Of Mice and Men By John Steinbeck

    NEW LONGMAN LITERATURE titles provide an excellent selection of popular modern fiction and are suitable for 14-18 year olds of all abilities. Notes and questions are provided at the beginning of each section to help guide the student's understanding of key themes and language. A programme of study provides practice in skills required at GCSE.

    “Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no family. They don’t belong no place ...With us it ain’t like that.We got a future ... because I got you to look after me and you got me to look after you.”

    George and Lennie are migrant American labourers –the one alert and protective and the other strong, stupid and potentially dangerous. This is the powerful story of their relationship and their dreams of finding a more stable and less lonely way of life. This edition contains notes to help students' understanding.
    --back cover Of Mice and Men


    John Steinbeck Ü 2 Review

    Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck

    Friendship, dream, agony.This book is not an easy read by any means. But while the book graced with beautiful friendships and human kindness, it also explores the darkest aspects of humanity and ugly racism. That's a story of the love of one man for his friend, he is willing to give up so much to help his friend because he loves him like a brother. That's a masterfully written book with a very tragic ending and I couldn't stop my tears.

    I got you to look after me, and you got me to look after you, and that's why.

    Classic. 160 Yet each man kills the thing he loves...

    Oscar Wilde's prison poem came to mind not only for its literal truth in the context of Lenny and George, but also because it evokes the brutal isolation of the whole cast of characters, each one of them stuck in their separate reality and unable to connect with each other. The young lonely wife has nobody to confide in, and keeps looking for trouble out of sheer isolation. The black man is so utterly alone that he is almost insane, and the barrier of his skin colour is even more impenetrable than the woman's gender. George's loneliness is connected to his responsibility for Lenny, and Lenny himself is in the brutal prison of his intellectual inferiority and herculean strength. Even the boss' son is in a no man's land between privilege and torture.

    The dream of sharing a future together keeps the men's spirits alive for a while, and it is contagious. Breaking out of the isolation, enjoying freedom and partnership - those are powerful ideas.

    Yet each man kills the thing he loves...

    The domino effect of Lenny's inability to control his strength or his craving for softness and love makes all dreamers wake up to a nightmare without end. The only solace is finding another human being who understands enough of the pain of killing what one loves to offer a sign of support or friendship in the misery of reality.

    Lenny broke my heart, and yet I had to smile at his limited vision over and over again. When I first read this novel, I was a busy teenager, bored and frustrated that school picked my reading materials for me, not willing to enter into the confused minds of men with whom I had seemingly nothing in common. With hindsight, I see myself in a cloud of ignorance, not fully grasping what happened around me, missing a masterpiece in the process - I was very much like Lenny myself, unaware of the bigger picture of what was going on around me. Reading Of Mice and Men now, to prepare a teaching unit for a new generation of fifteen-year-olds, I find myself more in the role of George, gently coaxing, carefully repeating the information I consider crucial, avoiding too much detail out of fear to completely lose the attention of my students. Lenny and George live a life of their own in my head now, and they have transcended their bitter story and become part of mine.

    Just what one expects of a great classic! 160 Oh shit. Don't laugh at me but I just now got this:

    Of Mice & Men has been on my bucket list for a while. It's one of those stories that are kind of everywhere, but somehow I've still managed to avoid spoilers for the past 45 years.
    I'm going to go out on a long shaky limb and say it's probably because nothing about me lends itself to paying any attention to mopey books about ranch hands.

    Steinbeck covers a lot of ground in this relatively small tale. The casually horrible racism, the plight of a man who has the mind of a child, and the bleak outlook for the poor and uneducated once they've passed their point of usefulness. And of course, those painted tarts that flirt and wreck a man's sanity. <--somehow it doesn't surprise me that the hoe was the villain of the piece.

    So. The moral of the story is that you shouldn't pet animals too hard or they'll get all dead and floppy, don't be a mean skank because nobody wants to catch herpes from a complete bitch, and sometimes you just need to shoot a guy in the head to be nice.
    That's it, right? Right?
    Maybe the moral of the story is just that sometimes, no matter how hard you try, shit just goes sideways.

    Yes, it was poignant and worth reading. But more important to me, it was blessedly short. I don't think I would have wanted to endure living in that depressing story for any longer than I did.

    Gary Sinise was an unbelievably incredible narrator. I mean, I actually had to go back and make sure this audiobook didn't have a full cast because his voices were so distinct.

    160 “Trouble with mice is you always kill 'em. ”

    Breathtaking prose, touching characters and a heart breaking ending. Who said only lengthy novel can make an impact? 160 (Book 608 from 1001 books) - Of Mice And Men, John Steinbeck

    Of Mice and Men is a novella written by author John Steinbeck. Published in 1937.

    Of Mice and Men tells the story of George Milton and Lennie Small, two displaced migrant ranch workers, who move from place to place in California in search of new job opportunities during the Great Depression in the United States.

    عنوانهای چاپ شده در ایران: «موشها و آدمها»؛ نویسنده: جان استاین‌بک (اشتاین بک)؛ انتشاراتیهای: (اساطیر، امیرکبیر، کانون معرفت، زرین، مدبر، علی فرهنگی، سعیدی، چکاوک، گلبرگ برزین، جنگل، در دانش، گلمهر، گویش نو، ماهی، و ...)؛ ادبیات؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: سال 1974میلادی

    عنوان: موشها و آدمها؛ نویسنده: جان استاین‌بک (اشتاین بک)؛ مترجم پرویز داریوش؛ تهران، امیرکبیر، چاپ دوم 1340، در 104ص؛ چاپ سوم سال1356، چاپ چهارم 1362؛ چاپ دیگر تهران، کانون معرفت، 1345، در 184ص؛ چاپ دیگر تهران، زرین، 1362، در 202ص؛ چاپ دیگر تهران، اساطیر، 1366، در 137ص؛ چاپ بعدی 1389، در 136ص؛ شابک 9789643314675؛ چاپ دیگر تهران، مدبر، 1370، در 167ص؛ چاپ بعدی 1388، در 172ص، شابک 9789646631670؛ چاپ دیگر انتشارات علمی فرهنگی، 1394، در 139ص؛ موضوع: داستانهای نویسندگان امریکایی - سده 20م

    مترجم: ولی الله ابراهیمی؛ تهران، سعیدی، 1348، در 175ص؛ چاپ بعدی 1363، در 203ص؛

    مترجم: مهدی خوانساری؛ تهران، چکاوک، 1362، در 195ص؛ چاپ دیگر تهران، پگاه، 1369، در 195ص؛

    مترجم: گلبرگ برزین؛ تهران، گلمهر، 1381، در 137ص؛ شابک 9647438060؛ در 137ص؛

    مترجم: الهام تابع احمدی؛ اصفهان، جنگل، 1382، در 79ص؛ دو زبانه، شابک 9646089857؛

    مترجم: محمدصادق شریعتی؛ تهران، گویش نو، 1387، در 87ص؛ دو زبانه، شابک 9789649616841؛

    مترجم: پریسا محمدی؛ کرج، در دانش، 1387، در 102ص؛ شابک 9789641740940؛

    مترجم: سروش حبیبی؛ تهران، ماهی، 1388، در 154ص؛ شابک 9789642090594؛ چاپ دوم 1392؛ چاپ پنجم 1395؛ شابک 9789642091522؛ در 160ص؛

    مترجم: مینا فراهانی؛ تهران، فرهنگ زبان، 1389، در 84ص؛ دو زبانه، شابک 9789648794670؛

    مترجم: ایمان قادری؛ تهران، ابرسفید، 1391، در 227ص؛ شابک 9786009254507؛

    مترجم: احسان قادری؛ تهران، ابرسفید، چاپ دوم 1393، در 216ص؛ شابک 9786009254507؛

    مترجم: مهدی افشار؛ تهران، به سخن، 1394، در 160ص؛ شابک 9786007987018؛

    مترجم: فرزام حبیبی اصفهانی؛ تهران، زاویه، 1395، در 154ص؛ شابک 9789649562032؛ چاپ دیگر، نشر هرم، 1395؛ شابک 9789648882674؛

    هشدار: اگر این کتاب خود میخواهید بخوانید، از خوانش ریویو خودداری فرمائید؛

    در این داستان «جرج میلتون»، و «لنی اسمال»، دو دوست هستند، که روزگار خویش را در اسبداری‌ها، می‌گذرانند؛ آرزوی دیرین آنها این است، که روزی جایی را بخرند، و در آنجا «خرگوش» پرورش دهند؛ «لنی» از کودکی، از نوازش چیزهای نرم، خوشش میآید، و زور بازوی بسیار دارد؛ او چندان باهوش نیست؛ دچار دردسر میشود، به ویژه هنگامی که زن پسر ارباب، «کرلی»، از او میخواهد تا موهایش را نوازش کند؛ «لنی» ناخواسته زن بیچاره را می‌کشد، و از ترس می‌گریزد؛ «کرلی» خشمگین، با مردانش، در پی یافتن و از پای درآوردن «لنی»، راهی میشوند؛ «جرج» هم، به رغم سوگندش، برای پشتیبانی از «لنی»، به گروه میپیوندد؛ و ...؛

    تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 28/05/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 09/05/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی 160

    The title of this novel is only 50% accurate, a very poor effort. Yes, it’s about men, but there’s little or nothing about mice in these pages. Mice enthusiasts will come away disappointed. This got me thinking about other novel titles. You would have to say that such books as The Slap, The Help, The Great Gatsby, Gangsta Granny, Mrs Dalloway and Hamlet have very good titles because they are all about a slap, some help, a Gatsby who was really great, a no good granny, a woman who was married to a guy called Dalloway and a Hamlet. I have no problem with those titles. But you may be poring over the pages of To Kill a Mockingbird for a long fruitless evening to find any mockingbirds coming to any harm at all. Indeed, to coin a phrase, no mockingbirds were harmed during the making of that book. So I rate that title only 5% accurate. And some titles seem to have a word missing, such as Conan Doyle’s The Sign of Four. Four what? It doesn’t say. Perhaps he completed the book and left the title to the very last minute and died as he was writing it down. Same thing with The Crimson Petal and the White. White what? Wallpaper? Hat? Cat? Mouse? Mockingbird? Could be The Crimson Petal and the White Gangsta Granny for all we know. A poor title. And what about The Dharma Bums? I think a Cigarette or You Out is clearly missing from that title. Another grossly misleading title is Women in Love . I can’t be the only reader who was expecting some strong girl on girl action from DH Lawrence but I would have been better off fast-forwarding to the middle part of Mulholland Drive. Now that’s what I call Women in Love. DH, take note. Another badly chosen title is Hitler’s Niece - yes, it is 100% accurate, but at first glance it can look like Hitler’s Nice, and surely that is going to put off a lot of potential readers (except for the readers you really don’t want).

    And what about Call it Sleep? – call what sleep?

    The Catcher in the Rye, The Postman Always Rings Twice, Flaubert’s Parrot, The Camomile Lawn – sometimes obscure titles can be solved if you understand that the author is referring to Death, so, the Catcher is Death, the Postman is Death, the lawn is Death and the Parrot is Death. Of course, I may have got that wrong. It’s something I read somewhere and it just stuck in my mind.

    Some other titles I would give low ratings to :

    The Turn of the Screw completely baffled me – I know that “screw” is what inmates call prison officers, so I was expecting a story about a concert put on by the staff of a large correctional institution. It was nothing like that.

    The Little Prince according to my system does rate 100% but I still think The Little Faux-naif Idiot would have been better.

    The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay – actually, I rate this as 90% accurate – there are two guys who are named Kavalier and Clay, and they do have adventures, but they aren’t amazing.

    A Clockwork Orange – this must be a metaphor for “I have given up thinking of a title for my novel”

    No Name – like A Clockwork Orange this must be where the author couldn’t think of any title so in this case he left it without one, like the Byrds’ album Untitled, or () by Sigur Ros, or several paintings by De Kooning and those other abstract expressionist types; but to call a novel No Name is self-defeating, because No Name then becomes its name – epic fail, Mr Collins.

    The Violent Bear it Away - this is another example of a word missing - possibly took or dragged, I expect that's the sort of thing a violent bear would do I’m surprised the publisher did not catch this error.

    160 I remember reading this at school at being completely uninterested in the story. I remember the teacher droning on about basic plot allegories before we read each section; she would tell us what certain things “meant” before we had even seen them. She would explain how this portrays a vital part of American culture and a vital element of human nature. All in all we were told what to see in the book before we even began reading.

    Perhaps she should have just let us read it first, and see what we took from it before being told how to read it. I hated it at the time. I hated being told that passages meant certain things when clearly criticism is just speculation. This wasn’t effective teaching: it was being told how to think. She should have prized open our minds and made us engage with it more. When I approached it again years later I did so with more of an open mind, I was determined to find more in the book than I’d been taught to see.

    And I did. Lenny and George naively dream of the farm; they dream of a retreat where they can reside in friendship without having to answer to any master. They wouldn’t have to go to work; they can simply work for themselves. Running their own farm would mean that they are self-sustainable. They could grow crops for themselves and choose when they laboured: they would be free. Well George wants this. Lenny just wants a few rabbits to pet. The attractiveness of the dream draws in Candy, who is very old and very lonely. He doesn’t want to end up like his dog: put down because of his years. He wants someone to protect him and care for him in his advanced years. The three become united by this shared dream but it is nothing but fancy.

    “Just like heaven. Ever’body wants a little piece of lan’. I read plenty of books out here. Nobody never gets to heaven, and nobody gets no land. It’s just in their head. They’re all the time talkin’ about it, but it’s jus’ in their head.”

    Indeed, the American dream doesn’t exist in this book. Only harsh cold reality awaits the protagonists. Crooks, for all his cruel and understandable bitterness, was right in the end. The farm is just a dream. It is evocative of the loneliness within the human soul, and how we will always long for the impossible. It’s impossible because there is no sunset over the rainbow. Life doesn’t quite work like that. People don’t always get what they want. The world is a cruel unforgiving place here. This is embodied by Lenny; he is vulnerable and emotionally weak. He is completely unaware of the vicious strength he possesses. He never truly understands the situation. He almost walks through the world blind. The world he sees is different to that of everyone else’s.

    So this is a story about the outsiders, about the unloved and misunderstood. This a story about those that long for an alternative to the drudgery of standard human existence, but have their expectations cut short. This is a story about how we judge people based upon their appearance and how we label them unjustly. This is a story that Mary Shelley would have loved, a story where a character with an innocent heart is destroyed by the world he should have been accepted by.


    You can connect with me on social media via My Linktree.
    __________________________________ 160 John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men is a novella (around 72 pages) that focuses on two men in The Great Depression Era. George is a small man while Lennie is the bigger man. They are two farmhands who have a big dream to one day own their own small place. However, George and Lennie have just been run out of town. Is this ranch their second chance? Will George and Lennie realize their dream?

    Of Mice and Men is a very dark novella. I mean dark. Steinbeck is a master at setting the scene. He begins each chapter with a few paragraphs about the landscape. This sets an eerie tone, almost like sitting on top of a powder keg.

    The character development in this book is really second to none. Many authors will write characters as all good or all bad. However, Steinbeck’s characters are well developed. They are not perfect, and they don’t fit nicely into one mold. That leaves the reader wondering what the character will do because they haven’t been type cast.

    Of Mice and Men is chock full of symbolism. George and Lennie are obsessed with The American Dream. However, is it ever attainable? Does society treat people as interchangeable? Are our social safety nets strong and working appropriately?

    Do our social safety nets work? Please allow me to answer that question from the US perspective. It is a resounding NO. Here in the United States, we have something called Social Security Disability. If you can’t work because of a disability, you can apply for this program. It takes 3 months just to get someone assigned to your case. That is 3 months without being paid. Only 22% of claims are initially approved. The average process takes 27 months (2-3 years). This is someone who cannot go out and get another job. They are disabled! Who can go 2-3 years without getting paid? Who can not pay their mortgage, their car payment, their medical bills for 2-3 years?

    This is a really fun book to talk about in a book club. It was part of the April Readalong. If you want to take a look at our discussion, take a look here.

    Overall, I am happy that I read this book. I really enjoyed how Steinbeck set the scene and admire how he was able to set a super creepy tone. This book has some major depth with his use of symbolism. Of Mice and Men is not long-winded. However, this book was a bit too dark for me. Thanks for everyone who participated in the Readalong!

    2023 Reading Schedule
    Jan Alice in Wonderland
    Feb Notes from a Small Island
    Mar Cloud Atlas
    Apr On the Road
    May The Color Purple
    Jun Bleak House
    Jul Bridget Jones’s Diary
    Aug Anna Karenina
    Sep The Secret History
    Oct Brave New World
    Nov A Confederacy of Dunces
    Dec The Count of Monte Cristo

    Connect With Me!
    Blog Twitter BookTube Facebook Insta 160 I needed a quick read because I stupidly forgot that the library would be closed yesterday for Veteran's Day. I'd exhausted my current supply, and I needed a short term fix to hold me until I could get some new product today. So I grabbed Of Mice and Men off the bookshelf last night.

    And I'm glad I did because I'd somehow remembered that this was a depressing book. How wrong I was! Oh, sure there were some tense moments like when you think Lennie will accidently hurt Curley's wife in the barn. What a relief when George and Candy come in at the last minute and stop anything bad from happening! And isn't it nice that the scare changes both Curley and his wife so that they have a much better marriage and new appreciation for each other.

    Plus, it leads to the great moment when Curley is so grateful that he fronts George, Lennie and Candy the money to finally buy the ranch of their dreams. Oh, and that last scene with George and Candy on the porch of their new home while Lennie tends the rabbits brought a tear to my eye.

    What's that you say? I got the ending wrong? No, I'm quite certain this is what happened. No! Be quiet! I can't hear you! LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA

    Well, somehow I've managed to read close to 800 books by now, and none of those had been Of Mice and Men. That has been remedied now, and I'm feeling emotionally drained by it. So yeah.

    I suppose pretty much everyone knows the heartbreaking story of Lennie and George. I was relatively 'unspoiled' and still knew what happened in the end. I just did not know how or why, but figured out those pretty quickly into the book. And still that did not help the sense of impending doom that was like one protracted gut punch. I think that says something about the masterful writing - where the story takes over so much that you keep reading despite the clear sense of where it is going, without having to rely on suspense or twists - instead, going forward just on the impact of the story itself

    I ought to of shot that dog myself, George. I shouldn't ought to of let no stranger shoot my dog.
    I used to work with Special Education kids some time ago. And I have seen first-hand what Steinbeck describes in Of Mice and Men - the childlike vulnerability and innocence often combined with physical strength, just waiting for something bad to happen. The children we took care of - some of which topped my 5'3'' frame by a foot or so and outweighed me by a good hundred pounds (but despite that a few times I had to physically put myself on between them and a smaller child) - had, unlike Lennie, the society that is determined to protect them. They were luckier than poor George's charge. But I could not help but picture some of them, who have forever secured spots in my heart, in place of Lennie Small, feeling nothing but dread and sadness. Lennie, who is as innocent as one gets, and yet as much of a unwilling menace as one can be. And it was soul-crushing.

    I think the impact of this story was that it did not have me taking sides. I felt bad for Lennie. I felt awful for Curley's wife who does not even have a NAME in this story. I felt sad for George and what he had to do. And I felt bad for the whole bunch of men who had names and stories, and a woman who got one but not the other.
    You God damn tramp, be said viciously. You done it, di'n't you? I s'pose you're glad. Ever'body knowed you'd mess things up. You wasn't no good. You ain't no good now, you lousy tart.
    And that's where this book lost stars for me. Curley's wife, the unwilling almost-antagonist/victim of this story. The woman who had no name except for the possessive one of her husband whose property - and therefore trouble for everyone else - she was viewed as. It seemed that she was the one getting the blame, not as much the crazy volatile husband of hers. After all, she *asked* for trouble, didn't she? At least that's the nagging feeling I got from this story, from the way her character was handled, from the way it was repeatedly stated that a 'tart' like her meant trouble for a man. Blame-the-victim mentality does not sit well with me, and I can't help but think that Steinbeck did that. .

    This book is definitely a classic with a profound impact on the reader, a short read that is in no way easy. It deserves the fame and recognition that it has enjoyed for quite a few years. 3.5 stars from me (it would have been 4.5 stars, but for the literary treatment of Curley's wife). 160