Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Danielle Lo
Ms. Mann
AP Literature - Block 3
8 October 2018
In every comic book or TV show, there always seems to be some sob story to create
sympathy for the villain. Perhaps it’s because we find it too bland to have a character circling
around a character of pure malice and evil. Justification for actions manifests itself everywhere,
from pop culture to daily life. John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men features the seemingly abrupt
murder of Lennie Small. Steinbeck explores the idea of whether George Milton’s actions can be
justified, exposing the ability for us to delude ourselves beyond our own moral compass and
Before George’s murder of Lennie, Steinbeck seems to spend the entirety of the novel
establishing George and Lennie’s relationship, immediately presenting George as hotheaded and
impulsive. Irritated easily by Lennie’s childish behavior and his forgetfulness, George often
berates Lennie, “[scowling], … ‘Jesus Christ, you’re a crazy bastard’” (4). And after Lennie asks
George for ketchup that they’re too poor to afford, George irately responds that Lennie “can’t
keep and a job … and loses [George] ever’ job [he] get … [keeping George] in hot water all the
time” after Lennie had attempted to “feel that girl’s dress” which had caused them to run away
from the law (11). But Lennie’s “timid” and meek lack of retaliation melts George’s explosive
attitude, causing him to quickly reassure Lennie that his “Aunt Clara wouldn’t like you running
off by yourself,” a facade for the genuine care he holds for Lennie, a bond that connects both of
Lo 2
them to their dreams of owning their own place — their American Dream (12). Despite George’s
tirades, he still continues to indulge in Lennie’s naive fantasies, despite both George and the
audience recognizing that “if [he] was alone, [he] could live so easy” (11). Though George is
annoyed easily and frequently by Lennie, he also forgives easily. But beyond all, George feels
responsibility to care for Lennie, despite the burden that Lennie adds with his unknowingly
jeopardizing actions. And that is what serves as Steinbeck’s first layer that lays beneath George’s
violent anger with his care for Lennie. By expressing the duality of the love-hate relationship that
George has for Lennie, Steinbeck invokes a deeper examination into George’s motives for killing
Lennie. Was it out of love or was it for his own gain? While George does seem to genuinely care
for his and Lennie’s future, Steinbeck also exposes the underlying current of George’s weary
After Lennie breaks the neck of Curley’s wife — the wife of the boss’s son, Curley — in
an inadvertent attempt to touch her hair, George recognizes that Curley would “get ‘im lynched
[and] get’im killed” (47). Even defending Lennie to the other workers that he wouldn’t have
killed Curley’s wife out of malice, it is never explicitly stated whether George killed Lennie to
prevent him from such a future, or whether it was that George, after running away from the law
and protecting Lennie, was selfishly tired of Lennie. And with this, Steinbeck aims to challenge
our own perceptions of whether this act of killing could be considered “good.” Murder —
despised by the law, by religion, by social standards — could something so inherently “evil”
become “good?” George may have reasoned that he was delivering Lennie from perishing in a
lifetime of pain and suffering by ending Lennie’s life quickly while Lennie was far away in his
Lo 3
whimsical dreams of rabbits and their own land. When Slim assists George in processing and
rationalizing his actions, he tells him “‘You hadda, George…” in a final closing remark (54).
Steinbeck inserts this as a critique on our own attempts to rationalize every action, and yet also
portrays that every decision extends beyond a single dimension.The pair of George and Lennie
emblematized both of their aspirations — for George to own his own independent established
and for Lennie to have a rabbit farm. And without Lennie, George ultimately realizes that their
dream could not have been accomplished regardless. While it can be reasonably inferred and
indeed the audience desires to infer that George killed Lennie out of love, Steinbeck dissolves
the barriers of morality, of “good” and “evil,” but most importantly, he questions if we are
Throughout the novel, Steinbeck develops the likable pair of characters George and
Lennie. And throughout the novel, he consistently causes the audience to rationalize the actions
of George and Lennie. Though Lennie had killed a woman and run away from the law before,
can he still be “good” because he does not understand his own actions? Can George still be
considered “good” despite having murdered Lennie while Lennie trusted him? By writing a
novel to critique both the American Dream’s tantalizing nature and our own delusions, Steinbeck
uses moral ambiguity to develop George to remind his audience that sometimes things may not
be as black-and-white as they seem, but simultaneously not to rationalize actions beyond what
they are.
Account of Revisions:
Intro: Intro:
1. I changed the thesis to be more 1. Everyone who read my essay agreed
concise and flow with the hook. I also that the thesis was difficult to
separated it into 2 sentences to keep it comprehend, so I revised it into more
from becoming wordy. understandable terms and to more
accurately reflect the essay’s topic.
Conclusion: Conclusion:
1. I did not have a conclusion for the 1. The rhetorical questions flows well
most part, so I drew some of the with my points but seemed to be more
Lo 5
misplaced rhetorical questions from apt for the conclusion rather than the
the second body paragraph to tie the second body paragraph, so I moved
conclusion together. them there to inspire some ending
2. I added a “so what” portion to my thoughts.
conclusion. 2. The “so what” portion creates
meaning for the reader.
I think this circuit of essays was a little cramped for time, but even then, my Writer’s
Workshop group was able to provide insight into how I could better organize my points rather
than having them be in a pile of rabble slapped onto a piece of paper. In addition, Nicole and
Elliott both pointed out how it was hard to understand context of all the different situations I
mentioned when they had not refreshed knowledge on the novel. Eliana pointed out some of the
more structural issues with the essay especially between the first and second paragraph. Overall,
I was able to get a more rounded picture of how my essay was progressing and which areas I
could use improvement on, compared to my own perspective which had filled in the gaps
between evidence and analysis. Beyond that, they were all able to help me see where my