Analysis Of A Teachable Good Book: Of Mice And Men

In Thomas Scarseth's writing "A Teachable Good Book: Of Mice and Men," he discusses reasons why Of Mice and Men has good lessons and themes for teaching. He talks about how Of Mice and Men is a Tragedy in an Aristotle/Shakespeare sense. I agree with Scarseth's points about this topic. He makes valid points about why George Steinbeck's novel is a good book to teach and learn from. In the following paragraphs, I will describe some of the points in the essay that stood out to me and why I agree with those statements.

The first point Scarseth discusses is that literature was not created to provide "happy endings." He states that "literature is not only mere sugar candy, it can sometimes be a strong medicine." His point is that in life, sometimes

there are unhappy endings, and literature shouldn't sugarcoat this truth. I agree with this point. I love books that don't just give you the predictable or perfect ending, but end with the sad and honest truth. I think that the ending of Of Mice and Men was necessary because although it was tragic, Lennie had to be killed mercifully at George's hand. The ending was especially heartbreaking because Lennie became just another loss that George had to suffer in his life, along with their dreams of the farm.

Another point that Scarseth vocalizes is that all men are created equal.

In paragraph 4, he claims that "tragedy exists even among the lowly of the earth; even the least of us has the human potential for tragic nobility." I agree with this point because I think no matter your social status, tragic events may take place in your life. Even the men that thought they already had nothing, like George and Lennie, had each other. They took that for granted while they had it, as shown in George's quote, "God almighty, if I was alone I could live so easy. When I think of the swell time I could have without you, I go nuts. I never get no peace (Steinbeck pgs. 11-12)." While Lennie was alive, George always thought about what he could do if he didn't have Lennie to take care of. He didn't realize how much he loved Lennie's company and dreaming about the farm they would own until it was

gone.

The final claim that the author made that stood out to me is that all of the characters are very complex but limited.

This argument is shown in the quote "There are no purely bad people in it [Of Mice and Men]. Conversely, there are no purely good people in it either. Each man is his own mix of good and bad." I agree with this argument because all of the characters in the story have complexities and perform actions that are both good and bad. They also all have complicated reasons for doing things, and what they think is good might not be portrayed that way to somebody else. This is shown significantly in Lennie, who only wanted to pet soft things but ended up ruining the dream of the farm for himself, George, and Candy and having to be killed mercifully. This is also displayed in the character of Crooks. You can tell in the story that Crooks is good at heart, but his treatment and oppression turned him bitter. He does both good and bad things in the story, and is not purely one or the other. I believe that statement is applicable to all of the Of Mice and Men

characters.

In conclusion, I agree with Thomas Scarseth's opinion that Of Mice and Men is a teachable book. It shows the truth about "happy endings," describes how all men are created equal, and displays the complexities in people that make them neither purely bad nor good. It also portrays many great lessons and morals in the form of complex characters and a limited world. George Steinbeck's novel is a great story about friendship, loss, and the unfortunate events that stand in the way of our dreams.