Why I don’t like Of Mice and Men
This isn’t a professional review. This isn’t an unbiased review, or even a particularly good review. Heck, I wouldn’t even call this a review. This is just a little explanation as to why I don’t like this book. It is hastily written and not well-proofread, because I am supposed to be doing homework right now.
Also, there are spoilers. Duh.
I read this book in Honors English my freshman year of high school. And I read it again for my Beginning Novel class in college. I’m glad that we read it, but my opinion on it hasn’t changed.
First off, I’m going to say that the setting is very well done. I may not like Steinbeck very much, but he can certainly paint a picture with words.
I’m also going to say that the characters are well done, too. To me, they felt pretty real. At least for the most part.
And Steinbeck certainly knows how to foreshadow, and use literary devices effectively. Ultimately, I will say that reading the book has made me a better writer, and it’s taught me some interesting things.
Obviously the way he portrays women sucks, but I don’t think anybody actually likes that. Or at least most reasonable, rational people don’t.
So I get why it’s a classic.
But I still don’t like it.
What I don’t like is 1) the ending, and 2) the themes that the ending seemed to imply.
First off, the ending is one of those “let’s be a hero” endings. I remember in my Intro to Film class at BYU (which is an excellent class, by the way — I would definitely recommend it), we had to watch this clip about two dudes being rescued from being lost at sea. This helicopter was trying to lift both of them up at the same time, for some ridiculous reason that I can only assume made more sense in context. Obviously, it couldn’t lift them both at once. So the older mentor dude said “it’s okay, I’ll sacrifice my life for you BECAUSE I AM NOBLE” and the other dude was like “lol nooo you practically raised me BROOO” and of course the moron goes and unclips himself from the cable, falling to his death. Because apparently the helicopter pilot was too stupid to lower them back down, and then pick up them one at a time, more vulnerable guy first.
That’s what I would have done, but then again I’m not a helicopter pilot for a number of reasons.
It’s the same thing with Of Mice and Men. I’ve said this before, and I will say it again: George didn’t have to shoot Lennie.
Or at least if it were me, I certainly would not have shot my best friend, because that is what douchebags do. My general goal in life is to not be one of those. :') Oh sure, he did it humanely, talking about their sweet little dream of owning a farm. Even though they didn't tough it out. So it’s not like he was a totally unredeemable character.
But they could have ran away again. Steinbeck tried to make it seem like the only option was to kill his friend or let someone else do the wicked deed. No. False. Bullcrap.
Look, I get that the theme was that weak people are screwed over by society sometimes. I get it. It happens, it sucks, and we need to do something about that. But George and Lennie still could’ve ran away like they did in Weed. They could’ve hid, or at least tried to. I’d at least try to save the life of my best friend, who didn’t know his own strength and therefore was not intellectually responsible for his actions. Even if I died in the process of trying to save him. Just keep him away from people and things that he could hurt. So he accidentally kills a few animals. And then humans, which is scary. Yeah that's awful, but surely they could’ve figured something out. Tried a little harder. Not given up so freaking easily. Steinbeck presents a very utilitarian perspective here, and to me it is extremely cynical and quite frankly cruel. To me, this is a very, very dangerous way of approaching the world and your choices as an individual.
Now, I certainly don’t think the book should be banned, or even not required reading. It wasn’t like I hated reading it. I just disagree very strongly with its message that “the best-laid plans of mice and men often go astray.” Yeah, they do, but you work through challenging obstacles and you overcome them. That’s kind of the reason why we’re on this earth. Of course life is hard. It’s always been hard, and it always will be hard, and we have to go through copious amounts of pain every single day. But that’s why we work through the obstacles that have been presented to us, even if they’re something as crazy as “my friend has a mental handicap and keeps accidentally killing people because he doesn’t know his own strength.”
Maybe I just like Lennie too much. He didn’t know what he was doing. He didn’t deserve to die. Then again, I am also vehemently opposed to euthanasia, even of animals. So I’m definitely not giving you an unbiased opinion here.
That last scene, with Lennie hallucinating the giant rabbit, was positively terrifying. I completely forgot about that from my initial high school reading, but I sure as heck am not going to forget it now. It is definitely going to give me nightmares. And not the ones I get from scary stories, which are cool nightmares. :D
Also, they gave up on their dream so freaking easily. Just work somewhere else again. Go somewhere else where no one knows you, and keep saving your money. Don’t be an idiot and spend it on prostitutes. Find a different farm if you have to. Don’t throw it all away just because something bad happened.
And even if George did still kill Lennie, he really could have gotten that farm with Candy. He was only a few hundred dollars short. I get that it’s insanely hard to do in the Great Depression, but isn’t that what they were hired for? If Lennie’s dead, then the threat is gone, and if anything George could’ve just moved somewhere else for a while and saved up money there.
The American dream is NOT futile. Yes, it can be harder for some people than others, and that’s unfair and it sucks. Life is unfair. But that doesn’t mean you’re never going to achieve what you want, or at least die trying.
I guess that if anything, Steinbeck certainly elicited a strong reaction from me. So I guess you could say that the novella accomplished its purpose.
I still hate it though.
Have a nice 3-day weekend, peeps.
Also, there are spoilers. Duh.
I read this book in Honors English my freshman year of high school. And I read it again for my Beginning Novel class in college. I’m glad that we read it, but my opinion on it hasn’t changed.
First off, I’m going to say that the setting is very well done. I may not like Steinbeck very much, but he can certainly paint a picture with words.
I’m also going to say that the characters are well done, too. To me, they felt pretty real. At least for the most part.
And Steinbeck certainly knows how to foreshadow, and use literary devices effectively. Ultimately, I will say that reading the book has made me a better writer, and it’s taught me some interesting things.
Obviously the way he portrays women sucks, but I don’t think anybody actually likes that. Or at least most reasonable, rational people don’t.
So I get why it’s a classic.
But I still don’t like it.
What I don’t like is 1) the ending, and 2) the themes that the ending seemed to imply.
First off, the ending is one of those “let’s be a hero” endings. I remember in my Intro to Film class at BYU (which is an excellent class, by the way — I would definitely recommend it), we had to watch this clip about two dudes being rescued from being lost at sea. This helicopter was trying to lift both of them up at the same time, for some ridiculous reason that I can only assume made more sense in context. Obviously, it couldn’t lift them both at once. So the older mentor dude said “it’s okay, I’ll sacrifice my life for you BECAUSE I AM NOBLE” and the other dude was like “lol nooo you practically raised me BROOO” and of course the moron goes and unclips himself from the cable, falling to his death. Because apparently the helicopter pilot was too stupid to lower them back down, and then pick up them one at a time, more vulnerable guy first.
That’s what I would have done, but then again I’m not a helicopter pilot for a number of reasons.
It’s the same thing with Of Mice and Men. I’ve said this before, and I will say it again: George didn’t have to shoot Lennie.
Or at least if it were me, I certainly would not have shot my best friend, because that is what douchebags do. My general goal in life is to not be one of those. :') Oh sure, he did it humanely, talking about their sweet little dream of owning a farm. Even though they didn't tough it out. So it’s not like he was a totally unredeemable character.
But they could have ran away again. Steinbeck tried to make it seem like the only option was to kill his friend or let someone else do the wicked deed. No. False. Bullcrap.
Look, I get that the theme was that weak people are screwed over by society sometimes. I get it. It happens, it sucks, and we need to do something about that. But George and Lennie still could’ve ran away like they did in Weed. They could’ve hid, or at least tried to. I’d at least try to save the life of my best friend, who didn’t know his own strength and therefore was not intellectually responsible for his actions. Even if I died in the process of trying to save him. Just keep him away from people and things that he could hurt. So he accidentally kills a few animals. And then humans, which is scary. Yeah that's awful, but surely they could’ve figured something out. Tried a little harder. Not given up so freaking easily. Steinbeck presents a very utilitarian perspective here, and to me it is extremely cynical and quite frankly cruel. To me, this is a very, very dangerous way of approaching the world and your choices as an individual.
Now, I certainly don’t think the book should be banned, or even not required reading. It wasn’t like I hated reading it. I just disagree very strongly with its message that “the best-laid plans of mice and men often go astray.” Yeah, they do, but you work through challenging obstacles and you overcome them. That’s kind of the reason why we’re on this earth. Of course life is hard. It’s always been hard, and it always will be hard, and we have to go through copious amounts of pain every single day. But that’s why we work through the obstacles that have been presented to us, even if they’re something as crazy as “my friend has a mental handicap and keeps accidentally killing people because he doesn’t know his own strength.”
Maybe I just like Lennie too much. He didn’t know what he was doing. He didn’t deserve to die. Then again, I am also vehemently opposed to euthanasia, even of animals. So I’m definitely not giving you an unbiased opinion here.
That last scene, with Lennie hallucinating the giant rabbit, was positively terrifying. I completely forgot about that from my initial high school reading, but I sure as heck am not going to forget it now. It is definitely going to give me nightmares. And not the ones I get from scary stories, which are cool nightmares. :D
Also, they gave up on their dream so freaking easily. Just work somewhere else again. Go somewhere else where no one knows you, and keep saving your money. Don’t be an idiot and spend it on prostitutes. Find a different farm if you have to. Don’t throw it all away just because something bad happened.
And even if George did still kill Lennie, he really could have gotten that farm with Candy. He was only a few hundred dollars short. I get that it’s insanely hard to do in the Great Depression, but isn’t that what they were hired for? If Lennie’s dead, then the threat is gone, and if anything George could’ve just moved somewhere else for a while and saved up money there.
The American dream is NOT futile. Yes, it can be harder for some people than others, and that’s unfair and it sucks. Life is unfair. But that doesn’t mean you’re never going to achieve what you want, or at least die trying.
I guess that if anything, Steinbeck certainly elicited a strong reaction from me. So I guess you could say that the novella accomplished its purpose.
I still hate it though.
Have a nice 3-day weekend, peeps.
Comments
Post a Comment