After reading the book “Mice of Men” over the summer, I found myself disliking the book for its surfaces level apperance. George and Lennie came off as the two main characters that complemented each other in the size and smarts, along with Crooks, Candy, Slim, and Carlson; some semi-interesting farm hands with very different personalities. Although the book did not intially teach me much about anything, reading it challenged me to find a deeper meaning in each characters actions and personalities. This level of anaylsis is a quality that I want to develope as it will help with quicker comprehension and creativity when writing essays. In this upcoming semester I hope to read books that challenge me to dig and reason to understand underlying ideas.
What made me more engaged in “Mice of Men” was the approach that Steinbeck took in developing the overall plot that eventually ended with Lennies death. Steinbeck created Lenny as a character based on innocence and vulnerability, and then placed him in a huge powerful body. Steinbeck describes Lennies childlike innocence when interacting with Crooks, “s’pose George went into town tonight and you never heard of him no more.” He pressed foward some kind of private victory. “Just s’pose that,” he repeated. “He won’t do it,” Lennie cried. “George wouldn’t do nothing like that. I been with George a long time. He’ll come back tonight” (73). Stienbeck uses Crooks to expose one of the many vulnerable aspects of Leenie by comparing him to a lost child. By combining size and the innocence of a child, Lennie was doomed from the beginning of the book. His innocence, care for animals, and his positive outlook on life kept me reading to see what could happen when he interacted with Curley and his wifes brute and seductive personalities. What disturbed me was I knew Lennie would die before it ever actually happened and Steinbeck wanted me to become more attached before his death.
Book Blog 2016 