OF MICE AND MEN [Mass Market Paperback]

One of the things that immediately stuck out to me about this book is Steinbeck's writing style. Heavily focused on dialogue, the overall terseness and efficient use of words is only interrupted occasionally when Steinbeck describes a new scene, where he goes into great detail. Otherwise, all you see on paper is exactly what you need to understand the story; this prevents it from dragging too much, and it allows the story to progress more quickly without spending forever on the same topic. This results in a natural flow of events that won't leave you reading the same thing re-stated 10 times; as a result, you'll want to read more because you know good things are always around the turn of the page. To almost put it in a blatantly simple manner, this reads like a very complex bedtime story.

Probably the thing that sticks out most to me is the incredibly well portrayed characters. Steinbeck takes a very Hemingway-like approach in both quantity and quality of characters; he keeps the book very condensed in terms of plots, sub-plots, complex characters, etc ...(it's barely 100 pages), which means you won't be scratching your head after every chapter going, "What on earth just happened?" It's a testament to his writing style that each character is so individually portrayed in a span of barely 100 pages, yet I didn't feel like anything was missing; I could visualize every one of the characters in real life. He does an excellent job of fleshing out the characters simply through what they say, not having to rely on superfluous dialogue or extraneous details to get their personalities across.

Finally, the ending of Of Mice and Men is very powerful. It illustrates a theme that must have been particularly prevalent in them minds of most people during the Great Depression: "When do we draw the line on tolerance and do what has to be done?" Although the entire book is impressive in its lucidity, the ending is particularly impressive because it brings extreme tragedy to the novel without a change in style; it's perfectly believable, yet not something you really want to believe. Part of it is due to the memorable characters (I assure you you won't forget Lennie after the ending of the book), part of it is just Steinbeck's genius. Pick up a copy of this classic book! Another novel I need to recommend -- completely unrelated to Steinbeck, but very much on my mind since I purchased a "used" copy off Amazon is "The Losers' Club: Complete Restored Edition" by Richard Perez, an exceptional, highly entertaining little novel I can't stop thinking about.

· "Of Mice and Men" was banned:
Syracuse, Indiana, 1974;
Oil City, Pennsylvania, 1977;
Grand Blanc, Michigan, 1979;
Continental, Ohio, 1980
Skyline High School, Scottsboro, Alabama, 1983.

· The book was challenged:
Greenville, South Carolina, 1977;
Vernon-Verona-Sherill, NY, School District, 1980;
St. David, Arizona, 1981;
Telly City, Indiana, 1982;
Knoxville, Tennessee, School Board, 1984

Steinbeck wrote the novel at his house in Los Gatos, Ca back in 1937. It was an era of depression; migrant workers and poverty persisted in the US. Steinbeck had dropped out of Stanford earlier to work on the Sprechels Sugar Ranch in this area as a farm hand. He observed the workers behavior and wrote about them. They represented low education and economically poorly people who would do anything to survive. He accurately described the way things were with no flowerily words.

The plot of the novel was quite straight forward.

George Mitton (witty, small) and Lennie Small (big man with small brain) both dreamed of acquiring a little land of their own someday. They also were in need of each other's company. This was in the middle of the depression years among many poor migrant workers searched for work. As low social class they got no respect in the society. Steinbeck showed his sympathy and concern for the down trodden the way we are concerned with homeless and jobless today.

Paired with both accusations and past accidents these two went to work at a Ranch. It was there the readers were introduced to some interesting characters, all seemed to evolve around rancher's son Curley. Curley is the bully, always ready to pick on those weaker people, but was an unsequired person and a disaster. He failed to be a respected boss #2, husband, and a man. His wife (name never mentioned) knew what was missing in life. She tried to get Lannie's attention in taking her. It led to her accidental death. The end of the novel was worth contemplation and debate. Lennie Small hid in the brush and awaited his frightful punishment. George Mitton had to make a decision; he took matters into his own hands by ending Small's life. The tragic ending could have been averted. Some writers sometimes believe the ending of a novel to provide vicarious happy endings especially targeted for youth. Steinbeck ended it as a tragedy.

Could in the novel George Mitton run away in the novel from the crime scene with the woman? Would George have waited for justice to be meted out by a bunch of gun carrying migrant workers who were ready to shoot Lennie? To some readers true literary tragedy is distasteful. This may be one of the reasons that the novel was challenged by many parents if not banned?

I thought Steinbeck experimented with novel structured like a play. To satirize its silliness, to attack its injustices, to stigmatize its faults. He achieved this goal remarkably well in this novel. In fact, the book was in the form of a play (1937) and ended as an opera (1970).

In retrospect, throughout the novel there were words or vernaculars of improper conduct, vulgar language, presentation of low social class characters which can be objectionable to YA or their parents. I list some examples found from the six chapters including but not limited to:

1.Live off the fatta the lan', 2. Bustin' a gut, 3. Cat house, 4. Health issues like pants rabbits, 5. Shove out of here, 6. What the hell's he got on his shoulder, 7. Crack and flop, 8. Goo-goos.

The urge to control other's lives and restrict what they can read appears to be just below the surface. People may deny that they want to censor books and mouth platitudes about appropriate reading material, but the end results are challenges to books in schools and libraries.

I would hesitate recommending this book at junior high or grade school. As for YA a novel teaches more than the mechanics of reading, the vernaculars used actually helps to stimulate critical thinking skills. As teenagers they are old enough to discuss and debate the meanings of the vulgar language as it applies today. For college age patrons, they are old enough to vote and fight for America they should be allowed to read as they please.
This is a good book to read and to comtemplate.