



Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
An overview of John Steinbeck's novel 'Of Mice and Men,' focusing on its historical context during the Great Depression and Steinbeck's experiences. The text also discusses the literary context, comparing it to Harriet Beecher Stowe's 'Uncle Tom's Cabin' and Ernest Hemingway's influence. The document highlights the themes of loneliness, powerlessness, and dreams present in the novel.
What you will learn
Typology: Lecture notes
1 / 6
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Overview
Historical Context Steinbeck wrote Of Mice and Men in 1937 in an America that was ravaged by the Great Depression. In 1929 there was an enormous stock market crash – caused by speculation – that wiped out the savings of many middle Americans. The U.S.A responded to the crisis by a policy of isolationism, cutting imports and focussing on domestic production. This was a decidedly bad idea. There was an enormous demand for crops to feed the population in an era where one couldn’t rely on sourcing basic necessities from elsewhere. Farmers, bankers and landowners took advantage of the crisis to grow their own estates at the expense of workers – particularly migrant workers (those without a home, rather than those that came from foreign countries). The increased demand for crops meant an increased demand for workers, certainly, but the supply of workers grew at a much larger rate as people lost their savings, sources of income and often even their houses. Lennie and George are both built of this mould – they have no place to call home so they dream of somewhere where they can settle. Many dismiss their dream as one that millions have had and have never manage to fulfil. Here, Steinbeck mounts an obvious criticism of what was, until 1931 when the term was coined by James Truslow Adams, an unspoken national ethos
about Adolf Eichmann’s trial in Jerusalem, called the ‘banality of evil’ – an evil which is unaware of its own cruelty. Literary Context Novels of this kind were common enough in America – deeply moralistic pieces with somewhat underdeveloped characters are a tradition dating back to Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Uncle Tom’s Cabin is an anti-slavery novel whose protagonist, Tom, is a noble and principled black slave who stands up for his ideals and earns the grudging respect of his white oppressors. Stowe’s novel is credited with altering American attitudes towards race to at least some extent. However, it arguably failed to ameliorate the plight of African Americans as its simplistic portrayal of Tom and other characters inspired a great deal of stereotypes about black people prevalent to this day – ‘uncle tom’ is now a pejorative directed at black people who are accused of selling out to white people, ‘picaninny’ was co-opted into a racial slur and contributed to a developing culture of minstrelsy, and the ‘mammy’ figure stereotyped black women as fat, sassy and subservient to white authority. Steinbeck’s novella, with its marginally more complex characters, paints a starker picture of humanity, warts and all, as no one within the book can properly be called morally upstanding. This places Steinbeck firmly within the context of literary realism – a movement spawned in the late 19th^ century in opposition to romanticism. Where romanticism emphasised idealism, the human spirit and sensitivity (in other words, things as they should be), realism instead tried to depict things as they are. The scenes explored by realism are banal and commonplace, not idealised and romantic. It attempts to capture the subtle magic of the everyday and the beauty of the commonplace in an attempt to elevate the ordinary to art. However, one could argue that Steinbeck only captured things as they were to white men; his characterisations of women and black men in the novella are certainly found wanting. He encourages us to blame Curley’s wife for her own death. Crooks is portrayed as bitter in his treatment of white men because he isn’t willing to indulge innocent Lennie until he feels sorry for ‘torturing’ him. Even Aunt Clara, entirely willing to care for Lennie until she died, is called a ‘little fat old woman’ and only arrives in the story to chastise Lennie for how he’s an inconvenience to George. Some have attributed his reflections on the nature of stiff upper lip, stone-faced, stoic masculinity to his reverence for his contemporary, Ernest Hemingway. Steinbeck said of
Hemingway that he was perhaps ‘the finest writer of our generation’. The feeling was not reciprocated, Hemingway routinely criticised Steinbeck as a popular writer whose novels were cheap and easy. There are a number of explanations for why this may be the case. One of the most compelling is that Hemingway was a notoriously competitive author who was determined to be the master of his craft. The other is that Steinbeck’s representation of masculinity was fundamentally found wanting in comparison to Hemingway’s presentation of the same theme (novels like The Garden of Eden certainly suggest that Hemingway’s relationship with the masculine identity was a good deal more complex than people have attributed to him). It is quite coherent to hold that Hemingway’s disdain for Steinbeck was justified. Many critics, including the New York Times and Arthur Meizner, have accused Steinbeck’s work of being superficial, sentimental, and overly moralistic. I tend to agree with this assessment. These opinions tend to rest on the distinctive lack of moral progress his characters make and how this constitutes a flaw in his use of characterisation. The ‘moral of the story’, such as it were, often takes precedence over the story itself. Additionally, Steinbeck lacks something of an original style – he borrows heavily from Hemingway but lacks the innate sense of rhythm, grace and poise that Hemingway had. For example: “His eyes passed over the new men and he stopped. He glanced coldly at George and then at Lennie. His arms gradually bent at the elbows and his hands closed into fists. He stiffened and went into a low crouch. His glance was at once calculating and pugnacious. Lennie squirmed under the look and shifted his feet nervously. Curley stepped gingerly close to him.” This collection of sentences is meant to demonstrate Steinbeck’s comparative lack of fluency. He ignores some of the most basic traits of good writing: he does not vary his sentence lengths, his descriptions of what is meant to be intimidating is anything but, and his prose contradicts itself. One could, in an essay, criticise his lack of technique just as easily as one could commend it. Still, it is worth noting that Steinbeck intended for the book to double as a play; such that its dialogue could be repeated on stage verbatim without much loss to the literary quality of the work. The descriptions of setting that precede the dialogue heavy prose can be considered akin to act and scene breaks. This also explains the extreme symmetry of the book in its 3 acts of 2 scenes each. If we view the book in this light, its lack of technical skill is no longer as much of a problem. The prose is not meant to be beautiful, but instead utilitarian. The beauty of the book lies in its plot and characters; not in its words.