What If?
Of Mice and Men is set over 3 days, which is a very short period of time considering all the events that it consists of. Each event in the novella is extremely important to uncover emotions/mentality of the characters and also reveal some of the attitudes that Steinbeck had; which he had portrayed through his novella. For example, Lennie accidentally killing Curley's wife reflects his innocence and lack of control in the similar situations previous to that moment, like killing the puppy. This emphasises his clumsiness and even the lack of understanding of his physical abilities.
I see this novella as quite a tragic one. It seems to be a series of unfortunate events revolving around this unfortunate pair of friends. But what if Steinbeck wrote it differently? What if some sections were altered or cut out completely?
The big shooting scene: probably the most shocking, yet memorable occurrence. What if it didn't happen? I imagine that if Lennie was still alive, he probably wouldn't be imprisoned or not for very long because of his noticeably low level of mental ability. This would leave George choosing over two situations: staying or leaving Lennie. Of course we've seen how strong their friendship has become and where there may be cracks in the friendship, but George has always stuck by him. It wouldn't be surprising if George stuck with Lennie after what happened in Weed, but then again, we understand that sometimes George feels as though the burden that he would have to carry around could tip him over the edge. I think that it was important that Steinbeck ended the novel in this way as although at first the shooting is very shocking to the reader, we grow to understand that George is in no way selfish, despite what comes across.
This dream ranch that is a reoccurring vision in the novella is one that is fixed in our minds throughout the whole novel. However, after Lennie kills Curley's wife, the offer made with Candy shatters which creates sympathy for George, Lennie and Candy. This dream is what motivates them to work hard on the ranches together and its this shared commonplace that strengthens their friendship. What if they achieved their dream? First of all, Lennie probably wouldn't have killed Curley's wife and therefore George wouldn't have had to kill Lennie. It would probably end the novella on a very positive and hopeful note rather than one that is quite suspended when Carlson says "Now what the hell ya supposed is eating' them two guys?"
We could have potentially seen this seemingly ordinary desire become true for these characters which was seen as an 'American Dream' in the time in which this book was written. Because of the low quality of life that we are shown that they live, with them staying in a bunkhouse, we want the best for these innocent protagonists. However, Steinbeck snatches this dream from them, making their downfall seem more tragic than it should be. There are an abundance of troughs in George and Lennie's 3 day account and a minuscule amount of peaks, so when something good comes along, we immediately feel happy for them, but then the decline in luck makes these peak moments far out of reach. I think that it was important for Steinbeck to take away this dream because it is very close to reality. Its not a fictional or fantasy novel; it highlights the realities of life in 1960's America and what people in that society had to deal with. Not all wishes came true, and no matter how close you are to reaching it, one thing (no matter how big or small) can change it. It makes us realise that not only in this period of time, but for this time-period, no matter how hard we strive and work to achieve something, theres a sense of inevitability that not everything will go to plan, whether its for the best or the worst. Therefore not only is Steinbeck highlighting historical moments but he's also indicating morals and lessons that the reader can take with them after reading the book.
Although these are only two of the major scenes in the novella, it really displays how well crafted this novella really is. Steinbeck manages to impress his readers despite using quite simple language in comparison to other novels and in less than 150 pages. In my opinion, all the decisions that Steinbeck made in his novella could not have been better than the ones he had chosen. Thinking about all the other possible outcomes, his choices seem the most logical yet most intriguing. It almost seems as though he's trying to portray himself thought the character of George?
I see this novella as quite a tragic one. It seems to be a series of unfortunate events revolving around this unfortunate pair of friends. But what if Steinbeck wrote it differently? What if some sections were altered or cut out completely?
The big shooting scene: probably the most shocking, yet memorable occurrence. What if it didn't happen? I imagine that if Lennie was still alive, he probably wouldn't be imprisoned or not for very long because of his noticeably low level of mental ability. This would leave George choosing over two situations: staying or leaving Lennie. Of course we've seen how strong their friendship has become and where there may be cracks in the friendship, but George has always stuck by him. It wouldn't be surprising if George stuck with Lennie after what happened in Weed, but then again, we understand that sometimes George feels as though the burden that he would have to carry around could tip him over the edge. I think that it was important that Steinbeck ended the novel in this way as although at first the shooting is very shocking to the reader, we grow to understand that George is in no way selfish, despite what comes across.
This dream ranch that is a reoccurring vision in the novella is one that is fixed in our minds throughout the whole novel. However, after Lennie kills Curley's wife, the offer made with Candy shatters which creates sympathy for George, Lennie and Candy. This dream is what motivates them to work hard on the ranches together and its this shared commonplace that strengthens their friendship. What if they achieved their dream? First of all, Lennie probably wouldn't have killed Curley's wife and therefore George wouldn't have had to kill Lennie. It would probably end the novella on a very positive and hopeful note rather than one that is quite suspended when Carlson says "Now what the hell ya supposed is eating' them two guys?"
We could have potentially seen this seemingly ordinary desire become true for these characters which was seen as an 'American Dream' in the time in which this book was written. Because of the low quality of life that we are shown that they live, with them staying in a bunkhouse, we want the best for these innocent protagonists. However, Steinbeck snatches this dream from them, making their downfall seem more tragic than it should be. There are an abundance of troughs in George and Lennie's 3 day account and a minuscule amount of peaks, so when something good comes along, we immediately feel happy for them, but then the decline in luck makes these peak moments far out of reach. I think that it was important for Steinbeck to take away this dream because it is very close to reality. Its not a fictional or fantasy novel; it highlights the realities of life in 1960's America and what people in that society had to deal with. Not all wishes came true, and no matter how close you are to reaching it, one thing (no matter how big or small) can change it. It makes us realise that not only in this period of time, but for this time-period, no matter how hard we strive and work to achieve something, theres a sense of inevitability that not everything will go to plan, whether its for the best or the worst. Therefore not only is Steinbeck highlighting historical moments but he's also indicating morals and lessons that the reader can take with them after reading the book.
Although these are only two of the major scenes in the novella, it really displays how well crafted this novella really is. Steinbeck manages to impress his readers despite using quite simple language in comparison to other novels and in less than 150 pages. In my opinion, all the decisions that Steinbeck made in his novella could not have been better than the ones he had chosen. Thinking about all the other possible outcomes, his choices seem the most logical yet most intriguing. It almost seems as though he's trying to portray himself thought the character of George?
Comments
Post a Comment