Which do you think is most important in Of Mice and Men, loneliness or friendship? The examiners tend to be very excited by loneliness (so to speak) and it regularly comes up as a question in one form or another. But I've been thinking about it, and I'm not so sure--perhaps the focus of the book is realy friendship?
Certainly the friendship of Lennie and George (one so often misinterpreted by others)is of key importance in the novel, but consider others also--how Slim offers friendship to George, almost shyly, how Curley has no friends, how much of the interactions in the bunkhouse are almost like primary school--everyone looks to Slim, because he's the most important, to decide the fate of Candy's dog; Crooks is isolated; the guys get the courage to gang up on Curley (the school bully?) once Slim stands up for himself.
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think that the interactions of the men in that novel are like the interactions of children. Perhaps the lack of independence breeds immaturity? Look how Curley is always out for attention, wanting to prove himself sexually, wanting to be the toughest in the playground... but ultimately threatneing people with 'my dad can get you canned'. There's not a lot of maturity there, is there? Candy, unable to make decisions for himself, relying on popular opinion to make an important, life-or-death decision... George and Lennie, wanting to fit in, not get into trouble... and when Curley's wife is killed, like kids they try to sort it out themselves rather than call the law (the teacher)?
What do you think?
I agree that the interactions presented in the novel are like that of children rather school children,there is a sense of 'friendship groups' as well. For example, we repeatedly see George, Lennie and Candy having private talks and the dream is a 'secret'. While on the other hand, Slim and Carlson (and maybe Curley) are generally shown together. Also when there is interaction between these groups something different happens (like shooting Candy's dog and Curley's hand being crushed).
ReplyDeletePerhaps Steinbeck did this on purpose, or perhaps he did it unconsciously, as lots of life situations echo those of the playground; after all, it is where we learn to react with others, and where we start to learn the lessons of life. For example, we could extend it to the current political situation: at the first debate, Brown, feeling his popularity slipping, tries to get in with the new popular kid, by saying 'I agree with Nick', but Nick refuses to acknowledge him, wanting the fame and admirers to himself, and saying he would not be able to cooperate with him in a hung parliament... The political eqivalent of saying you won't partner someone as they're not cool enough for you. Isn't this like when new kids come to school and become the centre of the new 'It' crowd, while the old leaders desperately try to ingratiate themselves with them, in the hope of regaining some of their old popularity???
ReplyDeleteOr am I taking this too far? :D
I like both of these comments! How many of us ever outgrow the politics of the playground? In many ways they are a microcosm of how society works--or society is a macrocosm; take your pick.
ReplyDelete