Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck
A Book About Cruelty, Friendship, and Lonelihood
This is the second episode of a series of personal book reviews. Please follow me if you enjoyed it and want to read my next stories, feel free to leave your own comments, or contact me if you would like me to write a personal analysis of one of your favorite literary pieces !
Disclaimer : All opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily reflect a general truth nor the opinions of anyone else.
Content : 10/10 |
I first read the book in its French translation at least a dozen times before I actually read it in English. It was only when, years later, I dived into its original version, that I understood what the title really meant : it is a book about mice, and about men. Surprisingly enough, even though the French interpretation of the title was ambiguous, I still love the meaning it bears : some mice, and some men. Both versions are complementary and perfectly summarize what this absolutely unique novel is.
This is a book about some mice, and some men, looked upon from far above, some beings lost in a world so wide, so vast, where they are so small, so tiny, that you can hardly tell apart the mouse from the man. It is a book about people who are just as insignificant as mice to the march of the universe. John Steinbeck doesn’t try to make them special, unique. They have very definite characters, very well-described, but each and every one of them could embody tens of millions of destinies in his own. In just a few words, the entire people of the miserable farm workers, homeless, wifeless, friendless, stand up straight in their farmer’s boots.
This is also a book about mice, and about men, as a whole. This a book that teaches you so much about mankind, without ever talking about it, without a word lost in philosophical considerations, without the slightest dwelling on metaphysical questionings. The title, moreover, had warned us : formulated in the way the philosophers of the time of Descartes or Pascal used to do it, it was a scent of the work’s profound nature, closer to the essay than to the novel. However, Steinbeck breaks the custom and, instead of discussing important philosophical questions, he pretends to devote himself to the study of the insignificant. His genius was to bring the universal out of the ordinary with a clarity and a strength never met anywhere else.
Form : 9/10 |
Steinbeck can without a doubt be counted among the greatest English-speaking authors of the twentieth century, and the most prominent American writers of all times. His style is unique, very detached, ostensibly neutral. His gaze brushes against the scene more than it lands on it, as if the common human actions taking place before his eyes mattered to him less than the description of the precise place with its own life, independent of human disturbances. I always liked the way he leads a scene : he starts by describing a place, intimate and untouched, then people arrive, some events or discussions occur, and they leave ; and the author stays there and describes the quiet life of the place resuming its long tranquil flow, unmoved by the tragedy that took place within it.
The language is so suggestive and so powerful that behind every sentence pronounced you understand a million feelings. This is what makes it feel so close to truth : in real life, you never have this off-voice telling you things, explaining every silence or unsaid word, analyzing the slightest intonation for you to better understand the complexity of sentiments. You just have to figure it out yourself. You’re alone in front of the world, in front of others.
I love how the book is perfectly compliant to classic tragedy rules, and yet so incredibly innovative. Behind the apparent casualness of the tone, we have a perfectly structured five-acts tragedy. Due to Steinbeck’s style of distanciating himself from his characters, most of the scenes consist of raw, theatrical dialogues, the descriptions being kept for what surrounds them, the setting of the drama. Yet the heroes have nothing mythical. From the first line, the premonition was there, in this place designated in advance as the final scene. As the book progresses, we sense the tragedy coming closer. The sacrifice of Candy’s old dog prefigures the dark omens that are knotted over the characters’ heads. And in the end, as it was due to happen, all dreams are shattered, lives are broken forever, and innocent blood must be shed to appease the divine anger, represented in the most terrible way possible : the raging wrath of men.
Emotion : 10/10 |
The genius of this work is to have brought millions of readers to tears without a Shakespearean love story, without a grandiose hero sacrificed to his faith, without the martyrdom of an entire people for a sublime cause. I had never realised before how common it was for authors to buy some emotion from their lectors by just featuring a beautiful and tragic love story between two beautiful, young and tragic heroes. Steinbeck doesn’t need such artifacts. He just tells his story, without any grandiose effects, and the mere tragedy of life is rendered with such a strength that the characters stay there, lingering in your mind, for days and weeks, refusing to leave you in peace, and your spirit is scarred more by the novel than it would be by an ancient greek tragedy.
Global : 10/10 |
It can feel so trivial to say that this book is an absolute must-read, and yet I really have to. I challenge anyone to remain indifferent to this grandiose book. It is a classic that will surprise you by how close it is to you, in every aspects, and you will never have truly understood the power of litterature as a mirror of humanity if you have not read Of mice and men.
“But lynching is such an American thing.”
One time, as I was discussing the book with someone, this person told me : “But lynching is such an American thing”. That’s right in a sense, and wrong in another. It is true that, in the non-American world, we have this general image of lynching deeply associated with the United States of the 20’s, 30’s. The story feels so truthful mostly because it is located in the US, and deeply immersed in US problems and specificities of that time : the harsh condition of migrant farm workers, the even harsher fate of black people, the intolerance towards all those who would go beyond the socially assigned framework. Lynching is part of the US side of the story, it would not feel as exact if featured in another part of the world. However, there is a universal dimension in the characters of George and Lennie. The way the events happened is not as important as the fact that they indeed happened, that the tragedy was due to take place, no matter what form it took, because it was not as much of a US problem as a humankind problem.
