John SteinbeckThe Log from the Sea of Cortez (Penguin Classics)

The following is a letter I received from a friend, away on a research cruise.Before her expedition embarked, I gave to her my treasured copy of this book,and this is what she had to say:"Day 14 at Sea."After spending a good week of troubleshooting, rebuilding arrays,breaking them, re-fixing them, dealing with conflicting egos(including my own), switching wires, and dealing with theunfamiliarity of sea-sickness (due in two parts to my cold and themagnificent roll of this ship), I have finally finished Sea of Cortez.While it's fresh in my mind, I thought I'd jot down my thoughts tosend your way. This is going to be more of a letter than a note, asthe mood has struck me. Sans cigarette, however. I do not favor theidea of clinging to my laptop on deck, protecting it from theelements."Also, holy crap, has it really only been two weeks?"SUCH a romantic story, from start to appendix. This idea that evenpost Depression Era people could scrap together enough savings toafford such a lavish, albeit business, adventure. I think of themodern day scramble to get grants, itemized so precisely, spent onlyon what you thought you may need six month prior. I far prefer thenotion of pooling together funds until one can afford to hire or buythe required equipment, sketching out the necessities and desiredgoods as you go. I took to reading this book during my breaks up onthe flying bridge, wind and sea around me. Reading this book at seawas a good idea, though I was frequently interrupted by visualobservers passing by and asking me what part I was up to. Many ofthem harbored a great fondness for the book."The passage about the futility of hope and how it weakens us as aspecies set the whole tone of the book for me. We have hope, andtherefore we are disillusioned. I imaged the different outlook onlife high school graduates may have if that paragraph was recited tothem at graduation, instead of the usual spiel about how special theyall are. It shouldn't be read in a negative way, as that's not howit's written. But in a matter-of-fact way, that this is an obstaclein life which one must acknowledge if they are going to be satisfiedwith whatever the end up setting their minds to."The descriptions of the towns along the peninsula made me sore fortravel. Though I am certainly on a current adventure, I love travelingto new places and walking around, getting a feel for the people (aswell as their beer and coffee). This book, however, also sets youback in time to villages that likely do not exist in the same manneranymore. They mention how either La Paz or Loreto was in the middleof constructing a hotel-like building that would bring floods ofweekenders from LA and elsewhere, and how sick that makes them. Howsick would they be now with the modern "Floridaization" of sea sideMexico. I'd love to take a road trip down, compare and contrast theirexperience (albeit through the lens of stylized storytelling) with thecurrent reality (of course through my own lens, as that's the onlyreality I can know)."The bit about the Japanese shrimping fleet broke my heart a bit,because the authors were spot on. The Gulf of California fishingindustry is a shell of what it could have been mostly thanks to gillnetting and those huge bottom trawlers that destroyed everything intheir path. The fact that this was evident 60 years ago to people ofan academic mind and no protective actions were taken gives me littlefaith in our ability to save anything now. The Vaquita, the smallestporpoise in the world, which lives exclusively in the northern regionof the Gulf, is quickly being exterminated by a barely profitable gillnetting industry. The extinction of a species can be avoided if peoplejust fished a different way. There is such a wall against doingthings the right way rather than the first way we happened to stumbleupon. I have heard fisherman say "God will always make sure there isenough fish in the sea." *facepalm* Because the bible never saysanything about an angry and vengeful god testing his people to livewithin their means."Speaking of God, I enjoy the idea of such an entity being expressed asa mathematical symbol for an expanding universe. As a non-believer,that notion suits me."What also broke my heart is the amount of animals they killed. Notjust the ones they took (and as they often repeated 'a great many ofthem'), some they just mortally wounded. Then they head out on ahunting trip and repeat frequently how they don't like killing things,they only do it when necessary. People used to have such a causalattitude towards killing things, like the cats which may or may nothave been pets. I don't have a strong objection to killing for thesake of the animal. As we have previously discussed, once its dead itdoesn't know the difference. Life is only as precious as the pedestalwe place it on. But that poor shark they left to suffocate on theirdeck, that's a horrible death. I also understand that most for mostpeople, to properly study biology you have to sacrifice the animal youwork with. That isn't a reality for me. Not because I don't have thestomach for it, but because that isn't the nature of my work. But whenI was killing fish on a regular basis, you at least try to only killthe ones you need, rather than killing as many samples as possible tothe point of not having enough collection jars to hold them. It'ssuperfluous. If something can live, let it live. If the purpose oftheir expedition was to go tide pooling, why did they need to harpoona great manta ray? Mantas don't make a regular practice of checkingout tide pools, as far as I am aware."It's an older way of thinking. An older methodology. One of thereasons the Ivory-billed Woodpecker went extinct was becausenaturalists found out they were disappearing, and then promptly wentout and killed as many as possible to preserve specimens. I don'tthink we, the biological community, are that out of touch now. Or atleast, I hope not."There were some other notes about the old-fashion-ness of this story,but I fear this letter is too long, and I don't want to bore you. Allof these thoughts are just at the front of my mind, and the more Itype the more I remember. I'll end with Steinbeck's attempt to "laythe ghost" of Ed Ricketts, which is just as sweet as you had promised.His snapshot of the man he knew, as beautiful as it was, does not ridhim from the loss of his late friend. This was a bittersweet momentfor me, as it rang true for my own losses. Memories of them stilltingle with every day occurrences, mostly unexpected. Reading thatSteinbeck still carried the ghost of Ed Ricketts brought both comfortand sadness."I suppose it'll always be confusing. So I will leave it for now."I hope all is well with you. :)"x x"

I possess what I thought was a complete collection of John Steinbeck’s works but “The Log from the Sea of Cortez” is not included. In fact I knew nothing about it. When I saw it advertised, I had to read it. I have it now and I can say it might be my favorite Steinbeck effort. Yes, the usual Steinbeck meanderings are still there and somewhat distracting, but I found them to be more lucid here, as if he intentionally intended to wander but was willing to explain their presence with no apology. They were very interesting and I gobbled them up like the hungry tuna he explored on his journey. Why were they not distracting? Because this was an expedition with lots of time to search out and ruminate on other subjects, which he did.Take teleology, for instance; the study of the presence of things and why they exist in the world. He devotes an entire chapter and makes numerous other references in his book to explain why things are what they are. The simple answer? Because they are. Simple as that. Of course he goes into great detail to reach that conclusion. As you read about it, you’ll find yourself nodding your head in agreement to what seems a senseless answer. You’ll also find yourself carelessly skimming over the scientific names of the flora and fauna collected by the adventurers and not even be ashamed of your indolence. You’ll find yourself enveloped in the ennui that heat and humidity and boredom can bring, even as you are strenuously dipping up thousands of remarkable and beautiful specimens. Hour after hour of this tedious work can wear on the reader as much as the explorer. Steinbeck explores this lapse of industriousness in his depictions of the beauty, peacefulness and heaviness of the surroundings.But Steinbeck also captures the excitement of the expedition with all its hardship, mind numbing concentration, and thrill of discovery through his descriptive and graphic writing skills. The reader feels right in the middle of the heat and humidity, feeling the chill of tidal water swirling around his feet, the sting of sea urchin spines penetrating the hands and arms, and the pain of other cuts and lacerations from ferociously defensive small crabs and other unfriendly inhabitants of the tide pools. He is also adept at depicting the friendly reception they got from most of the human inhabitants of the Baja California gulf. As poor and hungry as they might appear to be, they seemed always trustworthy and honest during their encounters. There was some talk of native cannibalism, but the author was more concerned with the attitude of his hungry companions and wondered who would get the first bite should they meet some suspicious natives carrying a large boiling pot.I really enjoyed this book. It’s a different Steinbeck than I’m used to but still enjoyable, notwithstanding some typical stuffiness. If you like marine exploration adventures, and the complexities they bring, you should give it a try.Schuyler T WallaceAuthor of TIN LIZARD TALES

Need to really interwine the teleological (read those sections thrice), the trip, and the story of Ed Ricketts to begin to see another point of view as valid today as then almost 80 years ago. San Francisco with all its funk and stink and "bums" sure was more interesting than today's sterilized overrated characterless money hub. No soul.ĺ

I found the book boring and repetitive and lacking in any sense of adventure or wonder that is common in great travel writing. Also, for me, the philosophical parts of the book were shallow and not particularly thought provoking.The main part of the book is I think written predominantly by Ed Ricketts, and the appendix is written by John Steinbeck -- this came through clearly in the writing style -- I found the appendix much more readable and enjoyable than the main text.The book is called a log, so perhaps I should not view it as a story and more as a journal of a scientific journey.

Revisiting a book from my youth half-way through but it oesn't have the freshness I remember all those year ago- but then I might have lost something with age!!

very different from steinbecks other novels but interesting

Pleased with the book

great book. I bought it just before the oil spillage, so poignant for me.