I didn't particularly enjoy either of these author's writing styles. They tell a very fluid and well built story but I find that it was too much of a narrative for me. Each book simply stated what happened in the story, and what the main character was thinking occasionally. I enjoy novels that dwell on the actions of the story, extending beyond the thoughts of the character and diving into complex ideas and how they affect the characters. For example, in Of Mice and Men, I would have appreciated a section of the introduction be devoted to defining George and Lennie's relationship, who benefits from what parts of it, how it formed, etc. While these things could be gleaned from intense literary analysis, I find that it makes for a better story if it is built directly into the novel.
One of the things I found interesting about both of these novels is the length of the book. Both books barely top 100 pages each, yet they are extremely famous novels and are considered classics. I used to think that for a book to be a classic, it had to be very long and cover absolutely everything about the story, such as War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy. However, a book like War and Peace explains absolutely everything in the novel. Books like Night and Of Mice and Men, however, leave the interpretation to you. Depending on how deep of a literary analysis you perform, Of Mice and Men could be about friendship, dealing with mental disabilities, or even the dueling idealogies of logic and spirit. Night could be about surviving hardships, determination, adolescence, or the false hope of putting faith in religion. These books could be all these things and more. On the surface, Of Mice and Men is about a farmhand and his mentally disabled friend. Night is about a boy and his father surviving the holocaust. But they transcend these simple stories and become so much more. This is what a true classic is defined as.
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
The Results of Time
Compare and contrast for Night and Of Mice and Men: Post 4
Jon, in our past posts, we have talked quite a lot about things such as freedom and discrimination, and I feel that these things are closely associated with the time period in which they take place. It is true that the desire to be independent and the concept of bullying can occur anytime and anywhere, yet there is something about the way our minds work that relates the ideas people develope to the era in which they live. You have talked much about how the places where these two books are set impact the main characters, but I want to mention how the time aspect of the settings impact the thoughts of our "villains."
Both the stories we have read for this project take place in the past, and even if they are not too far back, they still are impacted very much by their settings. As the world progresses in technology and such, there is more for the general public to access so that it can learn about the significant impacts the small actions they take can have on the world. After the time of Night, there was a sense of knowing what was happening to the Jews of Europe around the world, and the access to real life stories of dispair and pleas for help is what ignited that very sense. "We had forgotten everything--death, fatigue, our natural needs. Stronger than cold or hunger, stronger than the shots and the desire to die, condemned and wandering, mere numbers, we were the only men on earth." (Wiesel, 83). If this book and its events were to have taken place further back in history, it would have been harder for others to acknowledge that killing due to religion was wrong since there would be nothing a person could see or do that would send that message. This is what happens within Of Mice and Men with Lennie; others gang up on him and accuse him of doing things because they really have no way of knowing that it is wrong. For instance, when George asks Curley to have mercy on Lennie for accidentally killing his wife, Curley replies with: "'Don't shoot 'im?' Curley cried. 'He got Carlson's Luger. 'Course we'll shoot 'im.'" (Steinbeck, 95). With modern times comes modern technology that can help people view the world from the point of view of another that is suffering, and that can often save lives by manifesting into realization.
The time period of a story is important due to the fact that people can often be immune to the traditional ways of the past, and therefore, be hooked to many regulations that don't fit into a modern world. Night and Of Mice and Men are both similar in the way that they both contain people (major characters even) who are hooked onto the ideas from the past that no longer would make sense in today's times. Hitler, for example, was swaying in the thought that ultimate control can only be achieved if the "filthy" and "impure" people of the world were somehow removed from proper society. In the same way, Curley was a man who floated in the idea that someone who was not mentally able to contribute to a community should be an outcast since nothing is gained out of him or her. If we think about it, both of these are ideas that have been existing for a long time in history, and a change in the setting of these stories would not have given them the same meaning that can be seen now. There are people that think in similar ways to Hitler and Curley even now, but that is changing as new generations are reestablishing the rules on which societies work.
Overall, the messages and feelings I have received from these two books made me happy that we chose to read them; I hope they have made some impact on you too, Jon.
P.S. Don't worry, Jon. I will read your later posts even though I am done...
Jon, in our past posts, we have talked quite a lot about things such as freedom and discrimination, and I feel that these things are closely associated with the time period in which they take place. It is true that the desire to be independent and the concept of bullying can occur anytime and anywhere, yet there is something about the way our minds work that relates the ideas people develope to the era in which they live. You have talked much about how the places where these two books are set impact the main characters, but I want to mention how the time aspect of the settings impact the thoughts of our "villains."
Both the stories we have read for this project take place in the past, and even if they are not too far back, they still are impacted very much by their settings. As the world progresses in technology and such, there is more for the general public to access so that it can learn about the significant impacts the small actions they take can have on the world. After the time of Night, there was a sense of knowing what was happening to the Jews of Europe around the world, and the access to real life stories of dispair and pleas for help is what ignited that very sense. "We had forgotten everything--death, fatigue, our natural needs. Stronger than cold or hunger, stronger than the shots and the desire to die, condemned and wandering, mere numbers, we were the only men on earth." (Wiesel, 83). If this book and its events were to have taken place further back in history, it would have been harder for others to acknowledge that killing due to religion was wrong since there would be nothing a person could see or do that would send that message. This is what happens within Of Mice and Men with Lennie; others gang up on him and accuse him of doing things because they really have no way of knowing that it is wrong. For instance, when George asks Curley to have mercy on Lennie for accidentally killing his wife, Curley replies with: "'Don't shoot 'im?' Curley cried. 'He got Carlson's Luger. 'Course we'll shoot 'im.'" (Steinbeck, 95). With modern times comes modern technology that can help people view the world from the point of view of another that is suffering, and that can often save lives by manifesting into realization.
The time period of a story is important due to the fact that people can often be immune to the traditional ways of the past, and therefore, be hooked to many regulations that don't fit into a modern world. Night and Of Mice and Men are both similar in the way that they both contain people (major characters even) who are hooked onto the ideas from the past that no longer would make sense in today's times. Hitler, for example, was swaying in the thought that ultimate control can only be achieved if the "filthy" and "impure" people of the world were somehow removed from proper society. In the same way, Curley was a man who floated in the idea that someone who was not mentally able to contribute to a community should be an outcast since nothing is gained out of him or her. If we think about it, both of these are ideas that have been existing for a long time in history, and a change in the setting of these stories would not have given them the same meaning that can be seen now. There are people that think in similar ways to Hitler and Curley even now, but that is changing as new generations are reestablishing the rules on which societies work.
Overall, the messages and feelings I have received from these two books made me happy that we chose to read them; I hope they have made some impact on you too, Jon.
P.S. Don't worry, Jon. I will read your later posts even though I am done...
The Impacts of Writing Style
Compare and contrast for Night and Of Mice and Men: Post 3
Jon, I can totally see the point you made about how much the settings of these two books affect what the main characters have to deal with and what they get out of those experiences. I was also happy to see that you thought the way I did about the fact that Elie and Lennie could be seen as extremely different individuals due to their learning processes. In books such as Night, there is not only one person that is affected by the setting, yet I have developed a sympathy for Elie's sufferings, and this makes it seem like he went through more than anyone else did in the Holocaust (while we both know that is most likely not true). As for Of Mice and Men, Lennie's disability to learn why he was treated so differently made it hard for him to adapt to the setting of his book, and this made the setting a big problem for him. Even though plots can be described as moving the entire story along, they make the most impact on the main characters of books, and this means that Elie and Lennie/George went through significant change from the beginnings to the ends of these books.
In this post, I want to focus mostly on the differences between the writing styles of Mr. Wiesel and Mr. Steinbeck because there are many that can be noticed. Mr. Wiesel wrote Night from personal experience, and this was able to create a dark and realistic tone for it, and while Of Mice and Men might be an earthly book, it is nothing like Mr. Wiesel's book when it comes to voice. The most noticeable difference between these two writing styles is that Night was written in first-person while Mr. Steinbeck wrote in a third-person fashion. Usually, a first-person fashion puts the reader into the shoes of the main character, making the events of the story more powerful, and while Of Mice and Men wasn't entirely hard to connect to, Night's style succeeded in pulling the reader towards it. There is a sense of the innocence of a boy going through pain in Mr. Wiesel's writing, and it gives the reader and opportunity to be that boy for a short while. "When they withdrew, next to me were two corpses, side by side, the father and the son. I was fifteen years old." (Wiesel, 96). Although a third-person style is not the best form of writing, many stories are written perfectly for it, and this makes them interesting all on their own; Mr. Steinbeck's novel wouldn't have been at all the same if written from either the view of Lennie or George since both of their views can be seen in this specific fashion. Mr. Steinbeck had a choice for the tone he gave to his book, and he chose one that would present multiple aspects of his society to the reader, making Of Mice and Men all the more unique and interesting. For example, Crooks can be given action-descriptions to tell things about his character, something that can often be difficult in first-person: "The room was swept and fairly neat, for Crooks was a proud, aloof man." (Steinbeck, 66). On the other hand, Mr. Wiesel didn't really have an option for writing style since his own experiences would most likely get in the way of his imagination if he tried to write something other than a memoir.
Both books bring with them reality, whether written about real events or merely drawn from instances in the real world, and this is something that connects them, no matter how different their writing style. Mr. Wiesel and Mr. Steinbeck both found ways in which to get the reader attached to the characters within Night and Of Mice and Men, making sure to incorporate huge amounts of feeling into their writing so that the reader could go through the same emotions they felt while writing. Whether first-person or third, whether real or imaginary, whether one main character or two, both of these men wrote with such intensity that it inspires those who read their work to make a difference in the world.
What style did you like to read more, Jon? What story was enhanced more due to how it was written in your opinion?
Jon, I can totally see the point you made about how much the settings of these two books affect what the main characters have to deal with and what they get out of those experiences. I was also happy to see that you thought the way I did about the fact that Elie and Lennie could be seen as extremely different individuals due to their learning processes. In books such as Night, there is not only one person that is affected by the setting, yet I have developed a sympathy for Elie's sufferings, and this makes it seem like he went through more than anyone else did in the Holocaust (while we both know that is most likely not true). As for Of Mice and Men, Lennie's disability to learn why he was treated so differently made it hard for him to adapt to the setting of his book, and this made the setting a big problem for him. Even though plots can be described as moving the entire story along, they make the most impact on the main characters of books, and this means that Elie and Lennie/George went through significant change from the beginnings to the ends of these books.
In this post, I want to focus mostly on the differences between the writing styles of Mr. Wiesel and Mr. Steinbeck because there are many that can be noticed. Mr. Wiesel wrote Night from personal experience, and this was able to create a dark and realistic tone for it, and while Of Mice and Men might be an earthly book, it is nothing like Mr. Wiesel's book when it comes to voice. The most noticeable difference between these two writing styles is that Night was written in first-person while Mr. Steinbeck wrote in a third-person fashion. Usually, a first-person fashion puts the reader into the shoes of the main character, making the events of the story more powerful, and while Of Mice and Men wasn't entirely hard to connect to, Night's style succeeded in pulling the reader towards it. There is a sense of the innocence of a boy going through pain in Mr. Wiesel's writing, and it gives the reader and opportunity to be that boy for a short while. "When they withdrew, next to me were two corpses, side by side, the father and the son. I was fifteen years old." (Wiesel, 96). Although a third-person style is not the best form of writing, many stories are written perfectly for it, and this makes them interesting all on their own; Mr. Steinbeck's novel wouldn't have been at all the same if written from either the view of Lennie or George since both of their views can be seen in this specific fashion. Mr. Steinbeck had a choice for the tone he gave to his book, and he chose one that would present multiple aspects of his society to the reader, making Of Mice and Men all the more unique and interesting. For example, Crooks can be given action-descriptions to tell things about his character, something that can often be difficult in first-person: "The room was swept and fairly neat, for Crooks was a proud, aloof man." (Steinbeck, 66). On the other hand, Mr. Wiesel didn't really have an option for writing style since his own experiences would most likely get in the way of his imagination if he tried to write something other than a memoir.
Both books bring with them reality, whether written about real events or merely drawn from instances in the real world, and this is something that connects them, no matter how different their writing style. Mr. Wiesel and Mr. Steinbeck both found ways in which to get the reader attached to the characters within Night and Of Mice and Men, making sure to incorporate huge amounts of feeling into their writing so that the reader could go through the same emotions they felt while writing. Whether first-person or third, whether real or imaginary, whether one main character or two, both of these men wrote with such intensity that it inspires those who read their work to make a difference in the world.
What style did you like to read more, Jon? What story was enhanced more due to how it was written in your opinion?
Compare and Contrast Post 2: Effects of the Plot and Setting
Surbhi, I feel that Elie and Lennie are pretty different people. Yes, they were both victims of discrimination, and they both reacted with confusion to their unfair treatment, but I feel that is where the similarities end. Lennie is mentally disabled, and I think this changes his aspect on the world greatly. When Elie is discriminated against for being Jewish, he knows why the Nazis are doing this to him. He may not understand their reason, but he understands that they have a reason. Lennie, however, does not understand the reasons people are angry at him. He does not have the mental capacity to think from their point of view, and imagine their reaction to his actions.
I think that the surroundings of the characters and what happens in each story really shapes them and who they are in each novel. Elie, who slowlys becomes emotionally callused and stolid as the book progresses, has to develop these personality traits in order to retain his sanity in the concentration camps. He would not develop these if the story was set in, say, a small town in the US. That's a very strange example, but it's a place where a person doesn't have to emotionally guard themselves against a genocide going on around them. Lennie and George, two nomadic farmhands who pick up work where they can, develop scavenger-like instincts that are prevalent especially in the beginning of the book to help them find work, supplies, anything they need. They wouldn't develop these skills if Lennie and George were instead working on urban farms close to present-day cities, not sparse, distant fields scattered across the midwestern US during the Great Depression.
Each character's surroundings shape him into a different person as the story progresses. Elie becomes emotionally stolid and indifferent to death. Lennie becomes more conscious of his actions. George questions his choice in friends. These are all direct results of the setting and specific events in the story.
Who do you think was most impacted by the setting of each novel? Who was most impacted by plots within the story?
I think that the surroundings of the characters and what happens in each story really shapes them and who they are in each novel. Elie, who slowlys becomes emotionally callused and stolid as the book progresses, has to develop these personality traits in order to retain his sanity in the concentration camps. He would not develop these if the story was set in, say, a small town in the US. That's a very strange example, but it's a place where a person doesn't have to emotionally guard themselves against a genocide going on around them. Lennie and George, two nomadic farmhands who pick up work where they can, develop scavenger-like instincts that are prevalent especially in the beginning of the book to help them find work, supplies, anything they need. They wouldn't develop these skills if Lennie and George were instead working on urban farms close to present-day cities, not sparse, distant fields scattered across the midwestern US during the Great Depression.
Each character's surroundings shape him into a different person as the story progresses. Elie becomes emotionally stolid and indifferent to death. Lennie becomes more conscious of his actions. George questions his choice in friends. These are all direct results of the setting and specific events in the story.
Who do you think was most impacted by the setting of each novel? Who was most impacted by plots within the story?
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Elie vs. Lennie: Understanding the World
Compare and contrast of Night and Of Mice and Men: Post 2
Jon, I am incredibly relieved that you thought Night showed a stronger level of discrimination in it since that story is based off of horrible events that actually happened in history. I agree with you that even though both books show a desire for freedom, Elie's want to be free is much more noticeable than that of George or Lennie's, and this creates a dramatic amount of empathy within a reader. I feel that everyone who was able to think straight after experiencing the trauma from the Holocaust wanted to achieve freedom as much as Elie, while other minorities in Mr. Steinbeck's story wished for the independence George and Lennie wanted to have, showing us that these main characters were never the only ones to think of having equal rights to those who were "superior" to them.
Although the themes within Night and Of Mice and Men are very important to know about, I want to focus mostly on the main characters for this post. Specifically, I want to compare Elie and Lennie since they were the two who were most often the targets of discrimination, and we could actually hear and analyze what they thought when others bullied them. Elie, for one, was a boy when he was taken to concentration camps, and therefore, he had a much harder time understanding exactly why he was experiencing such events than the adults that surrounded him. Lennie could be described as being even less capable than Elie when it came to learning about how the world works because of his mental state, and his lack of sensibility made him seem more childish that of Night's young protagonist. Due to the differences in the mental states of these two characters, it is crystal clear that Elie began to take in the happenings around him pretty fast and adapted to his new environment much quicker than Lennie was able to realize the mistakes he repeatedly made. "The morning star was shining in the sky. I too had become a completely different person. The student of the Talmud, the child that I was, had been consumed in the flames." (Wiesel, 34). Although both Elie and Lennie went through forms of discrimination and hoped for a better life, the differences in how they saw the world and its people created varying options for the two, whether they were becoming determined to create a bright future or thinking about how not to kill one's next pet.
In the end, one can say that Lennie's mental state is what killed him, because Elie was very young when he experienced the Holocaust, yet he survived since he could notice things and use his observations to learn from them. Lennie, even being a fully grown man, could not grasp many general concepts of life throughout Mr. Steinbeck's entire novel, and his innocence is what caused him to kill Curley's wife. It was in no way Lennie's fault that he had a hard time adapting to new environments, yet it is more that this poor character can be seen suffering his entire life because of something so uncontrollable. Elie and Lennie were not different because of Lennie's disability, but more so because of how they saw everything with such different points of view. Elie learned how bitter the world can be and what one needs to do for survival from what he witnessed, while Lennie was continuously stuck on the idea of being sheltered by George for the rest of his life (until his death). "'George gonna come back,' Lennie reassured himself in a frightened voice. 'Maybe George come back already. Maybe I better go see.'" (Steinbeck, 71).
Jon, do you think that Elie and Lennie are more similar because of their life experiences, or more different because of their various coping strategies? Do you think George is more like either one of them?
Jon, I am incredibly relieved that you thought Night showed a stronger level of discrimination in it since that story is based off of horrible events that actually happened in history. I agree with you that even though both books show a desire for freedom, Elie's want to be free is much more noticeable than that of George or Lennie's, and this creates a dramatic amount of empathy within a reader. I feel that everyone who was able to think straight after experiencing the trauma from the Holocaust wanted to achieve freedom as much as Elie, while other minorities in Mr. Steinbeck's story wished for the independence George and Lennie wanted to have, showing us that these main characters were never the only ones to think of having equal rights to those who were "superior" to them.
Although the themes within Night and Of Mice and Men are very important to know about, I want to focus mostly on the main characters for this post. Specifically, I want to compare Elie and Lennie since they were the two who were most often the targets of discrimination, and we could actually hear and analyze what they thought when others bullied them. Elie, for one, was a boy when he was taken to concentration camps, and therefore, he had a much harder time understanding exactly why he was experiencing such events than the adults that surrounded him. Lennie could be described as being even less capable than Elie when it came to learning about how the world works because of his mental state, and his lack of sensibility made him seem more childish that of Night's young protagonist. Due to the differences in the mental states of these two characters, it is crystal clear that Elie began to take in the happenings around him pretty fast and adapted to his new environment much quicker than Lennie was able to realize the mistakes he repeatedly made. "The morning star was shining in the sky. I too had become a completely different person. The student of the Talmud, the child that I was, had been consumed in the flames." (Wiesel, 34). Although both Elie and Lennie went through forms of discrimination and hoped for a better life, the differences in how they saw the world and its people created varying options for the two, whether they were becoming determined to create a bright future or thinking about how not to kill one's next pet.
In the end, one can say that Lennie's mental state is what killed him, because Elie was very young when he experienced the Holocaust, yet he survived since he could notice things and use his observations to learn from them. Lennie, even being a fully grown man, could not grasp many general concepts of life throughout Mr. Steinbeck's entire novel, and his innocence is what caused him to kill Curley's wife. It was in no way Lennie's fault that he had a hard time adapting to new environments, yet it is more that this poor character can be seen suffering his entire life because of something so uncontrollable. Elie and Lennie were not different because of Lennie's disability, but more so because of how they saw everything with such different points of view. Elie learned how bitter the world can be and what one needs to do for survival from what he witnessed, while Lennie was continuously stuck on the idea of being sheltered by George for the rest of his life (until his death). "'George gonna come back,' Lennie reassured himself in a frightened voice. 'Maybe George come back already. Maybe I better go see.'" (Steinbeck, 71).
Jon, do you think that Elie and Lennie are more similar because of their life experiences, or more different because of their various coping strategies? Do you think George is more like either one of them?
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Compare and Contrast Post 1: Freedom
I think that Night definitely had more discrimination in it. After all, this is a book about the Holocaust, the largest attempted genocide in human history. Everything that happens to Elie in the book is a direct result of discrimination towards his religion, while discrimination in Of Mice and Men is occasional and on a much smaller scale.
I find the idea of freedom in both of these books to be interesting. In Night, Elie constantly thinks about why he is being oppressed, and copes with it differently at different sections of the book. He dwells on losing his freedom, and how his life has changed since then. Unlike George and Lennie, he has to accept being imprisoned possibly indefinitely. George and Lennie willingly give up some freedoms in order to make money, so they accept having less freedom. Elie gets no say in the matter. Elie is also treated much worse. Elie's loss of freedom is forced on him, while George and Lennie give it up as part of a deal, so they gain something in exchange.
I find it interesting that the characters in both stories have to live in bunkhouses and do daily manual labor. However, except for that and the idea of less freedom, that is where the similarities stop. Elie is imprisoned for his religion, while George and Lennie opt to agree to such a structured and controlled life in exchange for pay. Elie is also physically forced to stay in the camps, while George and Lennie stay since they want to make money. They are not physically forced to stay, but morally forced, if you will. This also brings into question how much each person valued their freedom beforehand.
George and Lennie, two broke farmhands wandering the country looking for work, are completely willing to give up some things to make money, during the Great Depression no less. Before being sent to a camp, Elie lived in a middle-to high-class household with a loving family and lots of friends. Upon losing these things and being forced to work in the camps, his life has gotten significantly worse. George and Lennie's lives barely changed, so they could accept it much more easily.
Surbhi, what do you think about the idea of freedom in these two books? How prevalent is it in each book, and do only the main characters experience a loss of freedom, or does it affect more people in the story?
I find the idea of freedom in both of these books to be interesting. In Night, Elie constantly thinks about why he is being oppressed, and copes with it differently at different sections of the book. He dwells on losing his freedom, and how his life has changed since then. Unlike George and Lennie, he has to accept being imprisoned possibly indefinitely. George and Lennie willingly give up some freedoms in order to make money, so they accept having less freedom. Elie gets no say in the matter. Elie is also treated much worse. Elie's loss of freedom is forced on him, while George and Lennie give it up as part of a deal, so they gain something in exchange.
I find it interesting that the characters in both stories have to live in bunkhouses and do daily manual labor. However, except for that and the idea of less freedom, that is where the similarities stop. Elie is imprisoned for his religion, while George and Lennie opt to agree to such a structured and controlled life in exchange for pay. Elie is also physically forced to stay in the camps, while George and Lennie stay since they want to make money. They are not physically forced to stay, but morally forced, if you will. This also brings into question how much each person valued their freedom beforehand.
George and Lennie, two broke farmhands wandering the country looking for work, are completely willing to give up some things to make money, during the Great Depression no less. Before being sent to a camp, Elie lived in a middle-to high-class household with a loving family and lots of friends. Upon losing these things and being forced to work in the camps, his life has gotten significantly worse. George and Lennie's lives barely changed, so they could accept it much more easily.
Surbhi, what do you think about the idea of freedom in these two books? How prevalent is it in each book, and do only the main characters experience a loss of freedom, or does it affect more people in the story?
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Of Mice and Men Chapter 6: Lennie's Death
Upon finishing the book, I found Lennie's death deeply saddening, but I also thought of the deep symbolism behind his passing. I find it very fitting that George kills Lennie in the end. It's a very sad ending to the book, but it carries deep symbolism. I sort of viewed Lennie as being every man's crazy dream in life. All he wants to do is go live on a farm and tend the rabbits. This idea, of course, is crazy, since this is in the middle of the Great Depression and they are simply farm workers. However, Lennie pursues it constantly. Simply put, they are like two parts of the mind. George represents reason and logic, he is the set of values rooted in knowledge, common sense, and reason. Lennie, however, represents creativity, hopes, and dreams. Lennie lives in a life filled with fun, while George constantly works through every day, very systematically thinking of his future. George has to constantly control Lennie's impulses, and keep him sensible and under control. Lennie lets them have fun and enjoy life occasionally. But, if the creative side grows too strong and endangers both individuals, as Lennie did by killing Curley's wife, then the sensible side silences it permanently. George does this by killing Lennie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)