I'm an old man who did CA farm labor in the 60s-70s so Steinbeck really hits home. The world was different then, people told race-jokes and had a slur word for everyone (mostly Okies, Mexicans, rich folks, later Blacks I encountered in the canneries). What i remember was that hard working people largely had a bond, regardless of race. Like the book, the "hate" line was drawn towards the indiscriminate overlords (like Curly). Note that there were always "nice" overlords (like Slim), that made it bearable. The working guys kind of laughed about the "Okie", "Spic", "rich bitch" kind of slur words, as the backdrop was "working guys stick together".

This all reminds me of "Huckleberry Finn" (another favorite). The argument for modern readers to read is "that's the way life was back then, if you want to get over racism (or unfairness), you need to know how bad it really was" (my sentiments). Like "Grapes of Wrath", the good overlords will be fair across the boards, the bad ones not.

The modern irony is that sex and violence are shown regularly in current media (as "realism"), more or less accepted. Back in the day, you didn't see any of that. What is "offensive" has been turned on its ear.

I'm not insensitive to racism (nor was Twain or Steinbeck, m.o.l. the vanguards of anti-racism in their day). I just believe that showing life the way it really was in history has value in making the world better (and that hiding from it makes us repeat mistakes).

As many modern historians will tell you, Jefferson and Lincoln were not 100% racially enlightened, but my God, did the good ever outweigh the bad. Andrew Jackson and W.H. Harrison on the other hand, need to be outed for their systemic/disgusting/highly damaging racism.

The other perhaps unappreciated thread in Twain/Steinbeck is the plight of the working male...not always fun in the old days, but then we found ways to cope. Does any white male work in the fields now? Probably not, but I rather enjoyed it.