the only breakfast that he knows or he can eat. It
shows that he is really poor that can‟t afford to buy more nutritious food.
Kino‟s condition is really different with the doctor‟s; which is the bourgeoisie.
The doctor has many properties.
“Beside him on a table was a small Oriental gong and a bowl of cigarette.
The furnishings of the room were heavy and dark… The pictures were
religious…” (Steinbeck 14)
Unlike Kino who only has primary goods, the doctor has many expensive and luxurious
goods. He even has mistress (Steinbeck 14).
The doctor which represents the bourgeoisie has really different breakfast. Unlike
the poor, he has much money, so he could buy delicious food, which is expensive.
“He poured his second cup of chocolate and crumbled a sweet biscuit in
his finger.” (Steinbeck 14)
The doctor‟s food is really different with Kino‟s. The doctor ate sweet biscuit, while Kino ate
corncake. The doctor drank two cups of chocolate; Kino only drank a little pulque. As Tyson
maintains (54), “the have” and “the have-not” are vividly different. Money makes people have
proper and delicious meal.
It is clear that there‟s a big social gap between the proletariat and bourgeoisie and
there‟s class- divided society in the novel, The Pearl.
The Struggle of the Lower Class as Represented by Kino
To pearl hunters, pearl is very valuable. First, they feed their families from the
money they get from selling the pearls. Second, it is very difficult for them to get pearls. As
Steinbeck describes:
“But the pearls were accidents, and the finding of one was luck, a little
pat on the back by God or the gods or both.” (Steinbeck 22)
10
Since finding a pearl is luck, it can be inferred that most pearl hunters are not rich despite the
fact that pearl is a valuable jewel.
Moreover, when a pearl hunter is quite lucky to find the jewel, it‟s the pearl buyer
who is really lucky. The pearl hunters get the lowest price they could stand; while the pearl
buyers get the most profit they could earn (Steinbeck 29). Such practice reflects the status of
the pearl hunters and buyers in the society, which is constituted of the proletariat and the
bourgeoisie. According to Marx, the proletariat maintains their lives by working for the
bourgeoisie, and the bourgeoisie defines how much money the proletariat gets (qtd. in Fulton
90). As a result, the pearl hunters would most probably remain poor the rest of their lives.
Kino was also one of the pearl hunters. He and his family lived in poverty for
generations. Fulton states that the lower social class people struggle to get a better life (class
struggle) (89). It means that the poor don‟t want to remain poor. Their desire to have a better
life implies their intention to move to the higher social class. Similarly, when Kino as a lower
class member found the pearl, he dreamed to use the money to do the following: getting
married in church, buying clothes for him and his family, buying a rifle, and sending his son
to school (Steinbeck 31- 33). What Kino would like to do reflects what Fulton says about the
lower class‟ desire to get a better life.
It is interesting that the first thing he wants to do after he has sold the pearl is
getting married in church.
“…In the pearl he saw Juana and Coyotito and himself standing and
kneeling at the high altar, and they were being married now that he could pay.”
(Steinbeck 31)
The quotation above implies that to be wed in church one must have money. Therefore, only
the rich can afford it. By being married in church, Kino and his family can be considered as
the rich.
11
The second thing he will do after he gets the money from the pearl is he will buy
clothes for him and his family (Steinbeck 32). Clothes are a symbol of social status. Through
clothes, people can be differentiated between the rich and the poor. Since what one wears
reflects the person‟s social class. Clothes can show someone‟s means or power. By wearing
police or army uniform, people can show to others that they have power in military. Then by
wearing luxurious and expensive clothes, people show that they are rich. Buying new clothes
shows that Kino is not a poor guy anymore.
The third thing he will buy is a rifle (Steinbeck 32). A rifle is a symbol of
manliness and power. Being a poor Indian, Kino is doubly powerless. First, he is powerless
because of his poverty. Second, he is powerless due to his skin- color. As depicted in the
novel, only the bourgeoisie, who are identical with the white, have guns.
“In the distance he could see three figures, two on foot and one on
horseback.” (Steinbeck 95)
“…Behind them, on a horse, was a dark man, his nose covered with a
blanket, and across his saddle a rifle gleamed in the sun.” (Steinbeck 96)
The hunters have power to kill Kino. Horse and rifle become a symbol of power. Kino is
powerless compare to them. He doesn‟t have rifle, and moreover he runs with his wife and
his son; it makes his moves slower. The three hunters are all men (Steinbeck 107), and one of
them rides horse; it makes them move faster than Kino. If Kino has a rifle, it‟s not only to
show his manliness, but also to show his power. Gun can give a sense of security to its owner,
and it also can take a life. By having a rifle that can give him power, Kino can be considered
as a bourgeoisie. It is because he can make people obey him; he can oppress people using the
rifle. If the people do not obey Kino, he can shoot them. Kino has the power to take
someone‟s life with the gun. However, what makes Kino powerless is not simply the rifle, but
from the beginning he is already powerless because of his social status. By buying the rifle
shows that he wants to get power, so that he can be considered as the bourgeoisie.
12
The fourth thing is Kino will send his son, Coyotito, to school. He hopes by
sending his son to school, his son will become smart and know everything.
“…And my son will make numbers, and these things will make us free
because he will know- he will know and through him we will
know…”(Steinbeck 33)
Kino seems to realize that he did not know anything besides searching the pearls
in the sea. He was not an educated person, he did not know how to read or count (illiterate).
However, Kino seems to believe what Engels assures that “education could contribute to
increase awareness” (qtd. in Cole 30). By sending his son to school, Kino assumes that his
son will be aware of the oppression. Oppression here means the oppression from the rich in
economy, education, ideologies and hegemony in the society. If an educated proletariat is
aware about the oppression, it can make him free from the oppression. Therefore, the words
“make us free” mean freeing Kino‟s family from the bourgeoisie oppression. By sending
Kino‟s son to school, it will also make him be able to “make numbers”. It means that Kino‟s
son will know how to count and he will know the value of money. As Steinbeck states that
the pearl buyers always give the pearl hunters the lowest price for the pearls (29). If Kino‟s
son goes to school, he will know the real price of the pearls. He will be able to make them
free from the economic oppression.
Oppression through ideology and hegemony is also rooted in church.
“But there was a price below which they dared not to go, for it had happened
that a fisherman in despair had given his pearls to the church.” (Steinbeck 29)
The word “they” refers to the pearl buyers. Because the pearl buyers offer the pearl hunter the
lowest price, they do not give the pearls to the pearl buyers. They would give the pearls to
church submissively rather than selling it at a low price (Litowitzaq 4). It is their belief
system (Tyson 56); they believe that although they didn‟t get the money, it is better off to
give the pearl to the church rather than give it to the pearl buyer with a low price. As the ISA
13
agent, church works most by ideology, not force (Wolff 225). It makes the congregation obey
its ideological rules by using the name of God. The pearl hunters are aware that giving the
pearl to the church is the right thing to do. However, as Engels said, their awareness is a
“false consciousness” (Williams 65). The proletariats (pearl hunters) are unaware that they are
controlled by such instance with its ideology. By manipulating the poor using ideology, the
rich makes the poor being the oppressed. If by any chance there is someone who wants to be
free from the oppression, his struggle will bring danger to himself.
Kino‟s struggle to get a better life makes himself and his family in danger. Even
though he and his family are in danger, he will not give the pearl to anyone.
“This pearl has become my soul,” said Kino. “If I give it up I shall lose my
soul. Go thou also with God.” (Steinbeck 87)
It is a strong statement which explains that Kino will fight for the pearl to the end. It is also
supported by his struggle against someone who wanted to take his pearl, and because Kino
did not want to lose the pearl, Kino killed him (Steinbeck 73). Kino‟s determination to own
the pearl reflects his strong desire to reach his dreams, which will finally change his and his
son‟s life. His strong will may also represent a lower class‟ desire to move to a higher social
class, which will be possible if he can realize the four things he would like to do with the
money he will get from selling the pearl. In short, Kino will not let the pearl go from him
because it is a means for him to be free from the sufferings of being a lower class member.
Kino has been occupied with material, so his life becomes meaningless (alienated). He does
not aware that if he can realize the four things he wanted, the one who would get the benefit
is the bourgeoisie (false consciousness). For an example is if he can sell the pearl to the pearl
buyer, the pearl buyer can sell it to someone else with higher price. The one who would get
more benefit is the bourgeoisie. Although Kino becomes rich, it doesn‟t mean he will move
14
to the upper class. He will not become a doctor, a pearl buyer, or a priest who represent the
upper class people; he is still a pearl hunter.
Kino‟s endless struggle finally stopped when he lost his only son.
“…And in the surface of the pearl he saw Coyotito lying in the little cave
with the top of his head shot away.” (Steinbeck 117)
By losing his son, he can not get one of his dreams, i.e. to send his son to school. His inability
to send his son to school means that he can not make his family free from the rich‟s
oppression. It is impossible for Kino and his family to get a better life. Because he realizes
that he can not get his dreams, he throws his pearl into the sea.
“And Kino drew back his arm and flung the pearl with all his might. Kino
and Juana watched it go, winking and glimmering under the setting sun…”
(Steinbeck 117)
Kino‟s losing Coyotito and throwing the pearl back to the sea characterize the failure of the
proletariat in getting a better life. Instead of getting a better life, he lost everything; his house,
his canoe (Steinbeck 84), and his son (Steinbeck 117) and the pearl, which will enable him to
be successful in his class struggle. It is clear that the struggle from the poor against the rich is
impossible, as Gramsci clearly maintains that no oppressed class in history had yet succeeded
in liberating themselves from the dominant group hegemony (qtd. in Kolakowski 3: 242).
The Society’s Response
As previously discussed, the society in The Pearl is divided into two big groups, i.
e. the rich and the poor. Both react to Kino‟s finding the biggest pearl ever in a similar way.
They do not really care about Kino, who got the pearl, or how he got it; they only care about
the pearl and the money may bring it. Even the priest who should not put himself in any
groups gives the same response.
15
“It came to the priest walking in his garden, and it put a thoughtful look
in his eyes and a memory of certain repairs necessary to the church.” (Steinbeck
28)
The word “it” in the quotation refers to the pearl. It explains that the priest, who should not
belong to any class, also wants the money from the pearl for the church benefit. He did not
even think of how Kino‟s life should improve from selling the pearl. Instead, he asked Kino
to give an offering to the church.
“I hope thou wilt remember to give thanks, my son, to Him who has given
thee this treasure, and to pay for guidance in the future.” (Steinbeck 36)
Instead of stating what was actually in his mind while he was walking in his garden, the priest
uses God to remind Kino to give an offering to church. Therefore, what the priest says is
ideological. As Wolff maintains, as an Ideological State Apparatus, church uses ideology and
hegemony to control the congregation (225). By mentioning that the pearl is a gift of God, the
priest clarifies that Kino should give thanks. If Kino does not do it, he will behave improperly.
Although Kino intended to be married in church after he has got the money from selling the
pearl, the priest actually does not really care about Kino‟s intention. The priest only cares
about how the church may benefit from the pearl.
The news that Kino has found the biggest pearl ever has changed people‟s
attitudes toward Kino. Besides the priest, the doctor now treats Kino differently. Before Kino
got the pearl, the doctor did not want to examine Kino‟s son who was bitten by the scorpion.
He even did not want to meet Kino, who was at his door (Steinbeck 15). However, after Kino
had got the pearl, the doctor came to Kino‟s house to examine his son (Steinbeck 39). He
even gave the medicine to Kino‟s son. The doctor changed his mind because he wanted to get
the money from the pearl too.
“…And when it was made plain who Kino was, the doctor grew stern and
judicious at the same time. “He is a client of mine,” the doctor said. “I‟m
treating his child for a scorpion sting”…He remembered the room he had lived
16
in there as a great and luxurious place…he saw himself sitting in a restaurant in
Paris and a waiter was just opening a bottle of wine.” (Steinbeck 28)
It is clear that the doctor considers Kino as his client only after he has known who Kino is. At
the same time, he was thinking of having the money from Kino; he will get the luxury he
used to have. People, including the priest and the doctor treat Kino differently. To the doctor
and the priest Kino exists now because of the pearl. It will be a benefit for them. The pearl
has made Kino financially useful for them; to fund the cost of repairing the church and to pay
for the doctor‟s lifestyle.
It is not only the priest and the doctor who wanted Kino‟s pearl for their benefit,
but the pearl buyers also wanted to get it. They even said that Kino‟s pearl is a like a “fool‟s
gold”.
“”You have heard of fool‟s gold.” The dealer said. “This pearl is like
fool‟s gold.” It is too large.” (Steinbeck 64)
Fool‟s gold means any of various pyritic minerals resembling gold (Merriam Webster). It
means that it is not genuine. By claiming that the pearl is like fool‟s gold because it is too
large, the pearl buyers are instilling a false consciousness into Kino‟s understanding to make
him believe that it was a fool‟s gold that is valueless.
Such a false consciousness is solidly built because all pearl buyers will express
the same idea. As Steinbeck describes:
“Now there was only one pearl buyer with many hands…” (Steinbeck 54)
The quotation explains why all pearl buyers agree about the pearl. Actually, there was only
one pearl buyer, but he/ she has many agents. So, whenever Kino goes, he will not
successfully sell his pearl at a high price. These pearl buyers already compromise one another
that they will buy the pearl at a low price. The rich will not let Kino gets much money from
the pearl. If Kino gets much money from selling the pearl, he will become rich. If Kino
17
moves to higher social class, Kino will know that actually the pearl buyers lie to the pearl
hunters about the real price of pearls. Being one of the rich will make Kino free from the
oppression. Therefore, the rich cannot let Kino get much money from his pearl.
Instead of obeying the pearl buyers, Kino does not want to let the pearl go
(Steinbeck 74). Kino even would go to the cities in the north to find the right price for his
pearl (Steinbeck 86). Since the rich do not want Kino to find out the right price for the pearl,
and they do not want Kino to get a better life despite the false consciousness they have tried
to instill in Kino, they do not use ideology anymore to oppress him, but violence.
“Kino lay on the ground, struggling to rise, and there was no one near
him…But the evil was all about, hidden behind the brush fence…” (Steinbeck 73)
“He stumbled toward the beach and he came to his canoe. And when the
light broke through again he saw a great hole had been knocked in the bottom.”
(Steinbeck 80)
“He saw a little glow ahead of him, and then without interval a tall flame
leaped up in the dark with a crackling roar… Kino broke into a run; it was his
brush house, he knew. And he knew that these houses could burn down in very few
moments.” (Steinbeck 81)
“They were the trackers, they could follow the trail of a bighorn sheep in the
stone mountains.” (Steinbeck 96)
After the use of ideology and its agents (ISA) has proved to be useless, the rich use threat and
violence (RSA) to control Kino (Cole 30). First, someone attacked Kino. He wanted to take
Kino‟s pearl, but Kino struggled and saved the pearl. Second, Kino‟s canoe was ruined. It is a
threat from the rich, to make Kino gives up his peal. However, Kino still does not want to
give up his pearl. Because of that, they burned down Kino‟s house. Kino keeps persistent not
to give up his pearl. He even went to the north to find cities there and to get the right price for
his pearl (Steinbeck 86). It makes the rich use fiercer way to take his pearl. The more
determined Kino is, the crueler the rich‟s reaction to his attempts to reach his dream.
18
Kino‟s struggle against the rich shows that there has always been a conflict
caused by class struggle (Bressler 219). In the conflict between Kino and the rich, as
represented by the pearl buyers and those who want to take his pearl, other people did not
help Kino at all. It proves that even they believe that being poor is their fate. Or, they are
afraid of what happen to Kino may happen to them. They are afraid if they help Kino, the rich
will take their lives too. Even Kino‟s brother was afraid to help him.
“And Kino… saw deep worry come into his brother‟s eyes and he forestalled
him in a possible refusal.” (Steinbeck 84)
The statement above describes that Kino‟s brother is afraid to help Kino and Kino knows it.
However, he helped Kino. He let Kino stayed in his house until the night had come
(Steinbeck 84). That is the only thing that Kino‟s brother could do for Kino.
Not only the rich want to take advantage of Kino‟s finding the pearl, but also the
poor. The shopkeepers hoped that after Kino got the money from the pearl, it would bring
profit to them (Steinbeck 28). It is because they thought that Kino would buy their clothes if
he got the money. Even the beggars wanted to get some money from Kino.
“….and it made them giggle with pleasure, for they knew that there is no
almsgiver in the world like a poor man who is suddenly lucky.” (Steinbeck 29)
Almsgiver means people who give something (as money or food) given freely to relieve the
poor (Merriam Webster). The beggars think that Kino will give them a lot of money after
Kino gets money from selling the pearl. Everyone wanted to get Kino‟s fortune. People only
look for the money they will get after Kino has sold the pearl. They do not care about Kino‟s
dreams. They want the pearl for their own benefit. Although the rich already have much
money, they still want to get richer. The richer they get, the more power they will gain. As
Fulton says that economic struggle is not only to get a better life, but also to get a political
power (89).
19
It is like that there‟s no way for Kino to get rich. In other words, it is difficult for
the poor to get rich. Even the people from the same class do not help Kino.
“…Every road seemed blocked against him. In his head he heard only the
dark music of the enemy…” (Steinbeck 71)
The quotation implies that Kino struggles alone. He struggles because he wants to
get a better life. He is the only one who is aware of the oppression, because he is the only one
who has the initiative to move into the higher social class. The quotation above strengthens
the argument that there‟s no way for Kino to get rich, or the poor to get rich. So, it is not a
guarantee if poor people get a big fortune, they will get rich. There are many difficult things
that the poor will face in their struggle, whether it comes from the rich or the same social
class. The rich will oppress the poor, and make sure the poor do not move to the higher social
class; while those of the same class do not want to help him because they are afraid if they
oppose the rich, something bad may happen to them.
CONCLUSION
The discussion reflects that in a society which is characterized by a big economic
gap, both the rich and the poor struggle. The rich would like to maintain their domination;
whereas the poor try to move to the higher class. In The Pearl, the lower class‟ struggle to
enter the higher social class is represented in Kino‟s efforts to get a better life.
As a pearl hunter who found the biggest pearl ever, Kino should be able to have a
better life because if he sells the pearl, he will get a lot of money. It is quite surprising that
Kino and his family are explained to remain poor at the end of the story. Therefore the
researcher would like to find out why Kino failed to improve his life although he had already
owned the biggest pearl ever. In other words, this research would aim to analyze the reasons
20
behind Kino‟s failure in getting a better life. It can also be seen that the struggle from the
poor to get a better life will face many difficulties. To liberate from the rich‟s hegemony and
ideology is almost an impossible thing to do. It is because not all the poor are aware about the
oppression through ideology; and even though they are aware of it, they will face many
difficulties in liberating themselves. Kino assumes by getting married in church, buying new
clothes and rifle, and sending his son to school can make him get a better life or moves to the
upper class. He might be considered as the member of the upper class and get a better life, but
it does not mean he becomes one of the upper class people. Although he gets much money
from selling the pearl and he can realize those four things, his job is still a pearl hunter. He
will not become a doctor, a priest, or a pearl buyer who represent the upper class people. The
other people of the same social class do not help him because they are afraid of the
consequences they will get if they oppose the rich. It is a proof that although the proletariat
gets a big fortune, it does not mean he can gain wealth and power from it or he can move to
the higher social class.
From the discussion, it is clearly explained that one‟s success is not only
determined by individual efforts, but also by external forces. A society may not support a
lower class‟s struggle to go to the higher class, and that individual attempts to fight against
the domination of the powerful group will be mostly useless. Another significance this
research offers is the readers will learn that an individual‟s attempt to fight against the
domination of the powerful group will be mostly useless if she/ he fights individually.
21
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express the greatest gratitude to Jesus Christ for His amazing
miracle and power working in my life, so that I can finish my thesis. I wish to express sincere
appreciation to Ibu Lany Kristono, M. Hum for her invaluable supervision, advice and
guidance in helping me finishing my thesis; and also Ibu Purwanti Kusumaningtyas, M. Hum,
my second reader. This thesis would have never been completed without the encouragement
and devotion of my family, especially my mother and my younger sister who always support
me. Special credits I give for Danielle Donelson-Sims, M.A. for sharing information and
sources, Mbah Anik and Mbah Yang for giving me a second home in Salatiga, EDers 2008
for the wonderful togetherness. I will not forget to say thank you to my special friends:
Bravicky Franchrista Lova (QQ), Vicky Soficana (Je Pik), Dwitya Ari, Febrika P (Temon),
Tunggul Laras (Yayas), Daniel Setiyadi (Kimpul), Damaris Fajar, Rieka Ayu (Berry), and
Andhini Silvi (Sipul). Thank you for being my new family, guys.
22
REFERENCES
Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory: Marxist criticism. New York: Manchester University Press,
2002. Print.
Bressler, Charles. E. Literary Criticism : An Introduction to Theory and Practice 2nd edition .
New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1998. Print.
Cole, Mike. Marxism, Postmodernism, and Education. New York: Rouledge. 2008. Print.
Davis, Robert Con and Ronal Schleifer. Contemporary Literary Criticism. New York and
London: Longman. 1989. Print.
Fulton, Robert Brank. Original Marxism Estranged Offspring. Boston, U.S.A: The
Christopher Publishing House.1960. Print.
Kolakowski, Leszek. “Main Currents Of Marxism. The Founders”. 1st Volume. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1978. Print.
Kolakowski, Leszek. “Main Currents Of Marxism. The Golden Age”. 2nd Volume. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1978. Print.
Kolakowski, Leszek. “Main Currents Of Marxism. The Breakdown”. 3rd Volume. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1978. Print.
Litowitzaq, Douglas. Gramsci, Hegemony, and Law. 2000. Web.
Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels. The Communist Manifesto. New York: International
Publisher. 2007. Print.
Marx, Karl. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1841. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
1959. Web.
23
Ponco, Antonius A. and Aziz Nasru Alam. Pemkab Mimika Incar Saham Freeport. Nasional
Kompas. 2 November 2011. Web.
Storey, John. An Introductory Guide to Cultural Theory and Popular Culture . Great Britain:
Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993. Print.
Tyson, Louis. Critical Theory Today, a User- Friendly Guide. New York: Rouledge, 2006.
Print.
Williams, Raymond. Marxism and Literature. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.
Print.
Wolff, Richard D. Ideological State Apparatuses, Consumerism, and U. S. Capitalism:
Lesson for the Left. 2005. Web.
24