Of Mice and Men is an interesting story which was set in the 1930s, a time when America was struggling with the Great Depression. What sets the story apart from others is that the two main characters weren’t the kind that would be considered great role models. Although they had their dreams and ambitions, just like any other American, how they chose to live their lives was very questionable, they were also very broke. The story is filled with prejudice, racism, sexism and other controversial themes. Although it is full of these things, the book is relevant to contemporary culture because it can still apply today with its vast realism.
One of the biggest themes evident in the book was dreams, hopes and plans. All of the characters showed that they had something that they wanted to achieve. However, the difference between dreams and aspirations, or something that a person worked for was vague. There was a very thin line between dreams and actually making it into a reality. When Candy announced that he did, in fact, have money for the farm that everyone wanted to have, the narrator stated something which was quite interesting. He questioned whether or not the two main characters actually believed that they would get a farm. This brings the question to mind, did they really thing that they would get a ranch or was it something that would only get as far as their imagination. This is reflective of the time that they were in, which was during the Great Depression. People went as far as dreaming things, or hoping for things, but they did not really believe in their hearts that they would reach those dreams. This can apply today with people who are in the lower middle class or even those below the poverty line. They work all day and night, some pulling two jobs, just to try and make end meets. They do dream of a better life, and they do want to change their paths, but do they really believe that they eventually can through hard work?
"Sure," said George. "All kin's a vegetables in the garden, and if we want a little whisky we can sell a few eggs or something, or some milk. We'd jus' live there. We'd belong there. There wouldn't be no more runnin' round the country and gettin' fed by a Jap cook. No, sir, we'd have our own place where we belonged and not sleep in no bunk house." (Steinbeck 3.202-203).
The stories about owning a farm or ranch were like bedtime stories or fairytales to the two. When they would talk about it, you could tell that they were lighting up inside. This small dream is something that Candy said all farmhands dreamt of. This was because they would own everything and just have other people work for them. It wasn’t much of a dream, but it was something to hope for. However, it wasn’t clear if the two would ever reach their dream as things started to crumble even before they got anywhere near to owning a farm.
The story is told in third person, and there is a narrator who conveys the message to the readers. This is very appropriate since the narrator provides an omniscient tone to the book, where he could see past the characters’ flaws. Although the narrator is omniscient, and even sets the setting of the book so that the readers could imagine the surroundings or environment, he does not provide anything more than the facial expression or body language of the character. This kind of limited view leaves other things to the readers’ imagination. This means that the reader will be able to empathize whatever the character is feeling just by judging who the character is from the beginning of the book. This kind of set-up shows that everyone is prejudice, like how all the characters in the book were. The story is very real and hard-hitting. It would not have made sense to have the narrator talk about what the characters felt or how they would react exactly.
Like most of Steinbeck’s books, this one revolves around realism and tragedy. This kind of story is fitting for the setting. The reversal of experience from good to bad is seen in the two characters, which is brought about by a flaw. In this case, it was because of Lennie and his simple mind. However, the flaw in George is also seen in how much he trusts Lennie, and in his monologue about the farm, how much he actually needs Lennie. They have this friendship that cannot be torn apart. However, we see even though George is the brighter one out of the two, he mistakenly thinks that he can trust Lennie and that Lennie would do the same thing for him. Even in the end of the book, George realizes his mistake as he was standing over Curley’s wife’s dead body. He says that he knew about Lennie in the back of his head, and he said this in a way that he regretted trusting him or even being friends with him. The interesting thing about this book is the lack of emotion for the characters. Because they are pre-judged and the narrator is distant, they are viewed as an experiment and little is left to empathize for them. This kind of naturalism sees the ending as expected, like there was no other rout. The heroes of the story, one that the readers may or may not have been cheering on, are victims of a great tragedy. Yet, because of the distance that the third-person narrator brings, it shows that life must go on, and it is just one story that won’t change anything else around them. Nor will it improve the state America was in.
Works Cited
Steinbeck, John. "Of Mice and Men. 1937." Of Mice and Men & Cannery Row (1974).
