I read Of Mice and Men last Thursday. That is, all but the first three pages, which I'd read the night before. It was short, engaging, and provided a striking contrast to what my brother calls Hemingway ("Old Hem")'s focus on "the one true word and the sort of war on the adjective."
The only other Steinbeck I'd read was The Red Pony, close to two decades ago. I suppose eventually I'll have to read some of his longer novels, having now read (unintentionally) what must be two of the shortest classics of American literature.
I may also check out the film version(s); I've seen only one scene (a rather pivotal one) of the Malkovich version, and just the opening credits (while TA-ing Intro to Film) of the 1939 film.
February 28, 2008
John Steinbeck, Of Mice and Men
Posted by CëRïSë at 5:16 PM
Labels: American, February 2008, fiction
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
I read this book many years ago in one sitting in Barnes and Noble. I remember being surprised by how much I enjoyed it. Before then it felt like a cliched classic to me, though I'd never read it, just by its name and what I'd heard of its plot. But then I had to read Grapes of Wrath for a class, and I loved it, so I gave this book a chance, since it's so short. As it turns out, it deserves the hype.
I love how it reads like a play, a drama. Just dialogue and description to set the scene (if I'm remembering correctly; it has been at least five years, after all). And I love the story it tells, even when I hate what happens.
I definitely recommend Grapes of Wrath to you. And the first half of East of Eden (only the first half because I've not read the second half, but the first half was quite great).
Post a Comment