"Of Mice and Men" explores such a range of issues in America during the 1930s that it's hard to keep track of them all; it's amazing that Steinbeck was able to pack so much in to such a small novel.
Racism really is a key gripe for Steinbeck. If we look at this idea we can easily group it alongside intolerance, or perhaps this is better as an umbrella term covering Racism, Disability, Ageism and Sexism.
Intolerance is rife in "Of Mice and Men", which is ironic as the title, remember, comes from Robert Burns' poem "To a Mouse". In this poem Burns 'voice' makes the point that man and nature chould be living alongside each other and actually should be tolerant of each other, whether one is a mouse or a man - we are all part of the bigger picture and no one, or thing, has more of a right than another. Don't forget the value of alluding to this in your essay if you have the opportunity as it can demonstrate your ability to deepen your understanding and exploration of the novel.
Crooks, effectively, has an entire chapter dedicated to him. Out of all the characters the extent that Steinbeck goes to to describe his living conditions, his belongings and the man's personality ('proud, 'aloof') is extraordinary. After all, Lennie and George are the focus of the story, yet neither have the level of attention from teh author in one go that Crooks has.
Think about what Crooks has: he has nothing. He may own a few valued posessions and even 'gold-rimmed' glasses, but what good is that when he is treated the way he is by wider society. Candy, Lennie and George (Slim too) are pleasant enough to Crooks, but it's not enough for him. Curley's wife knows his place and reminds him of it, again this is an irony: one inferior individual reminding another inferior individual of their inferiority. She wants to be accepted for what she is yet cannot accept the tone Crooks takes with her - is it her racism that comes out in response to this or her wounded humanity? Is she purely spiteful, or can she be forgiven considering the circumstances and context?
The most obvious reference to racism is the use of the word 'nigger', this is how Crooks is first referred to, and repeatedly too. It embeds the idea that this is how he is first viewed, before his name, much like Curley's wife, or perhaps even the dog.
Candy is the one to first use it - does he use it as a simple noun, like you would any other noun, or is there a sense of malice behind its use?
Is it simply a word that is part of their environment? This, of course, does not make it acceptable, but some language can be used in ignorance unless it is challenged. Remember Jim's outburst around the word 'gay'? He argues that it is just a noun/adjective and carries no derogatory connotations, but just because he used it that way does that make it alright? There are plenty of people who will use it intentionally to hurt others or to firm up the idea that being gay is a bad thing. Does Steinbeck use it with this intention (not to wound, but to alert us to its use)? Does Candy display a level of intolerance, or is Candy a victim of the maliciousness of language as well through his ignorance?
Jim, I'm sure you won't mind being featured in this post.
STOOPID
ReplyDelete