Exploring the Modern Novel.
Of Mice and Men.
Remember that this section (b), like Lord of the Flies (section a), is also worth
20% . (Refer to my sheet on the breakdown!)
But because 10% of this section is awarded to how you relate the text to its
cultural, social and historical contexts, it is VITAL that in part B, you entwine
(not ‘bolt on’ at the end or the beginning of a paragraph!) context into your
answer as you have to show how the contexts have perhaps influenced
Steinbeck’s writing and also reflect American society in the 1930s.
THE CONTEXT ‘OF MICE AND MEN’.
Historical background:
1929: Collapse of the Wall Street stock market in New York.
1929 and onwards... (The Great Depression): the US entered a prolonged
period of economic depression (rather like now) and only emerged from it with
the onset of WW2.
Consequences?
 Failed businesses
 High suicide rates
 Horrific poverty (no social security/government help) and family life was
threatened
 Long-term unemployment for all; 1 in 4 Americans were out of work…
So think of the emotional effect on the individual: depression, anger,
bitterness, guilt, loneliness, frustration, terror, suspicion. (X ref to the
novel…)
As well as the financial crisis, the Mid West in America was suffering from
horrendous droughts and this added to the migration west.
In the once fertile states of the south west (mainly Oklahoma and Arkanas),
the droughts, the failed crops and over farming meant that the topsoil became
eroded and exhausted, creating the Dust Bowls. (SO THINK OF THE
METAPHORICAL INTERPRETATIONS OF THIS!!! Remember, at different
times in the novella, the characters are portrayed as lonely, sterile, isolated,
emotionally withered/ barren of any hope etc, etc – so do try and link this
symbolically to the actual dust bowls...)
Thousands of poor farm workers, including owners of now worthless land (think
of the irony of this when considering George and Lennie’s ‘dream farm’ and the
fact they could get it for ‘just’ $600 from the old couple) and hordes of
migrant workers came to California from other parts of America to find work.
Unskilled, uneducated workers like the protagonists, George and Lennie were at
the mercy of the bosses. Men were considered lucky to find any work. On
ranches like the one on the novella, wages were low and conditions squalid.
Steinbeck made himself unpopular with employers by writing socially critical
books like OMAM, but, if anything, real life conditions were worse that he
described.
The American Dream
When people began to emigrate from Europe to America, most had hopes and
dreams for their success in this new land. America did not have the same rigid
class system as there had been in England and Europe, so (but DO REMEMBER
the social hierarchy on the ranch; that is quite rigid, surely?) and there was
still a lot of land that was available to own. Up until about 1920, there was still
land waiting to be claimed and farmed (stolen from the Native Americans
though).
America became the country (in theory) anyone who worked hard could ‘make
good’ and fulfil their own individual dreams. Like the burgeoning film industry in
Hollywood itself, which ‘sold’ a celluloid life of wealth, glamour and excitement,
millions believed that they too could escape the drudgery of their lives just by
working hard. For most, all they experienced was bitter disappointment, anger
and disillusionment. Exploitation and poverty was what they continually
suffered.
Lennie and George are, arguably, believers in the ‘American Dream’. But how far
George does believe and how much of his story about the ‘dream farm’ is just to
comfort Lennie and to make him happy, is what you have to judge. However, look
at the section where Lennie, Candy and George appear to have at last a chance
that is tangible and ‘real’. But is it too good to be true? We find it is. (X ref
with the Burns’ poem that the title comes from – you have it!!!) Was the dream
farm ever going to become a reality...?
Curley’s wife has her own version of the ‘American dream’. In the 1930s, the
Hollywood film industry was growing. Before television, even in small towns
people flocked to cinema to escape reality of everyday life. Some, like Curley’s
wife dreamed of becoming stars of the silver screen themselves. As with the
land-owning dream of George and Lennie, in theory it could happen, but in
reality? Unlikely.
Racism
The author himself part German/part Irish, has been criticised for not
representing the ethnic diversity of the Californian ranch workers, yet in the
novella, we are asked to focus on one member of an ethnic minority – Crooks an
embittered black man, half crippled from being kicked in the back by a horse.
(Think of his name and the symbolism of its connotation; like Curley’s wife
perhaps? A character with no real name – where his identity is defined by a
physical deformity in a world where you were judged on your physical strength.)
Remember, all of the ‘ranch hands’ were just that – machines to be hired and
fired at will. None were really seen as human beings (Slim perhaps?), but
commodities to be exploited...
Until 1865, slavery was still legal in the USA. In fact, the economy of the
Southern states; Mississippi, Alabama and Georgia, depended heavily on slave
labour, especially for the production of sugar and cotton. We see in the novel,
that despite the government outlawing slavery, prejudice, discrimination, racism
and ignorance was still rife in the 1930s.
In the beginning of chapter 4, Steinbeck deliberately focuses our attention on
the text, ‘The California civil code for 1905’. The irony is that in the novel
Crooks has very few ‘rights’; he is certainly not treated by anyone with much
respect, apart from Lennie and Slim. (I couldn’t find the significance of 1905
though. Shame.)
However, The Civil
Code of California is a collection of statutes for the State of California. The
code is made up of statutes which govern the general obligations and rights of persons within the
jurisdiction of California. It was based on a civil code originally prepared by David Dudley Field
II . (Interestingly, an fervent advocate of abolishing slavery)
First adopted in 1872 the Civil Code is divided into four divisions: "the first relating to
persons"; "the second to property"; "the third to obligations"; "the fourth contains general
provisions relating to the three preceding divisions." Division One contains laws which govern
personal rights while Division Two contains laws which govern property rights. ... (Thank you Wiki!)
We can assume therefore, that Crooks was very much aware of his ‘rights’ as an
individual. Steinbeck seems keen that we view Crooks as an educated, literary
character (why – is the author attempting to break the stereotypical view of
ethnic minorities at this time? if so, why is Crooks in the lowly position he is
in?) Interestingly, the author continually emphasises Crooks’ insistence on his
rights; ‘You have no right to come into my room...’ and later, ‘I’ve got a right to
have a light...’
Yet, just a few pages on, we see how little he has as an individual; instead
cruelly categorised by his colour and therefore, beating home his inferior
status, ‘Listen, Nigger, I could get you strung up from a tree so easy it ain’t
even funny.’
Ironically, in the social hierarchy of the ranch, Crooks is probably at the
bottom of the social scale. Any rights he may be entitled to by law, are not
recognised by many of the characters on the white ranch...
The position of women.
Only one woman appears in the novella – Curley’s wife. Lennie’s Aunt Clara is
mentioned but only appears in the expressionistic, quite surreal episode close to
the end of the book. Interestingly, initially, she is portrayed as a ‘homemaker’;
the ‘ideal’ role and position of a woman, caring and nurturing. However, in the
‘rabbit’ episode, Steinbeck has her tormenting Lennie as his own conscience and
ability to express himself, is transferred into her character. The women who
run the local brothels are also described, as is the women in the red dress in
Weed (but look how George describes her to us) and an anonymous female who
apparently got an old friend of George and Lennie’s – Andy Cushman – into
trouble; he ended up in San Quentin jail because of a ‘tart’.
Therefore, it can be seen that Steinbeck presents women in quite a negative
manner in the novel. Many of the comments about women spoken by the male
characters are derogative and insulting. What you have to do is decide if the
author is allowing his own opinions to be conveyed in the text or whether he
uses the characters to present the attitudes prevalent in this particular era.
However, look at how Walt (a minor character) describes the local brothel.
Speaking in a lively, forthright manner (so different from George’s reticent,
guarded style), Steinbeck uses Whit to give an alternative view of women to
the one we see in the presentation of Curley’s wife. Whit appears to like and
admire Suzy; he quotes her sense of humour, and ironically, the fact that she
‘never talks dirty’. He also appreciates her relaxed manner ‘If a guy doesn’t
want a flop, he can just set in the chairs.’ The irony is that Suzy has more
freedom and is more independent than many of the male characters, let alone
Curley’s wife. At least Suzy has a name, an identity.
This is ‘positive’ although limited view of women. The male characters appear
comfortable with Suzy and her girls whilst are portrayed as nervous and
disrespectful towards Curley’s wife. Partly because of the risk of angering
Curley, but also perhaps Steinbeck is also highlighting the hypocritical
standards/attitudes shown by many males in this social class during this era.
Think about: the significance of her name = a lack of identity in the patriarchal
world of the ranch. It appears she is her husband’s property. He ‘owns’ her – a
symbol of power in an era where poverty and the accumulation of materialistic
goods/property was seen as desirable.
Curley’s wife is both interesting and indeed, controversial. The author doesn’t
present her as someone worthy of respect (both the characters’, but what
about ours?). She can be seen as pathetic and broken, cruelly racist and
desperately lonely. She attempts to relieve her boredom (and loneliness?) by
flirting (or genuinely just wanting to talk ? x-ref what Crooks and Slim and
George say about being alone in the novel) with the ranch hands. Yet behind her
back, their comments are insensitive and by our standards, sexist and very
disrespectful. But are they justified? Look at how she treats Crooks...Also,
does she bring her own downfall in her treatment of Lennie?
Before the reader judges her too harshly, remember the letter Steinbeck
wrote to the actress playing Curley’s wife on the stage – it is so very telling
about how much sympathy he has for her and arguably, for many women in
Curley’s wife’s position in this particular social sphere. Women, particularly
uneducated women in rural California in the 1930s had very few opportunities
and were seldom regarded by men as equals. They were expected to be
conventionally feminine or maternally nurturing (a mother and good wife), like
Aunt Clara, or were treated like commodities whose sexual favours could be
paid for in a financial transaction in a brothel. They were not expected to have
careers or be seen as an equal, worthy of respect.