As for closure, I understand and to a certain extent agree with your points. I believe a sense of closure is in many ways a function of the attachment a reader makes to the different facets of the reading process (the arc of the story, the individual characters, the didactic frame) and the effects those facets have on the reader.

For example, the timshel motif: As you said, it is brought round to closure by Adam’s laboriously spoken final(?) word. But that occurs only after being introduced through “showing” (in the Caleb/Charles/Adam relations), then being further developed and (b)elaborated by “telling” (in the exegesis of the Genesis story of Cain and Abel by the Lee/Samuel/Adam panel), and then finally being (re)illustrated for the reader by the Adam/Caleb/Aron relation. In this instance, while there is closure, I cannot but feel that Steinbeck was pounding his point home with a rather large and sometimes ill-handled hammer. As if the Adam/Eve/Cain/Abel motif were not obvious from the beginning, he had to (ab)use his characters to “tell” us that this was the thrust of his rendition of the story. It was a forced closure, in my mind, with Steinbeck continuously and–unfortunately–quite obviously bending the arc of the story around to a satisfactory close. Lois Maggenti would have immediately been on the phone to the schmalz police.

On the other hand, take the story of Lee–far and away, to me, the most interesting and well developed character in the story (though that may be a reflection of my own character): there is still in me a questioning, a desire to know more about what happened to Lee. And I can walk away with that, feeling that the story goes on despite the book ending. But as I said, above, this could be nothing more than a vestigial remnant of the attachment I formed for him. I do have to admit that Lee was as (ab)used by Steinbeck as any of the other characters in making his point, if not more so. Lee can be seen as the deus ex machina device of the novel. Without Lee and his (almost too obvious) intercession (at several crucial junctures), the story would founder under the weight of its own burden of repetition.

I enjoyed the story, and the reading. I am just not certain I would label it a “best read, ever.” It is entirely possible that Grant and Fred (the two unacquainted friends making the recommendation) have that sense of the book lingering from their first reads at an impressionable age. I can see where a High School student, a young man in particular, could form that attachment by comparison to his own familial relations.

How do you think conservapedia’s “Conservative Bible Project” will translate Genesis?

As we have both finished the book, we might as well jump ahead to the question of “endings” as opposed to “closure.” I think it is fair to say that the book comes to an end and that we would both agree to that. A more important question is: does the narrative have closure? does our narrator close things, neatly or otherwise?

And, riffing off of your lighter note: Today, we went looking for an asian grocer to find Shao Xing (Chinese cooking wine). We found a Korean-Japanese market that was well stocked and looked much better than the first one we went wandered through. Laurie asked the woman at the counter: “Do you have Shao Xing, Chinese cooking wine?” The response was vehemently, “NO! We have no Chinese cooking; we only have Japanese.” Which was not true, as there were Indian, Thai, and Korean products in plain view.

Well, we finally found EXACTLY what we were looking for and Laurie proudly displayed it and said, “We found it! See, Chinese cooking wine!” At which point the woman said, “Oh! You meen Chinee koooking whine.”

Lee strikes yet again. He and his pidgen English run both ways, apparently.

Steinbeck has also tied us up in an alliteration with Cyrus begetting Charles and Charles (with Cathy) begetting Caleb. As with Adam and Aron, the names are conveniently alpha coded to keep the reader informed about who is a Cain and who is an Abel. Even Cathy and Abra fit this mold. When all the dust settles at the feet of these favored sons the timshel discussion will dominate.

On a lighter note: What if Adam’s dying word was, “Rosebud”?