The Pearl, by John Steinbeck and The Secret River, by Kate Grenville both explore issues of racism and classism. However, while The Pearl places a strong emphasis on classism due to racism, The Secret River discusses racism and preconceived ideas experienced by those living in a hierarchical society. Resistant readings, common to all texts, manifest themselves as feminism in both The Pearl and The Secret River – although to a greater extent in the former. Readings such as Marxist and pro-colonialist are also considered resistant in The Secret River. In both texts, indigenous populations are represented as appreciating the important things in life; like family, love and respect for nature. Interestingly, the white population of both books are presented as corrupt and disrespectful due to their monetary system. The Pearl and The Secret River share many similarities, especially when it comes to their respective issues. However, even if their contrasting readings differ, their message remains the same; everyone is equal, despite everything. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay. Both The Pearl and The Secret River explore myriad issues regarding racism, classism, and the ingrained and accepted ideas surrounding these attitudes. The first text places a strong emphasis on racism and its effects on classism. Steinbeck implies that it is almost purely racism that drives classism and the divide this creates in society. The Pearl reflects its value on equality and the idea that classism would have no basis if racism did not exist. His use of Kino to represent the poor and oppressed Mexican population allows Steinbeck to present his belief that racism creates classism. He describes the Mexican population as simple, spiritual and content with what life has given them. Although they find the divide between societies difficult, they harbor no bitterness and instead use their energies to protect and support their own society. Steinbeck constructs Caucasians to appear greedy, cunning, manipulative, and ignorant of the simpler joys of life. This is evident in the contrast between Kino's morning; “he crouched by the hearth and rolled a hot cake in his hands… the sun warmed the brush house, breaking the cracks into long strips…” and the doctor's morning; “his eyes sat in puffy hammocks while his mouth dropped in discontent… he brushed the crumbs of a sweet cake from his fingers.” Grenville has a similar attitude towards money as Steinbeck. He presents his assumption that money corrodes the soul in his text The Secret River, constructing William Thornhill as a poor man who does the unspeakable to secure his wealth. It presents Australia's white settlers – freemen and convicts alike – as similar in their shared value of money. Although the social system divides them, it also unites them when they face a common enemy: the Aboriginal population who do not have a monetary system. Grenville contrasts this to present the conflict that arose between the white settlers and the Aboriginal population. As he does so, he represents white settlers who appear ignorant and too caught up in their own lifestyle to appreciate anyone else's. His use of Thornhill's son accentuates this value, as he plays with Aboriginal children and brings home knowledge that Thornhill himself is jealous of, but too proud to learn. This desire represents the idea that humans only want to connect and find similarities, but social constructs and hierarchies prevent.