Possibly the two most popularly addressed issues with Daughter of Earth are gender and class. Barbara Foley asserts that Marie's desire for sexual egalitarianism ties in with her struggle to create a better world. In her view, Marie's eventual ability to feel passion for Anand is a sign of her trust for Anand as a political comrade. Once she realizes that he doesn't live up to her ideal notions of gender equality, she leaves him.[1]
Sondra Guttman claims that the issues of gender, race, and class intermingle, impeding the progress of one another. The struggle between men and women for equality is impeded by the challenges of working-class life, which often cause men to feel inadequate and women to feel helpless. Men and women are pitted against one another by capitalism in order to keep the working class from strengthening. The oppression Marie sees as a child is predominantly gendered, but as she grows to adulthood, oppression based on class and race become more popular. The scene of Marie's rape is viewed not as the rape of a woman by a man but as a white woman by an Indian man, which impedes interracial and gender relations.[2]
Christie Launius, in her comparison of Bread Givers by Anzia Yezierska, Daughter of Earth by Agnes Smedley, and The Great Midland by Alexander Saxton, notes issues related to gender as well. Launius notes that Marie's aversion to marriage may largely be based on her motivation to obtain class mobility. Being married to a working-class man would obstruct this goal because Marie would not likely be allowed to continue her education. This is why both of Marie's marriages are to educated men who will not deny her goals and may, in fact, help her to obtain them.[3] Yerkes makes a similar point. He contends that Marie sees education as a form of escape from the vicious cycles of marriage and family in holding women in the working class. In contrast to the cowboys of her childhood, she idolizes Robert Hampton; he will not threaten her desire to better herself.[4]
Andrew C. Yerkes argues that Daughter of Earth stands out among other literature of the 1930s which remained sexist in its portrayals of women. He addresses the gender reversal apparent in the novel. Marie is untraditionally masculine, while she becomes more and more attracted to effeminate men. He connects Marie's love of Anand to her love of India, claiming Anand is India personified.[5] Similarly, Paula Rabinowitz looks at Daughter of Earth in contrast to proletarian literature dealing with gender roles in marriage, family, and sexuality written by men. She explains that Smedley and other female writers show women revolting against the stereotypes enhanced by marriage, family, and heterosexuality. Daughter of Earth, according to Rabinowitz, is an “antidomestic novel” (84). Rabinowitz also takes on the arguments made by Walter Rideout who claims sexuality in proletarian literature is seen as healthy. Rabinowitz notes that proletarian literature written by women would suggest otherwise, likely because it looks at sexuality from the perspective of women instead of men. Novels like Daughter of Earth depict sexual activity as repressive for women. The oppression of female sexuality in the working class is shown to be similar to class oppression in the United States. The working class is viewed as masculine, yet it needs women in order to be successful in creating unity within the class. Therefore, the issue of sexuality creates conflict in working-class unity.[6]
Family dynamics also play a vital role in the novel. Unlike other 1930s Leftist novels, Daughter of Earth depicted family as a negative entity which would ruin an individual's chances for a happy life. The role of the daughter is pertinent to the novel. Daughter symbolizes legacy, not just of the family, but also, in the case of Daughter of Earth, of the nation and the world. Yerkes notes that Smedley's Freudian psychoanalysis made her all too aware of philosophy. Smedley consciously uses her psychoanalysis when addressing her issues with gender in Daughter of Earth. As a child, Marie has an extreme hatred for her mother and feels her father can do no wrong.[7] Barbara Foley makes a similar Freudian argument when she acknowledges Marie's connection between the belt buckle of Juan Diaz and the colorful belt her father wore.[8]
Daughter of Earth also presents images of motherhood in such a negative light that Marie Rogers vows to escape marriage and all it entails. In “A Wake for Mother: The Maternal Deathbed in Women’s Fiction” Judith Kegan Gardiner elaborates on the role of motherhood in Daughter of Earth. She explains the role of mothers in recent literature as a juxtaposition between traditional womanly roles and the protagonist's desire to break free. Marie's mother's death signifys an end.[9]
Another widely discussed element of Daughter of Earth is the context in which it was written and its format. The novel is widely believed to be autobiographical. In his 1973 afterword of the novel, Paul Lauter notes the similarities between Marie's and Smedley's lives. In essence, they are identical with changes mostly to geography and names. Lauter explains that Smedley wrote the novel while seeking psychoanalysis. The novel was meant to be a therapeutic exercise performed while in therapy.[10]
Nancy Hoffman addresses the unique structure of the novel, which she also attributes to the therapeutic purpose of the writing. Daughter of Earth takes on three forms as it progresses through her childhood and adult life: mythic, novelistic, and autobiographical. Hoffman is somewhat critical of this format, noting that it may hinder fluid reading.[11]
