Of Mice and Men

Impressively, I managed to earn an English degree without ever reading this book. Today, I remedied this, and perhaps more impressively, I entered this horrible story unspoiled.

Yes, I said horrible. Yes, I give it four stars. And I might nudge it up to five later, after I've processed it.

Writing classes can (and probably some do) use this little book to teach ... well, a whole list of techniques. How to wield omniscient point of view with the emotional resonance of deep point of view. How to withhold backstory (in this case forever). How to compose audible dialogue in which every character's voice is different.

Most notably, Steinbeck teaches here how to construct a story in which every last thing is inevitable yet none of them is show more predictable. The foreshadowing of Lennie's death is heavy. Steinbeck wants us to see it coming--or more accurately, to feel it coming. But he doesn't want us to guess the particulars, so we don't (at least I didn't). This book is a storm cloud that begins to grow on the first page, piles higher and higher onto itself until the single streak of electricity, the single crack of thunder, and then the book is over and the reader is left in numb, buzzing shock. This is what I've been reading toward all this time. Of course it is. Why didn't I know it would be George? Wait, maybe I did.

I hate this story for being true. I want a different outcome even as I see that any other end would be a lie. This is life. Horrible and twisted and unjust. Right choices seem wrong and wrong choices seem right. Ours is a muddy world and we are broken, dirty souls, and as always, Steinbeck faces this reality, assaults his readers with it, and doesn't blink.

Dang it. Okay. Five stars. show less

In un pugno di pagine Steinbeck è riuscito a lasciarmi completamente senza fiato.
Siamo durante la depressione, in California. I protagonisti sono due braccianti che si muovono insieme da una fattoria all'altra. George e Lennie, George che si prende cura di Lennie, un gigante buono ma con un ritardo mentale e incapace di gestire la propria forza.
La grandezza di questo breve romanzo, o racconto lungo, sta, secondo me, nella sintesi. Ogni personaggio ha il suo ruolo all'interno della storia, la narrazione presenta spesso delle ripetizioni (sì, 100 pagine densissime e ci sono pure delle ripetizioni!), ma queste sono funzionali ad arricchire, ad ogni passaggio, dettagli e drammaticità al racconto.

Io l'ho trovato molto teatrale, forse show more anche perché gran parte della narrazione è occupata da dialoghi e questo me lo ha fatto ulteriormente amare, perché durante la lettura sono riuscita a visualizzare i personaggi e lo spazio intorno a loro. show less

If there is a benefit to lockdown, it’s been having the time to branch out and read books that I might not have time to during ‘normal life’. I generally want something that I’m going to like or find interesting – there isn’t time for risky choices. I’ve been hearing a lot about John Steinbeck from various people so I decided to try one of his shorter works to see if I enjoyed it. (Apparently buying this book in the same transaction as the new Christina Lauren is odd, but I stand by my diverse reads). You know what? I did enjoy it and I plan on cleaning out a few shops of their Steinbeck novels.

Of Mice and Men isn’t particularly long, but it punches way above its weight. It’s incredibly evocative of another time and show more another place. You can feel the sun on the backs of the characters and see the stream and mountains in the distance. It’s clear that the time of the novel is not ours and that adds a sense of nostalgia (possibly heightened in this time of stay home). It’s easy to read and easy to picture the characters. The novel also has a sense of foreboding in that all may not turn out as the main characters hope…

George and Lennie are two men making their way to a ranch with the aim of making some money and buying their own little farm. The caveat is that Lennie needs to stay out of trouble. On meeting Lennie, the reader can’t help but wonder what George is talking about. Lennie is a big guy with a lot of strength, but he is gentle. He just wants to touch nice things, like mice and pretty dresses. George guides him (some might say bullies him) through life, as Lennie isn’t too bright and needs frequent direction in what to do and what not to do. It’s a unique relationship, but one built on friendship. George looks after Lennie, and Lennie trusts George completely.

Once the pair get to the ranch, they meet the like-minded Candy, who shares their dream of a place to live. Here, there are also a number of marginalised characters reflecting the time period. Curley’s wife doesn’t get a name and she’s described as trouble by the other men. She’s bored and lonely. Crooks lives in a shed on his own because of the colour of his skin and is bitter about the way he’s been treated by others. The only one to make a connection with these characters is Lennie, who is also on the outer of society. It’s hard not to like or empathise with Lennie, as he doesn’t understand his strength or the implications. And the ending? If you don’t know it, prepare to be shocked. Then prepare to think of how it could have ended instead. Who is right and who is wrong? Steinbeck knows how to twist the knife after creating such memorable characters in this short novel. That’s why I’m going back for more of his work – he’s got the power to break the reader’s heart.

http://samstillreading.wordpress.com show less

it's telling what i remembered, and what i didn't from this beautiful little book. i hadn't really remembered this analysis of community and how people need each other. how he compares these solo white men who work a few weeks here and there, moving from place to place, never really making connections or stability, with the cast-out black men and the white women who aren't allowed in, aren't given space, aren't made welcome with the white men. their loneliness is different but born of similar places, and it was interesting to think about. he handles that well. it was surprising to me that i hadn't remembered the important part of the inciting incident that made lennie run. that i remembered the death of the pup, but not the woman, says show more something about me. certainly i didn't remember that she dies right after she's given some real humanity, when we come to understand her so much better, and to see in her the sadness and loneliness she carries. i also didn't remember how the shooting of candy's dog so perfectly sets us up for the shooting of lennie, not just in foreshadowing, but in the way you can find a reason to do something like that.

he says a lot in a really small number of pages. (3.25 stars)

from may 2014: i hadn't read this since high school a little over 20 years ago and hadn't remembered the powerful punch this little book packs. it's not a flawless book but it's got good commentary on race, gender, migrant workers, loneliness, and it nearly knocked me over even though i should have seen the ending coming a mile away. (3.5 stars) show less

I am so happy that I finally read this, although happy might not be the right word. I bawled my eyes out at the end, I really did. What a masterpiece. How can so much be conveyed in such a short text? The impotence, the helplessness, the desperation. I don't know if I would give five stars to such a bleak text under usual circumstances, but I have to, because the characters and their emotions were so real to me and I know that I will think about this story for days and days to come. Apart from George and Lenny, Candy is the character who stood out to me the most and whose story broke my heart.
And well, of course I felt that it would all culminate in tragedy, but I did not see that ending and I am still recovering. I still feel it like a show more punch in the gut. show less

I came across this little book while I was sorting through some books in the wardrobe today and decided on a whim to reread it this morning. I finished it a couple of hours later with tears in my eyes, just like last time.

I started reading it for the first time at school in year 9, I think it was, and was sure it wasn't going to be up my street. I ended up racing home from school and borrowing my stepdad's copy so I could read to the end NOW (and was glad I did so it didn't catch me off guard in class!). Second time round some of the urgency had ebbed away from the pull of the plot, but the tension was still there and I found it as moving as before.

I actually remembered a lot of what we'd learnt back at school as I read, which was a show more bit distracting, but Steinbeck drags the reader into the story of Lennie and George from the first couple of pages, and holds you there until he's ready to let you go. I liked the way there were two different emotional layers from very early on too: the top layer of Lennie's delightful innocence and the simple day to day existence of a ranch labourer, and the ominous undercurrent of foreboding and danger, which combine to create such a resonant atmosphere. It's humorous yet heavy, everyday yet profound, all at once, particularly with the realities of ranch life and race issues thrown in.

It's quite difficult to review 'Of Mice and Men' in a way that will do it justice - such a complex set of reactions and feelings about such a little book - but suffice to say, I will be reading more Steinbeck soon! show less

This is a parable that works on so many levels: Cain vs. Abel, male bonding, the haves and have nots, the earthly paradise, the futility of dreams, natives vs. interlopers, the threat of female sexuality ... On the surface it's a simple tale, but think about it a little and it becomes amazingly complex. A slight complaint is that the characters lack multi-dimensionality like you find in the greatest novels. But again, this is a parable. I just read this for the first time as an older adult and wish I had studied it in school because there is so much to say about it. But I don't think it would be appropriate for Catholic schools in the sixties given the book's profanity, sexuality and violence.