Book Review – Of Mice and Men (By: John Steinbeck)

I must say before getting too far into this review, that Of Mice and Men is my favorite book, and has been for quite some time. It probably has the award for the book I’ve read the most times, but for me “more than once” is a rarity. I’ve been using the book as a benchmark for what makes a good book since I first read it, but is had been some time since my last (subsequent) reading, and I felt I needed to refresh my memory. I must say I was not disappointed.

At the risk of potentially sounding more biased than I already sound, I believe I can safely say that my barometer for what is a good book has been reset so high with this one that I almost feel myself going “why do I even read other books? Couldn’t I just read this one again and again forever?” Even from the very beginning, which in and of itself is a master’s course in how to do exposition, I was wrapped up and engrossed again. Of Mice and Men does not wait to hook you, or need to spend pages of setup to allow you to understand it. At only a little more than a hundred pages it doesn’t have time for that. You are there, and it has you, and it will not let go.

The story is one of Steinbeck’s California workers’ collection, about two men: George and Lennie, who are working bucking barley in the hope of saving up enough money to buy a farm of their own. Lennie is big, strong, and “not bright”, while George is slim, quick-witted, and… harsh I guess. They were “kicked out” of the last place they worked at because of a misunderstanding with Lennie and now they’ve just come to a new place where they only have to keep a low profile for a little while in order to get their money and get out. Of course as the title alludes, these plans “often go awry”.

The rest of the cast of characters is pretty small (indeed, the book was meant to be half-novel, half-play, so it stands to reason): there’s Candy, the one-handed “swamper”; Curly, the boss’s son who’s “just mean”; Slim, the cool-headed team leader; Crooks, the “negro” stable-buck; Curley’s unsatisfied wife, and Carlson; a man who has a Luger (and a couple of other people there for convenience). Most are simply stereotypes, but instead of that being a “narrow-minded” or “easy-way-out” writing trick, here it is used as a way to introduce characters and themes without having to go into too much depth in the setup, allowing for more depth subsequently without bloating the size. For instance, Crooks isn’t just “cursed” to be black, but crippled, and his separation from the others gives him both a certain amount of freedom and a certain amount of dependence. And Curly’s wife (only identified as such) is a “flirtatious” “tart” but she had to settle for the life of a farm as opposed to the social life of an entertainer she yearned for.

With very few words, the stereotypes turn into people, understandable and empathetic people. One could suppose that there is an antagonist, and most would call our main characters protagonists, but in the end it’s just a story that happens to have them as the center. The book really gives the impression that things are happening because things happen, bad and good, to people, bad and good. There isn’t anyone malicious planning everything or being a villain “because”. It feels real, like you know these people and this actually happened.

And in my mind, my words don’t do it justice. I keep mulling over time and time again what exactly it is I have to say about this book, or how much there even is to say. really, and I come up with so many things that just never go down on paper quite right. It’s hard to express how much I enjoy it. Even with its flaws (both typographical and narrative) it just stands head and shoulders above any of the competition for me. It works, and it works as a story that is relatable on so many different levels for so many different people: for farmers, for workers, for friends and family, for planners and dreamers. It’s a cautionary and sad tale, but realistic. It doesn’t wallow about in its misery, it moves forward, as people tied to time are forced to do. Sometimes it’s a bit fast, and the transitions don’t always feel like they’ve adequately explained the amount of time that has passed (if any), but if picks it back up so fast after that little fumble that one barely notices it.

With my opinion already fairly obvious, I’ll say I’d recommend this book to most people. There are a selection of people who prefer very specific genres, books about non-serious topics, and who really don’t like less-than ecstatically happy endings. Those types of people I would not recommend this book to, but it’s not often I find one of them around. And even if one doesn’t enjoy the book it can be finished in a few hours and you’ll likely take away something major from it.

Back to Playing Chess

I like chess; I’ve always liked chess. Perhaps that’s just my general favor of board games, or perhaps it is the greatest game ever: that’s not for me to judge. Still, I’ve played it for a long time, and still play and enjoy it. In the past few years I played very little, though. That was mainly because I was no longer in school, and the main place I used to play chess was in my math class after I had finished assignments. I still played on my phone, but the AI on there is far too dumb to be interesting or far too hard to be fun. It just wasn’t like playing with the average or slightly below average casual chess player. I say that because I’m very bad at the game. According the, at the moment I’m about a 700, which is very low (and everyone beats me). I’m getting better, but my head just doesn’t really work for chess. Even though I enjoy playing the game, figuring out even a few of my opponent’s next possible moves just doesn’t click in my brain. From the middle game on I barely know what to do.

And with chess, it’s never really been just the game.  Even though I enjoy the game, there is so much more surrounding it. I’m almost forced to look at it since I can hardly find the time to play chess, mostly because when I do play board games they are for more than two players, because it’s just easier that way. So I mess with the board.  A set up chess game, unlike many other set up games, looks quite nice sitting about, so I bought a few different ones to change out now and again, and then a few more. I have quite a few chess sets now, and every time I find one different from what I have at an affordable price, I buy it. There are so many different permutations of chessmen that I’m not sure I could ever see them all, and that means I can afford to only get the ones I want. Looking at them, and playing on them is great, and the tactile feel of each different set is wonderful.

Beyond that I also enjoy looking up variants and strategies. I’m no good at employing the strategies and tactics myself, and I can barely remember them at times, but clever puzzles and other such things are very fun indeed. I think my favorite part, though, is the variants. Chess is such a simple concept, and its individual pieces break down so well, it seems like it would be infinitely variable, and it is. From regional variations like xiangqi and shogi (more on xaingqi next article, hopefully) to piece variations (chess 960 and most older variations) to board variations (hexagonal chess) to adding cards (Knightmare chess) and even just creating a whole new game from chess-like mechanics (the Duke, etc). Having all the different boards, rules, and pieces, and knowing the different games is just fun, and it immensely increases the options one has when attempting to start a game.

Still, I find myself going back to basic chess quite a bit. It is a masterfully-crafted game that may indeed last, almost unchanged from its current state, for a significant portion of human history. It’s a one-in-a-million formula that is great for both casual and experienced players (as long as people of vastly different skill levels generally play each other in moderation, and those on their own levels more). I hope to play more often in the future than I have been, but even so I know for certain that I will continue playing, both in real life, and on the computer, and even when I inevitably lose, I will have a blast