What do you think?
Rate this book
Uomini e topi
Pubblicato nel 1937 negli Stati Uniti, apparso un anno dopo in Italia nella celebre traduzione di Cesare Pavese, Uomini e topi è un piccolo intenso dramma che colloca l'amara vicenda dei suoi protagonisti su uno sfondo di denuncia sociale. Il romanzo affronta in chiave simbolica il problema dell'emigrazione contadina all'Ovest, terra di mancate promesse negli anni successivi alla Depressione: è la storia tragica e violenta di due braccianti che trovano lavoro in un ranch della California, il grande Lennie, gigante buono e irresponsabile, e il saggio George, guida e sostegno dell'amico nella vana resistenza alla difesa del mondo. Sfruttamento e lotte sociali, ingiustizia e sofferenza umana, tutti temi che verranno trattati con realismo aspro e risentito in Furore, sono qui espressi con una vena di lirica commozione e con quel vigore narrativo che fa di Steinbeck uno dei grandi autori americani.
117 pages, Paperback
First published February 25, 1937
About the author
John Steinbeck
918 books24.1k followersJohn Ernst Steinbeck was an American writer. He won the 1962 Nobel Prize in Literature "for his realistic and imaginative writings, combining as they do sympathetic humor and keen social perception". He has been called "a giant of American letters."
During his writing career, he authored 33 books, with one book coauthored alongside Edward F. Ricketts, including 16 novels, six non-fiction books, and two collections of short stories. He is widely known for the comic novels Tortilla Flat (1935) and Cannery Row (1945), the multi-generation epic East of Eden (1952), and the novellas The Red Pony (1933) and Of Mice and Men (1937). The Pulitzer Prize–winning The Grapes of Wrath (1939) is considered Steinbeck's masterpiece and part of the American literary canon. By the 75th anniversary of its publishing date, it had sold 14 million copies.
Most of Steinbeck's work is set in central California, particularly in the Salinas Valley and the California Coast Ranges region. His works frequently explored the themes of fate and injustice, especially as applied to downtrodden or everyman protagonists.
During his writing career, he authored 33 books, with one book coauthored alongside Edward F. Ricketts, including 16 novels, six non-fiction books, and two collections of short stories. He is widely known for the comic novels Tortilla Flat (1935) and Cannery Row (1945), the multi-generation epic East of Eden (1952), and the novellas The Red Pony (1933) and Of Mice and Men (1937). The Pulitzer Prize–winning The Grapes of Wrath (1939) is considered Steinbeck's masterpiece and part of the American literary canon. By the 75th anniversary of its publishing date, it had sold 14 million copies.
Most of Steinbeck's work is set in central California, particularly in the Salinas Valley and the California Coast Ranges region. His works frequently explored the themes of fate and injustice, especially as applied to downtrodden or everyman protagonists.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57,232 reviews
August 6, 2016
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.
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.
June 16, 2012
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).
August 12, 2024
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!
2025 Reading Schedule
Jan A Town Like Alice
Feb Birdsong
Mar Captain Corelli's Mandolin - Louis De Berniere
Apr War and Peace
May The Woman in White
Jun Atonement
Jul The Shadow of the Wind
Aug Jude the Obscure
Sep Ulysses
Oct Vanity Fair
Nov A Fine Balance
Dec Germinal
Connect With Me!
Blog Twitter BookTube Insta My Bookstore at Pango
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!
2025 Reading Schedule
Jan A Town Like Alice
Feb Birdsong
Mar Captain Corelli's Mandolin - Louis De Berniere
Apr War and Peace
May The Woman in White
Jun Atonement
Jul The Shadow of the Wind
Aug Jude the Obscure
Sep Ulysses
Oct Vanity Fair
Nov A Fine Balance
Dec Germinal
Connect With Me!
Blog Twitter BookTube Insta My Bookstore at Pango
November 12, 2009
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
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
November 17, 2020
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.
__________________________________
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.
__________________________________
January 27, 2021
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.
Classic.
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.
May 21, 2016
“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?
Breathtaking prose, touching characters and a heart breaking ending. Who said only lengthy novel can make an impact?
July 31, 2023
Of Mice and Men is a tale about the ultimate kindness - it is hard to talk about kindness without turning sentimental but John Steinbeck was the one who really could.
Simple-minded men of this cruel world live in their own dreamlands and they dream of rainbows.
His ear heard more than what was said to him, and his slow speech had overtones not of thought, but of understanding beyond thought.
Simple-minded men of this cruel world live in their own dreamlands and they dream of rainbows.
August 1, 2021
(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، ش��بک 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
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، ش��بک 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
November 9, 2024
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.
How?
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, you shouldn'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...?
Or.
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.
PS
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.
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.
How?
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, you shouldn'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...?
Or.
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.
PS
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.
August 30, 2020
"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!
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!
November 15, 2022
Can't believe some teachers make teenagers read this in school.
Don't get me wrong, this was good but it's so... miserable. Everyone's live is so awful.
I need to continue reading more by the author!
Edit: I know the misery is the point. Doesn't mean I enjoyed reading it. It was fine just not a favorite.
Don't get me wrong, this was good but it's so... miserable. Everyone's live is so awful.
I need to continue reading more by the author!
Edit: I know the misery is the point. Doesn't mean I enjoyed reading it. It was fine just not a favorite.
April 22, 2024
Sometimes people can do awful things, sometimes they mean it, and sometimes they don't.
In this novel we learn the story of "George" and "Lennie". Two wandering day laborers traveling together; from work to work, from trouble to trouble. One small and cunning; the other giant, and retarded. Working from city to city, from field to field, but always protecting each other. A dream pushes them forward, work the fields until one day have enough to purchase a small farm of their own. A place where George can work the land, and Lennie tend the rabbits. But there are difficulties, Lennie in his brutish innocence tends to get himself into serious problems, and more often that not, both.
A short but very memorable read from the famed Pulitzer winner John Steinbeck. A little 100p novella about the unbreakable bonds of friendship, and the cruelties of a sometimes hostile rural world.
**** One of those very few exceptions where the movie may actually match the book. John Steinbeck creates two immortal characters, but the movie (1992) gives them a real palpable soul. Mainly due to the exceptional performance of John Malkovich, and a very remarkable Gary Sinise. Brilliant book-to-film adaptation.
-----------------------------------------------
PERSONAL NOTE :
[1937] [103p] [Fiction] [3.5] [Recommendable]
-----------------------------------------------
★★★★☆ Of Mice and Men. [3.5]
★★☆☆☆ Flight.
-----------------------------------------------
A veces la gente puede hacer cosas terribles, a veces lo hacen a propósito, y a veces no.
En esta novela conocemos la historia de "George" y "Lennie". Dos jornaleros errantes viajando juntos; de trabajo en trabajo, de problema en problema. Uno pequeño y astuto, otro gigante y retardado. Trabajando de ciudad en ciudad, de campo en campo, pero siempre protegiéndose el uno al otro. Un sueño los motiva a seguir juntos, trabajar los campos hasta algún día tener lo suficiente para comprar una pequeña parcela propia. Un lugar donde George pueda trabajar la tierra, y Lennie cuidar de los conejos. Pero existen dificultades, Lennie en su bruta inocencia tiende a meterse en serios aprietos... y más que a menudo, a ambos.
Una lectura corta pero muy memorable del afamado ganador del Pulitzer John Steinbeck. Una pequeña novella de 100p sobre los fuertes lazos de la amistad, y las crueldades en un mundo campestre a veces hostil.
*** Una de esas pequeñas excepciones donde la película tal vez supera la obra escrita. John Steinbeck crea dos personajes inmortales, pero la película (1992) les otorga un alma real. Principalmente gracias a las actuación excepcional de John Malkovich, y un muy destacado Gary Sinise. Brillante adaptación de cine.
-----------------------------------------------
NOTA PERSONAL :
[1937] [103p] [Ficción] [3.5] [Recomendable]
-----------------------------------------------
In this novel we learn the story of "George" and "Lennie". Two wandering day laborers traveling together; from work to work, from trouble to trouble. One small and cunning; the other giant, and retarded. Working from city to city, from field to field, but always protecting each other. A dream pushes them forward, work the fields until one day have enough to purchase a small farm of their own. A place where George can work the land, and Lennie tend the rabbits. But there are difficulties, Lennie in his brutish innocence tends to get himself into serious problems, and more often that not, both.
A short but very memorable read from the famed Pulitzer winner John Steinbeck. A little 100p novella about the unbreakable bonds of friendship, and the cruelties of a sometimes hostile rural world.
**** One of those very few exceptions where the movie may actually match the book. John Steinbeck creates two immortal characters, but the movie (1992) gives them a real palpable soul. Mainly due to the exceptional performance of John Malkovich, and a very remarkable Gary Sinise. Brilliant book-to-film adaptation.
-----------------------------------------------
PERSONAL NOTE :
[1937] [103p] [Fiction] [3.5] [Recommendable]
-----------------------------------------------
★★★★☆ Of Mice and Men. [3.5]
★★☆☆☆ Flight.
-----------------------------------------------
A veces la gente puede hacer cosas terribles, a veces lo hacen a propósito, y a veces no.
En esta novela conocemos la historia de "George" y "Lennie". Dos jornaleros errantes viajando juntos; de trabajo en trabajo, de problema en problema. Uno pequeño y astuto, otro gigante y retardado. Trabajando de ciudad en ciudad, de campo en campo, pero siempre protegiéndose el uno al otro. Un sueño los motiva a seguir juntos, trabajar los campos hasta algún día tener lo suficiente para comprar una pequeña parcela propia. Un lugar donde George pueda trabajar la tierra, y Lennie cuidar de los conejos. Pero existen dificultades, Lennie en su bruta inocencia tiende a meterse en serios aprietos... y más que a menudo, a ambos.
Una lectura corta pero muy memorable del afamado ganador del Pulitzer John Steinbeck. Una pequeña novella de 100p sobre los fuertes lazos de la amistad, y las crueldades en un mundo campestre a veces hostil.
*** Una de esas pequeñas excepciones donde la película tal vez supera la obra escrita. John Steinbeck crea dos personajes inmortales, pero la película (1992) les otorga un alma real. Principalmente gracias a las actuación excepcional de John Malkovich, y un muy destacado Gary Sinise. Brillante adaptación de cine.
-----------------------------------------------
NOTA PERSONAL :
[1937] [103p] [Ficción] [3.5] [Recomendable]
-----------------------------------------------
November 5, 2017
I think I've been avoiding John Steinbeck, consciously or subconsciously, ever since I was a horse-loving teenager and thought that The Red Pony would be a nice, pleasant book to read.
I didn't read any Steinbeck books for years.
But I was in the local library, puttering around in the general fiction shelves, and happened to pull this one out and noticed how short it was--only 107 pages. I had just finished reading Jonathan Livingston Seagull, which was a 127-page overdose of cheesy 70's inspiration, and it occurred to me that by reading this book to offset JLS I could restore the cosmic balance in my life, or something like that.
Lennie and George are a unique pair of friends: George is restless, intelligent and often short-tempered; Lennie is huge and incredibly strong, although mentally damaged. He has a childlike sweetness but is easily confused and frightened, and that combined with his strength makes him threatening to others. Somehow, despite their differences, the two have formed a friendship. George tries to protect Lennie from the world . . . and the world from Lennie. It's a difficult task. But they have their dreams and plans of a place of their own, where they can tend a garden and raise animals. And Lennie can take care of the rabbits. It's the most heavenly thing he can imagine.
George and Lennie are hired as field hands at a ranch in California, and the foreshadowings of disaster start to come thick and fast. An old sheepdog whose usefulness has passed is unceremoniously shot. The owner's son Curley comes around to their bunkhouse, spoiling for a fight. Curley's young, bored wife comes around even more often, looking for a different kind of trouble. The hands are sure that they only need a month or two of wages to achieve their plans of a place of their own, but the best-laid schemes of mice and men gang oft agley.
I was expecting to read about shattered dreams, but I was surprised and touched by the strength of the theme of true friendship--not just the friendship between George and Lennie, but also the friendship and understanding offered by Slim, the ranch foreman. With all of the loneliness and cruelty and loss and disappointment that life can bring, it's this one message of hope that I choose to take away from this short but powerful book.
I didn't read any Steinbeck books for years.
But I was in the local library, puttering around in the general fiction shelves, and happened to pull this one out and noticed how short it was--only 107 pages. I had just finished reading Jonathan Livingston Seagull, which was a 127-page overdose of cheesy 70's inspiration, and it occurred to me that by reading this book to offset JLS I could restore the cosmic balance in my life, or something like that.
Lennie and George are a unique pair of friends: George is restless, intelligent and often short-tempered; Lennie is huge and incredibly strong, although mentally damaged. He has a childlike sweetness but is easily confused and frightened, and that combined with his strength makes him threatening to others. Somehow, despite their differences, the two have formed a friendship. George tries to protect Lennie from the world . . . and the world from Lennie. It's a difficult task. But they have their dreams and plans of a place of their own, where they can tend a garden and raise animals. And Lennie can take care of the rabbits. It's the most heavenly thing he can imagine.
George and Lennie are hired as field hands at a ranch in California, and the foreshadowings of disaster start to come thick and fast. An old sheepdog whose usefulness has passed is unceremoniously shot. The owner's son Curley comes around to their bunkhouse, spoiling for a fight. Curley's young, bored wife comes around even more often, looking for a different kind of trouble. The hands are sure that they only need a month or two of wages to achieve their plans of a place of their own, but the best-laid schemes of mice and men gang oft agley.
I was expecting to read about shattered dreams, but I was surprised and touched by the strength of the theme of true friendship--not just the friendship between George and Lennie, but also the friendship and understanding offered by Slim, the ranch foreman. With all of the loneliness and cruelty and loss and disappointment that life can bring, it's this one message of hope that I choose to take away from this short but powerful book.
September 22, 2024
Of Mice & Men, by the modern American author John Steinbeck, is a powerful and moving analysis of life during the Depression of the American era. It deals with the lives of two ranch farm hands, Lennie and George. Lennie is a simple, backward man who is tall and powerful but kind. George is the brains of the outfit, who organizes and arranges for them to get work on the ranches and farms as they travel and dream of getting their place, where they can make some money, have a home, and where Lennie can have lots of rabbits to play with and stroke.
The short novel is set out in acts as though it were a play and begins with the two men having to run away from the ranch they are working at, as Lennie has gotten too fond of one of the women on the farm who was kind to him. As he is pure and likes soft things, he stroked the lady's dress and accused her of trying to attack her. They run off and hide until the men stop searching, then move on to another ranch where they have work lined up.
The novel is about friendship, loneliness, plans, and broken dreams during the Depression. It hits America in the '50s—a must-read.
The short novel is set out in acts as though it were a play and begins with the two men having to run away from the ranch they are working at, as Lennie has gotten too fond of one of the women on the farm who was kind to him. As he is pure and likes soft things, he stroked the lady's dress and accused her of trying to attack her. They run off and hide until the men stop searching, then move on to another ranch where they have work lined up.
The novel is about friendship, loneliness, plans, and broken dreams during the Depression. It hits America in the '50s—a must-read.
August 8, 2021
"Hey Tim, old buddy… I hear you've been depressed recently. A book should cheer you up, right?"
"Why yes Tim, that sounds delightful. Got any good ideas?"
"How about a classic?"
"Brilliant idea Tim! One I haven't read?"
"Of course! How about Steinbeck?"
"I don't know… I hear he's a bit depressing."
"Come now, it's only 105 pages! How depressing could it be?"
…
Should I just end the review there? Nah, of course not.
Of Mice and Men is one of those books that pretty much everyone has read. I once saw an article that said it was one of the most commonly read books in High School classes in America. Somehow it is another one of those classics that I managed to never have assigned to me in both High School or College (and I majored in English). Well, I've read it now. My thoughts?
Well, it's a wonderfully well told story, frequently feeling more like a play than a novel, but I mean that as a compliment as it makes for a fast paced conversational tone. It's depressing as all hell mind you, but wonderfully told.
Did I enjoy reading it? No, no I sure as hell did not. I mean the writing is well done, Steinbeck created one of the best literary pairs ever written and managed to have the most perfect moment of foreshadowing I've ever read (in the form of a dog, so animal lovers beware!). I'm very glad I read it and genuinely liked the book. Enjoyment though? No, no and no.
Do I have anything else to add? Not really. It's a short review, because there's really not much I can say that hasn't already been said. I could address how Curley's wife is annoyingly only called Curley's wife despite being a main character, and the treatment she's given in the book… but I think this is entirely because Steinbeck is showing her only from the point of view of his characters. This is further reinforced by an article I saw in which it discussed how he wrote to Claire Luce, the actress who originated the role on stage saying the following about the character: "She is a nice, kind girl and not a floozy. No man has ever considered her as anything except a girl to try to make... As to her actual sex life — she has had none except with Curley and there has probably been no consummation there since Curley would not consider her gratification and would probably be suspicious if she had any." So I guess mission accomplished in showing how others viewed her, but also a bit of a failure if that was his real aim for the character (though I do love his jab at Curley there).
Will I read more Steinbeck in the future? Sure! I apparently like sliding down the rain slick precipice of despair, so why the hell not? 4/5 stars.
"Tell me what you told me before...about them rabbits"
"Why yes Tim, that sounds delightful. Got any good ideas?"
"How about a classic?"
"Brilliant idea Tim! One I haven't read?"
"Of course! How about Steinbeck?"
"I don't know… I hear he's a bit depressing."
"Come now, it's only 105 pages! How depressing could it be?"
…
Should I just end the review there? Nah, of course not.
Of Mice and Men is one of those books that pretty much everyone has read. I once saw an article that said it was one of the most commonly read books in High School classes in America. Somehow it is another one of those classics that I managed to never have assigned to me in both High School or College (and I majored in English). Well, I've read it now. My thoughts?
Well, it's a wonderfully well told story, frequently feeling more like a play than a novel, but I mean that as a compliment as it makes for a fast paced conversational tone. It's depressing as all hell mind you, but wonderfully told.
Did I enjoy reading it? No, no I sure as hell did not. I mean the writing is well done, Steinbeck created one of the best literary pairs ever written and managed to have the most perfect moment of foreshadowing I've ever read (in the form of a dog, so animal lovers beware!). I'm very glad I read it and genuinely liked the book. Enjoyment though? No, no and no.
Do I have anything else to add? Not really. It's a short review, because there's really not much I can say that hasn't already been said. I could address how Curley's wife is annoyingly only called Curley's wife despite being a main character, and the treatment she's given in the book… but I think this is entirely because Steinbeck is showing her only from the point of view of his characters. This is further reinforced by an article I saw in which it discussed how he wrote to Claire Luce, the actress who originated the role on stage saying the following about the character: "She is a nice, kind girl and not a floozy. No man has ever considered her as anything except a girl to try to make... As to her actual sex life — she has had none except with Curley and there has probably been no consummation there since Curley would not consider her gratification and would probably be suspicious if she had any." So I guess mission accomplished in showing how others viewed her, but also a bit of a failure if that was his real aim for the character (though I do love his jab at Curley there).
Will I read more Steinbeck in the future? Sure! I apparently like sliding down the rain slick precipice of despair, so why the hell not? 4/5 stars.
"Tell me what you told me before...about them rabbits"
September 13, 2021
Well I finally got round to reading it, and I’m pleased to say I wasn’t disappointed. Steinbeck’s descriptions are such that you need no imagination. Touching and beautifully written.
June 27, 2024
Геният на Стайнбек открих за себе си сравнително рано - бил съм 12-13 годишен, когато се натъкнах на негова книга в домашната библиотека. В изданието бяха включени "Улица Консервна" и "За мишките и хората". И до ден днешен си остава загадка за мен, защо ли точно тези две диаметрално противоположни творби са били събрани заедно, в едно книжно тяло?
Първата доста ме развесели и съответно никак не ме подготви за шока от втората. А такъв изпитах доста голям - за първи път се сблъсках с неправдите и жестокостта на живота, който живеят възрастните.
Съдбите на Лени и Джордж погълнаха част от детството ми, но ми помогнаха да израсна. И препрочетох "За мишките и хората" поне пет пъти в следващите няколко години, търсейки и намирайки в нея отговори на фундаментални въпроси.
Има и страхотен филм с Гари Синийз в ролята на Джордж и Джон Малкович в тази на Лени - просто перфектни!
Първата доста ме развесели и съответно никак не ме подготви за шока от втората. А такъв изпитах доста голям - за първи път се сблъсках с неправдите и жестокостта на живота, който живеят възрастните.
Съдбите на Лени и Джордж погълнаха част от детството ми, но ми помогнаха да израсна. И препрочетох "За мишките и хората" поне пет пъти в следващите няколко години, търсейки и намирайки в нея отговори на фундаментални въпроси.
Има и страхотен филм с Гари Синийз в ролята на Джордж и Джон Малкович в тази на Лени - просто перфектни!
October 21, 2017
این استین بک بی رحم! عین تقدیره داستان هاش: اول به آدم رؤیاهای شیرین نشون میده، در حالی که آدم میدونه قراره همه چیز به فاجعه ختم بشه.
فکر نمی کردم بعد از این همه مدت، یه داستان بتونه این طور منقلبم کنه، با این که آماده ی همچین پایانی بودم.
فکر نمی کردم بعد از این همه مدت، یه داستان بتونه این طور منقلبم کنه، با این که آماده ی همچین پایانی بودم.
June 14, 2016
I decided to up my rating with one star as I still think about this novella more than 2 years after I read it.
I will definitely remember this book because of the ending. It was brutal and heartbreaking.
I will definitely remember this book because of the ending. It was brutal and heartbreaking.
August 17, 2021
I read this book for the second time and it's one of the most depressing books I’ve ever read. Till now, it’s my favourite Steinbeck book.
February 11, 2008
It's the way Steinbeck describes things that gets me.
"Crooks, the negro stable buck, had his bunk in the harness room; a little shed that leaned off the wall of the barn. On one side of the little room there was a square four-paned window, and on the other, a narrow plank door leading into the barn. Crooks' bunk was a long box filled with straw, on which his blankets were flung. On the wall by the window there were pegs on which hung broken harness in process of being mended; strips of new leather; and under the window itself a little bench for leather-working tools, curved knives and needles and balls of linen thread, and a small hand riveter. On pegs were also pieces of harness, a split collar with the horsehair stuffing sticking out, a broken hame, and a trace chain with its leather covering split. Crooks had his apple box over his bunk, and in it a range of medicine bottles, both for himself and for the horses. There were cans of saddle soap and a drippy can of tar with its paint brush sticking over the edge. And scattered about the floor were a number of personal possessions; for, being alone, Crooks could leave his things about, ad being a stable buck and a cripple, he was more permanent than the other men, and he had accumulated more possessions than he could carry on his back."
None of this is relevant to the story, and yet a middle chapter opens up with this vivid scene. Steinbeck succeeds because the characters he paints in your head are exact. The first time I saw the movie that was made out of this story, it was just as I had envisioned it. Though the story great itself, the reason I will come back to this book is for the little things, the very things that have made me love Steinbeck so much.
I first read Of Mice And Men my sophomore year of high school, when it was a required reading in Mrs. Beeler's class. I recall disliking almost all required school readings up to this point (though admittedly I had skipped out on the summer reading project of "The Grapes Of Wrath"). When this book was assigned, I knew it was different. I blew through it, reading it in a day or two, even though I wasn't supposed to. For once there was a school book that I enjoyed. And all the credit in the world to my teacher, who chose other good books the rest of the year. So it's been 6-7 years since I've read this, and now, reading it for the second time, it's just as memorable as I remember. The story sticks with you, the imagery sticks. The characters are among Steinbeck's best, painted in such a crystal clear vision of the time.
It's a near perfect short story, and one that I will surely revisit throughout my life.
"Crooks, the negro stable buck, had his bunk in the harness room; a little shed that leaned off the wall of the barn. On one side of the little room there was a square four-paned window, and on the other, a narrow plank door leading into the barn. Crooks' bunk was a long box filled with straw, on which his blankets were flung. On the wall by the window there were pegs on which hung broken harness in process of being mended; strips of new leather; and under the window itself a little bench for leather-working tools, curved knives and needles and balls of linen thread, and a small hand riveter. On pegs were also pieces of harness, a split collar with the horsehair stuffing sticking out, a broken hame, and a trace chain with its leather covering split. Crooks had his apple box over his bunk, and in it a range of medicine bottles, both for himself and for the horses. There were cans of saddle soap and a drippy can of tar with its paint brush sticking over the edge. And scattered about the floor were a number of personal possessions; for, being alone, Crooks could leave his things about, ad being a stable buck and a cripple, he was more permanent than the other men, and he had accumulated more possessions than he could carry on his back."
None of this is relevant to the story, and yet a middle chapter opens up with this vivid scene. Steinbeck succeeds because the characters he paints in your head are exact. The first time I saw the movie that was made out of this story, it was just as I had envisioned it. Though the story great itself, the reason I will come back to this book is for the little things, the very things that have made me love Steinbeck so much.
I first read Of Mice And Men my sophomore year of high school, when it was a required reading in Mrs. Beeler's class. I recall disliking almost all required school readings up to this point (though admittedly I had skipped out on the summer reading project of "The Grapes Of Wrath"). When this book was assigned, I knew it was different. I blew through it, reading it in a day or two, even though I wasn't supposed to. For once there was a school book that I enjoyed. And all the credit in the world to my teacher, who chose other good books the rest of the year. So it's been 6-7 years since I've read this, and now, reading it for the second time, it's just as memorable as I remember. The story sticks with you, the imagery sticks. The characters are among Steinbeck's best, painted in such a crystal clear vision of the time.
It's a near perfect short story, and one that I will surely revisit throughout my life.
October 19, 2023
”We are lonesome animals. We spend all our life trying to be less lonesome.”
—John Steinbeck
Five mind-blown stars!
When I started Of Mice and Men, I wasn’t sure I’d chosen the right read. The dialogue really was not what I expected and Steinbeck’s straightforward prose cut straight to the core of the matter. However, I stuck with it and the reward blew my mind!
Set in 1930s California, the story follows two destitute men as they roam, taking work where it could be found. George and Lennie had grown up together, and when Lennie’s Aunt and caretaker died, George bore the responsibility of watching over him, a man fully grown and built like a bear, but with the innocent mind of a child. Lennie, due to his ineptness, unintentionally creates situations that lead to trouble, and it was up to George to keep them both from being lynched on many occasions. George, though often frustrated with Lennie, dearly loved his friend. All they had was each other and a fanciful dream of owning their own farm. Life on the road can be desperately lonely, and to have such a good companion was a precious commodity. I was filled with respect for George who did everything in his power to take care of his dear friend.
This is not an easy read by any stretch of the imagination. While it is graced with beautiful friendships and the milk of human kindness, the book also explores the darkest aspects of humanity, and the ugly racism in the book is really hard to stomach. Steinbeck writes with a raw realism that is admirable, but his honest depiction brings the cruelty that we all know exists in the world.
The story came together with such a crescendo that my heart nearly burst from my chest. I won’t spoil this for anyone who hasn’t read it, but the tale touched me so profoundly that I was left staring at the last page for ages before I could bring myself to close it.
—John Steinbeck
Five mind-blown stars!
When I started Of Mice and Men, I wasn’t sure I’d chosen the right read. The dialogue really was not what I expected and Steinbeck’s straightforward prose cut straight to the core of the matter. However, I stuck with it and the reward blew my mind!
Set in 1930s California, the story follows two destitute men as they roam, taking work where it could be found. George and Lennie had grown up together, and when Lennie’s Aunt and caretaker died, George bore the responsibility of watching over him, a man fully grown and built like a bear, but with the innocent mind of a child. Lennie, due to his ineptness, unintentionally creates situations that lead to trouble, and it was up to George to keep them both from being lynched on many occasions. George, though often frustrated with Lennie, dearly loved his friend. All they had was each other and a fanciful dream of owning their own farm. Life on the road can be desperately lonely, and to have such a good companion was a precious commodity. I was filled with respect for George who did everything in his power to take care of his dear friend.
This is not an easy read by any stretch of the imagination. While it is graced with beautiful friendships and the milk of human kindness, the book also explores the darkest aspects of humanity, and the ugly racism in the book is really hard to stomach. Steinbeck writes with a raw realism that is admirable, but his honest depiction brings the cruelty that we all know exists in the world.
The story came together with such a crescendo that my heart nearly burst from my chest. I won’t spoil this for anyone who hasn’t read it, but the tale touched me so profoundly that I was left staring at the last page for ages before I could bring myself to close it.
June 30, 2020
I know that this is a reread for me, but I never had Of Mice and Men marked as read in Goodreads. I am pretty sure it was required reading in high school and I know I enjoyed it the first time around. And, as luck would have it, I enjoyed it this time as well.
I can sum it up by saying that Steinbeck can write (and that is an understatement)! I have loved every book I have read by him. The descriptions are vivid, the characters are richly developed, and stories are powerful. Of Mice and Men is no exception. In fact, if you have been wanting to try Steinbeck but find the size of Grapes of Wrath or East of Eden daunting, this is a great place to start.
Even if you have never read this book, you have probably seen many tributes/homages to its main characters George and Lenny; cartoons, movies, tv shows, etc. George is the gruff and scrappy brains of the operation while Lenny is a mentally challenged giant who does not know or understand his own strength. Their relationship is an odd one but kind of beautiful. Without it, this story would just not be the same.
Also, this book has one of the most
This is a classic that I feel everyone should read. And, I feel like Steinbeck is an author that everyone should read at least once. The writing is just too amazing to miss out on and it is so awesome how consistently amazing Steinbeck was.
I can sum it up by saying that Steinbeck can write (and that is an understatement)! I have loved every book I have read by him. The descriptions are vivid, the characters are richly developed, and stories are powerful. Of Mice and Men is no exception. In fact, if you have been wanting to try Steinbeck but find the size of Grapes of Wrath or East of Eden daunting, this is a great place to start.
Even if you have never read this book, you have probably seen many tributes/homages to its main characters George and Lenny; cartoons, movies, tv shows, etc. George is the gruff and scrappy brains of the operation while Lenny is a mentally challenged giant who does not know or understand his own strength. Their relationship is an odd one but kind of beautiful. Without it, this story would just not be the same.
Also, this book has one of the most
This is a classic that I feel everyone should read. And, I feel like Steinbeck is an author that everyone should read at least once. The writing is just too amazing to miss out on and it is so awesome how consistently amazing Steinbeck was.
June 12, 2020
موش ها و آدم ها، خوشه های خشم، شرق بهشت
مغزم از کتاب های ادبیات سال های دبیرستان تربیت شده که به نام اشتاین بک این سه پاسخ رو بده، طوطی وار و بی علاقه
ولی از این به بعد نه
از این به بعد یادم می مونه که تو تاریکی اون شب تب دار یک نفس صحبت های جورج و لنی که کنار آب نشسته بودند رو می خوندم
یادم می مونه که فکر کردم بعضی وقت ها دیوانه وار فقط به یک چیز فکر می کنم، مثل لنی و خرگوش هاش
یادم می مونه که فکر کردم من مثل جورج خیلی جاها می تونستم و می تونم لنی های زندگیم رو رها کنم، ولی خودم نخواستم
که مثل لنی همیشه میگم که می تونم توی غار زندگی کنم و اصلا هم کچاپ نخورم ولی خودم می دونم نمی تونم
که مثل جورج آرزوی زمینم رو انقدر برای خودم بزرگ کردم که می دونم بهش نمی رسم
که من چقدر وقت ها بوده که مثل لنی نخواستم آزاری برسونم ولی به موقع رها نکردم، چون وحشت کرده بودم
که مثل جورج، هرچقدر هم تلاش کنم نمی تونم لنی رو از خودش نجات بدم
هرگز یادم نمیره که من خودم هم لنی هستم و هم جورج
و خودمم که کار خودم رو می سازم
پینوشت: واضحه که همیشه خواندن کتاب به زبان اصلیش بهتر از ترجمه ست. ولی در مورد این کتاب فکر می کنم هیچ ترجمه ای "نمی تونه" حق مطلب رو ادا کنه
98.11.21
مغزم از کتاب های ادبیات سال های دبیرستان تربیت شده که به نام اشتاین بک این سه پاسخ رو بده، طوطی وار و بی علاقه
ولی از این به بعد نه
از این به بعد یادم می مونه که تو تاریکی اون شب تب دار یک نفس صحبت های جورج و لنی که کنار آب نشسته بودند رو می خوندم
یادم می مونه که فکر کردم بعضی وقت ها دیوانه وار فقط به یک چیز فکر می کنم، مثل لنی و خرگوش هاش
یادم می مونه که فکر کردم من مثل جورج خیلی جاها می تونستم و می تونم لنی های زندگیم رو رها کنم، ولی خودم نخواستم
که مثل لنی همیشه میگم که می تونم توی غار زندگی کنم و اصلا هم کچاپ نخورم ولی خودم می دونم نمی تونم
که مثل جورج آرزوی زمینم رو انقدر برای خودم بزرگ کردم که می دونم بهش نمی رسم
که من چقدر وقت ها بوده که مثل لنی نخواستم آزاری برسونم ولی به موقع رها نکردم، چون وحشت کرده بودم
که مثل جورج، هرچقدر هم تلاش کنم نمی تونم لنی رو از خودش نجات بدم
هرگز یادم نمیره که من خودم هم لنی هستم و هم جورج
و خودمم که کار خودم رو می سازم
پینوشت: واضحه که همیشه خواندن کتاب به زبان اصلیش بهتر از ترجمه ست. ولی در مورد این کتاب فکر می کنم هیچ ترجمه ای "نمی تونه" حق مطلب رو ادا کنه
98.11.21
March 2, 2022
If you want to feel real sad, absorb Steinbeck's pitch perfect prose right to your dome. A worthwhile bummer of a great book.
When I was in college taking teaching courses I graded a lot of homework about this book. It was pretty magical, interacting with a novel I had loved when I read it in school and seeing it again through the opinions of young students. I’ve always found I like a novel more when I can dig into it and being able to be on the teaching side really opened it up further, especially because I was reading key passages over and over again. So this book holds a really special place in my heart.
When I was in college taking teaching courses I graded a lot of homework about this book. It was pretty magical, interacting with a novel I had loved when I read it in school and seeing it again through the opinions of young students. I’ve always found I like a novel more when I can dig into it and being able to be on the teaching side really opened it up further, especially because I was reading key passages over and over again. So this book holds a really special place in my heart.
June 2, 2019
عزیز نسین: آدمها به مرور زمان دروغهای خودشان را باور میکنند
همهمون میدونیم عاقبت سگ دو زدن به کجا میرسه ولی باز هروز شروع میکنیم به سگ دو زدن. چون یه امید لعنتی هست که میگه یک روز خوب میاد و ما خودمون رو بند کردیم به این روز خوب که هرگز هم نمیاد.
استاینبک اینا رو دیده و ازش کتاب ساخته اما خود کارگرا فک نکنم خستگی امونشون داده باشه که یه کم با مغزشون ور برن و به این حقایق برسن: به اینکه هرروز خدا(شایدم شیطان) باید کار کنن و وقتی حقوقشان را سر ماه گرفتن، تنها کاری که میتونند با این حقوق شندرغاز بکنن اینه که یه شب برن به عیاشی و قماربازی و پول و پله رو بر باد بدن. برای دمی خوشند اما میلیونها میلیون دمِ دیگر باز کارگرند و مشغول سگ دو زدن
اگه این امید لعنتی تو وجودمون نبود الان شاید...
همهمون میدونیم عاقبت سگ دو زدن به کجا میرسه ولی باز هروز شروع میکنیم به سگ دو زدن. چون یه امید لعنتی هست که میگه یک روز خوب میاد و ما خودمون رو بند کردیم به این روز خوب که هرگز هم نمیاد.
استاینبک اینا رو دیده و ازش کتاب ساخته اما خود کارگرا فک نکنم خستگی امونشون داده باشه که یه کم با مغزشون ور برن و به این حقایق برسن: به اینکه هرروز خدا(شایدم شیطان) باید کار کنن و وقتی حقوقشان را سر ماه گرفتن، تنها کاری که میتونند با این حقوق شندرغاز بکنن اینه که یه شب برن به عیاشی و قماربازی و پول و پله رو بر باد بدن. برای دمی خوشند اما میلیونها میلیون دمِ دیگر باز کارگرند و مشغول سگ دو زدن
اگه این امید لعنتی تو وجودمون نبود الان شاید...
July 20, 2019
A book I'd read an awfully long time ago, when pocket calculators were still the latest thing.
Such an iconic staple of American literature, wherein George and Lennie, migrant labourers in the Cali dustbowl, form an unlikely bond in a tale of brutality and tenderness.
Typical of Steinbeck, his 'no-fucking-about' narrative fast-tracks his examination of human morality, culminating in a story that has since been immortalised on film and stage.
Steinbeck strived for gritty realism and wrote about a time and a place, with all of its triumphs and evils. Hidden messages shadow the narrative, chiefly one of morality. He depicted an America that existed, not the one that he would have liked.
Such an iconic staple of American literature, wherein George and Lennie, migrant labourers in the Cali dustbowl, form an unlikely bond in a tale of brutality and tenderness.
Typical of Steinbeck, his 'no-fucking-about' narrative fast-tracks his examination of human morality, culminating in a story that has since been immortalised on film and stage.
Steinbeck strived for gritty realism and wrote about a time and a place, with all of its triumphs and evils. Hidden messages shadow the narrative, chiefly one of morality. He depicted an America that existed, not the one that he would have liked.
July 16, 2015
شاهکار فوقالعاده ای از روابط انسانی و سرگذشت غم انگیز دو دوست کارگر.. نثر نمایشنامه ای و ریتم بالای این اثر بهمراه شخصیت پردازی فوقالعاده و گیرایی روایت، خوانش اثر رو بشدت لذت بخش میکنه و درنهایت پایان تراژیک کتاب هست که جای هیچ بحثی رو باقی نمیگذاره..
June 27, 2021
What more can I possibly add to a discussion of John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men without drawing a high school English teacher's salary? Considering I'm not drawing bored glances from teenagers, I doubt that a check from LAUSD will appear in my mailbox anytime soon.
-- Published in 1937, this is the work that the Goodreads algorithms seem to have agreed is the author's most renowned. For Stephen King, it's The Shining, for Elmore Leonard it's Get Shorty and for John Steinbeck it's Of Mice and Men.
-- This is a novella, approximate length 34,720 words. I read it in under forty-eight hours.
-- The story revolves around two ranch hands traveling the highways and ranches of California, looking out for each other and trying to build enough of a stake to put down on their own piece of land.
Both were dressed in denim trousers and in denim coats with brass buttons. Both wore black, shapeless hats and both carried tight blanket rolls slung over their shoulders. The first man was small and quick, dark of face, with restless eyes and sharp, strong features. Every part of him was defined: small, strong hands, slender arms, a thin and bony nose. Behind him walked his opposite, a huge man, shapeless of face, with large, pale eyes, with wide, sloping shoulders; and he walked heavily, dragging his feet a little, the way a bear drags his paws. His arms did not swing at his sides, but hung loosely.
-- George Milton is the small man, the thinker. Lennie Small is the child in a hulk's body. Walking ten miles to a barley ranch south of Soledad after a bus driver with a grudge drops them off on the highway far short of their destination, Lennie is fascinated by petting mice or rabbits or anything with a nice texture. Lennie has never laid a hand on George, enamored by the tales his traveling partner tells of the land they'll settle someday. When the men finally arrive for work, George does the talking.
"He ain't no cuckoo," said George. "He's dumb as hell, but he ain't crazy. An' I ain't so bright neither, or I wouldn't be buckin' barley for my fifty and found. If I was bright, if I was even a little bit smart, I'd have my own little place, an' I'd be bringin' in my own crops, 'stead of doin' all the work and not getting what comes up outta the ground." George fell silent. He wanted to talk. Slim neither encouraged nor discouraged him. He just sat back quiet and receptive.
-- One of the reasons John Steinbeck is my favorite author is that when he pens description, I don't want it to end, and when he switches to dialogue, I don't want his characters to stop talking either. Stephen King's dialogue can be tin, while Elmore Leonard's attentiveness when it comes to prose is short spanned to say the least, but Steinbeck's descriptions and dialogue achieve a purity that captivates me. It's like the difference between drinking water from a garden hose that's been drying in the sun with who knows what crawling inside it and one day, someone hands you a bottle of Perrier.
-- While most authors have been around people, with Steinbeck, I'm always left with the undeniable impression he watched and achieved a wisdom about people. Then he works that knowledge into his books and passes it along to the reader. I find myself able to relate to Steinbeck more than I can the majority of contemporary authors, who often seem to have never been around humans who dreamed, drank, lusted, got into fights or trouble with the law, fell out with family members or worried about where their next meal might come from.
Crooks said gently, "Maybe you can see now. You got George. You know he's goin' to come back. S'pose you didn't have nobody. S'pose you couldn't go into the bunkhouse and play rummy 'cause you was black. How'd you like that? S'pose you had to sit out here an' read books. Sure you could play horseshoes till it got dark, but then you got to read books. Books ain't no good. A guy needs somebody--to be near him." He whined, "A guy goes nuts if he ain't got nobody. Don't make no difference who the guy is, long as he's with you. I tell ya," he cried, "I tell ya a guy gets too lonely an' he gets sick."
-- For those joining late, I'm no English teacher, but if I encountered someone who was adamant that they didn't read fiction (I'm thinking men here) and I wanted to try to get them to change their attitude, Of Mice and Men would be the novel I'd hand them. It's short, it's about men and work and figuring out a better future and loyalty and how things don't always work out the way you dream they will. Yet the writing takes me away to another place. I couldn't last a day bucking barley or bucking a sack of anything, but as Steinbeck knows well, we all yearn to be on the open road, traveling, camping out on a river and maybe eating beans just because we felt like it.
-- Lastly, Of Mice and Men has been adapted to film twice: a 1939 production starring Burgess Meredith as George and Lon Chaney Jr. as Lennie and a 1992 film with Gary Sinise as George and John Malkovich as Lennie. Reading the novel, I heard Sinise's voice as George. As Lennie, I heard the Abominable Snowman from the 1949 Looney Toons short directed by Chuck Jones, The Abominable Snow Rabbit. References to Steinbeck's novel have been dropped by a ton of cartoon series, perhaps as much a tribute to Jones as to Steinbeck, but the homage that stands out for me are the characters of Pinky and the Brain on Animaniacs.
-- Published in 1937, this is the work that the Goodreads algorithms seem to have agreed is the author's most renowned. For Stephen King, it's The Shining, for Elmore Leonard it's Get Shorty and for John Steinbeck it's Of Mice and Men.
-- This is a novella, approximate length 34,720 words. I read it in under forty-eight hours.
-- The story revolves around two ranch hands traveling the highways and ranches of California, looking out for each other and trying to build enough of a stake to put down on their own piece of land.
Both were dressed in denim trousers and in denim coats with brass buttons. Both wore black, shapeless hats and both carried tight blanket rolls slung over their shoulders. The first man was small and quick, dark of face, with restless eyes and sharp, strong features. Every part of him was defined: small, strong hands, slender arms, a thin and bony nose. Behind him walked his opposite, a huge man, shapeless of face, with large, pale eyes, with wide, sloping shoulders; and he walked heavily, dragging his feet a little, the way a bear drags his paws. His arms did not swing at his sides, but hung loosely.
-- George Milton is the small man, the thinker. Lennie Small is the child in a hulk's body. Walking ten miles to a barley ranch south of Soledad after a bus driver with a grudge drops them off on the highway far short of their destination, Lennie is fascinated by petting mice or rabbits or anything with a nice texture. Lennie has never laid a hand on George, enamored by the tales his traveling partner tells of the land they'll settle someday. When the men finally arrive for work, George does the talking.
"He ain't no cuckoo," said George. "He's dumb as hell, but he ain't crazy. An' I ain't so bright neither, or I wouldn't be buckin' barley for my fifty and found. If I was bright, if I was even a little bit smart, I'd have my own little place, an' I'd be bringin' in my own crops, 'stead of doin' all the work and not getting what comes up outta the ground." George fell silent. He wanted to talk. Slim neither encouraged nor discouraged him. He just sat back quiet and receptive.
-- One of the reasons John Steinbeck is my favorite author is that when he pens description, I don't want it to end, and when he switches to dialogue, I don't want his characters to stop talking either. Stephen King's dialogue can be tin, while Elmore Leonard's attentiveness when it comes to prose is short spanned to say the least, but Steinbeck's descriptions and dialogue achieve a purity that captivates me. It's like the difference between drinking water from a garden hose that's been drying in the sun with who knows what crawling inside it and one day, someone hands you a bottle of Perrier.
-- While most authors have been around people, with Steinbeck, I'm always left with the undeniable impression he watched and achieved a wisdom about people. Then he works that knowledge into his books and passes it along to the reader. I find myself able to relate to Steinbeck more than I can the majority of contemporary authors, who often seem to have never been around humans who dreamed, drank, lusted, got into fights or trouble with the law, fell out with family members or worried about where their next meal might come from.
Crooks said gently, "Maybe you can see now. You got George. You know he's goin' to come back. S'pose you didn't have nobody. S'pose you couldn't go into the bunkhouse and play rummy 'cause you was black. How'd you like that? S'pose you had to sit out here an' read books. Sure you could play horseshoes till it got dark, but then you got to read books. Books ain't no good. A guy needs somebody--to be near him." He whined, "A guy goes nuts if he ain't got nobody. Don't make no difference who the guy is, long as he's with you. I tell ya," he cried, "I tell ya a guy gets too lonely an' he gets sick."
-- For those joining late, I'm no English teacher, but if I encountered someone who was adamant that they didn't read fiction (I'm thinking men here) and I wanted to try to get them to change their attitude, Of Mice and Men would be the novel I'd hand them. It's short, it's about men and work and figuring out a better future and loyalty and how things don't always work out the way you dream they will. Yet the writing takes me away to another place. I couldn't last a day bucking barley or bucking a sack of anything, but as Steinbeck knows well, we all yearn to be on the open road, traveling, camping out on a river and maybe eating beans just because we felt like it.
-- Lastly, Of Mice and Men has been adapted to film twice: a 1939 production starring Burgess Meredith as George and Lon Chaney Jr. as Lennie and a 1992 film with Gary Sinise as George and John Malkovich as Lennie. Reading the novel, I heard Sinise's voice as George. As Lennie, I heard the Abominable Snowman from the 1949 Looney Toons short directed by Chuck Jones, The Abominable Snow Rabbit. References to Steinbeck's novel have been dropped by a ton of cartoon series, perhaps as much a tribute to Jones as to Steinbeck, but the homage that stands out for me are the characters of Pinky and the Brain on Animaniacs.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57,232 reviews