English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

10 answers

No book should be banned. Every adult should have the choice in what they read. And every parent needs to decide for themselves what is appropriate for their children to read.

2006-10-29 06:02:18 · answer #1 · answered by Shalvia 5 · 1 0

It's a wonderful book. Yes, it gets darker towards the end. I almost cried when I finished it.

On top of that, I am SO against banning books! If you don't like it, stop reading it! Like Mark Twain is being taken out of libraries. Whatever. I didn't run away from home because I liked "Tom Sawyer". Heck, cartoons these days are worse than classic literature. My parents always told me I could read ANY book in the house. And if I had kids, I'd tell them the exact same thing.

Sorry for the rant.

2006-10-29 06:14:39 · answer #2 · answered by chefgrille 7 · 0 0

Pink Floyd. Rick Wright put out 2 solo albums and is working on a third. Syd Barrett put out 5. Gilmour did 3 and is working on another. Waters has 6 and even Nick Mason has 2 and wrote a book. While they all didn't leave, they did go on to have separate solo careers. edit: hey sarah

2016-05-22 05:35:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It is a very good literature. Why should any book be banned? It's like television if you don't want to look at it don't read it. Censorship is becoming epic in this country. Do you want to lose more freedoms? I have never understood the banning of any books.

2006-10-29 06:05:14 · answer #4 · answered by CuervoBMed 4 · 1 0

It should not be "banned" because no book should be banned. Literature is a form of free speech and banning books takes away from the freedom.

2006-10-29 10:09:56 · answer #5 · answered by Kate 2 · 0 0

The appropriate question from my point of view is why should it be banned. We in this country have a long history of allowing people to choose for themselves what is appropriate for their minds to see. this book is a classic question of "am I my brother's keeper." It contains colorful characters that pull at your heart strings. I am glad that it is not banned.

2006-10-29 06:04:25 · answer #6 · answered by FrogDog 4 · 1 0

I don't know why there'd be a possibility of it being banned to begin with.

2006-10-29 07:20:19 · answer #7 · answered by misskenjr 5 · 0 0

It should not be 'banned' because it has a wonderful message...

2006-10-29 06:01:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Why should it be banned. It is a gripping story inspired by Robert Burns' poem

The Robert Burns poem To a Mouse

Wee, sleeket, cowrin, tim'rous beastie,...
... But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane
In proving foresight may be vain:
The best laid schemes o' mice an' men
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain
For promis'd joy.

Still thou art blest, compar'd wi' me!
The present only toucheth thee:
But, och! I backward cast my e'e
On prospects drear!
An' forward, tho' I canna see,
I guess an' fear!

Plot as follows

The title of the story refers to a line in the Scots poem To a Mouse by the national poet of Scotland, Robert Burns: "The best-laid schemes o mice an men, Gang aft agley" (Eng: "Often go awry"). Theoretically, the mouse is Lennie who is lost in the big world in which he has to find a way to survive. The man refers to George who takes the mouse in and shows it the way. Like a real mouse Lennie gets in trouble being in places he shouldn’t be, and doing things he shouldn’t be doing. George is there to be the disciplinarian to the mouse (Lennie) so that he doesn’t get into such mischief.

Another interpretation could be taken from the inspiration Burns drew for the poem. Burns was plowing in a field when he found the plow had destroyed a mouse in its nest burrowed into the field. The incident—the destruction of this mouse and its home when it surely seemed to the mouse that its life had been carefully laid out—caused him to reflect on the ability for the most carefully-planned ambitions and hopes of the mouse—and man, in the larger sense—to go awry with a simple change of fate. The events in the novel tamper with the hopes, dreams, and ambitions of Lennie and George set out from the beginning, and become the vessel through which Steinbeck illustrates the book's themes of the plight of mankind and his dreams.


Plot summary

Lennie is a large, physically strong man with the mind of a child, and George is a smaller, feeble bodied man with quick wit. The men are wandering ranch workers who travel together in search of any available opportunities to earn money. Lennie depends on George as does George on Lennie for all different times in their travels. The ideal objective of most ranch workers is to amass a sizeable fortune and eventually purchase a small farm, and "live offa the fatta the lan'." Lennie is driven to reach this objective by the prospect of "tending the rabbits". However, this goal appears to be nothing more than a distant dream until Candy, another worker on the farm, offers to contribute his savings for a place on the farm.

While subjected to the loneliness and mediocrity of the life they presently lead, George and Lennie's prospect of their own farm attracts yet another hopeful, Crooks, the ***** stable buck. Despite their best efforts, however, the dream begins to collapse, completely falling apart when Lennie accidentally killed Curley's wife by breaking her neck,he said to himself, "I done a bad thing. I done another bad thing." It was foreshadowed in the beginning of the book, as in the last ranch they worked at, Lennie began to touch a womans dress, and they were going to be lynched until George hid with Lennie, and later on escaped. After Curley's wife, who is a promiscuous woman with a wandering eye, dies in his arms, Lennie escapes to the river where the story had begun, the place where George advised him to hide should he ever get into trouble (Note the circular ending: it suggests that the workers are trapped in the cycle forever).

To spare Lennie from Curley's revenge, which would entail much pain on Lennie's part, George quickly kills Lennie with a Luger pistol which he had stolen from Carlson earlier. He does this by coaxing Lennie with a description of the dream of their own farm, which captivates his attention and allows George to press the pistol to the back of Lennie's unsuspecting head and shoot him. Slim then takes George for a drink to settle his nerves. The last line of the book is delivered by Carlson, the ranch worker who kills Candy's old dog in a fashion similar to Lennie's killing (which foreshadows his death.) He says to Curley, "Now what the hell ya suppose is eatin' them two guys?" reflecting the fact that both characters never learned the value of compassion.

Characters in "Of Mice and Men"

George Milton – Dark haired, cynical ranch hand. He looks after Lennie and dreams of a better life. George's last name, Milton, is a reference to "Paradise Lost" scribe John Milton. The epic poem's themes and title tie into the themes of "Of Mice And Men"-- man's lost hopes and dreams. At the end of the book, he kills Lennie.
Lennie Small – Travels with George. He is a giant of a man who is unaware of his own strength. His mental deficiency culminates in an obsession to stroke 'soft' materials: this can be understood to represent his need for human contact, which is shown in his obsession with rabbits. George and Lennie are the only characters with both first and last names. There is irony in his last name, as it is "Small" while he is a very big man physically. Lennie is killed by George.
Candy – Is the swamper. He lost a hand while working on the ranch. He owns a very old dog who was shot at the hand of Carlson.
Curley – An unpleasant curly-haired character. The boss's son. He often picks fights and detests large people; mainly Lennie. During the book he picks a fight with Lennie for no reason. Lennie initially does not defend himself and takes the beating but finally grabs and crushes Curley's hand.
Curley's Wife – A young, pretty woman; sometimes called a "tart" by the men. She doesn't have a name and is the only woman mentioned on the male-oriented ranch. She often flirts with the ranch men as a cry for attention and secretly hates her husband as he sees her as his trophy. Like George and Lennie she had dreams that were eventually crushed. She is accidentally killed by Lennie.
Slim – The moral yardstick at the ranch. All the other characters respect him, as he has an omniscient and omnipotent presence. Curley suspects he is having an affair with his wife. Helps Lennie from getting fired after the fight with Curley. He is the prince of the ranch.
Crooks – The only black person on the ranch. He is discriminated against and has to sleep alone behind the stables. He is possibly the most intelligent man on the ranch. But later we see some of the discrimination wiped away as he plays horseshoes with the other ranch workers (even though he has a crooked back). Crooks judges people before he gets to know them.
Carlson – A large and insensitive man. He shoots Candy's dog and doesn't understand emotions such as compassion.
Whit – A young man; enthusiastic about life on the ranch, and is a regular visitor to the brothel.
The Boss – Only appears once. He is Curley's father and runs the ranch.
Aunt Clara – Lennie's previous guardian. Although she never directly appears, she plays a key role. She is the only positive female character in the story.

2006-10-29 07:07:08 · answer #9 · answered by quatt47 7 · 0 0

is there music in it or something?

2006-10-29 05:56:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers