In John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men, two men, George and Lennie, are kicked off of a farm and need to find new work, but, George is always covering for the trouble that Lennie causes unintentionally, causing George’s life to be harder than it needs to be. This leads into the idea that Steinbeck shows throughout the story, which is companionship is detrimental and will cause problems. Steinbeck uses characterization, archetypes, and motifs throughout the story to prove the detriment of companionship. Throughout the story, Steinbeck shows the detriment of companionship through the use of character development. The first place that the reader can find an example of this is through Lennie holding George back and not letting him reach …show more content…
In fact, the reader can see the detriment through the red archetype. Directly after George and Lennie are tossed off the bus, Steinbeck says that “The rims of [George’s] eyes were red with sun glare” (4). The red archetype highlights the anger that George has towards Lennie, which can be seen at multiple times throughout the story, such as when Lennie wants ketchup for his beans. Anything, including companionship, should be viewed as detrimental if it causes anger. Another key archetype that should show the negative side of companionship is the archetype of the setting sun. When Lennie is talking to Curley’s Wife in the barn, the story says, “Now the light was lifting as the sun went down…” (97). The setting sun is used to foreshadow the death of Curley’s wife, and it was her goal to meet a companion. As she was trying to make a companion in Lennie, he killed her, which could be used to symbolize that companions should be viewed as negative because they lead to death. The reader can see this not only through Curley’s Wife, but it can be seen through the death of Lennie who also needed a companion. Through the deaths of both Lennie and Curley’s Wife, the reader can see the negativity of companionship, because it leads to death. In another instance, the archetype of …show more content…
To demonstrate this, Steinbeck uses the motif of animals to show the detriment in a different kind of companionship. Throughout the beginning of the story, Candy is with his dog and they have a special companionship. Candy says, “I ought to have shot that dog myself, George” (67). This shows how Candy admits that having the companionship with the dog kept the dog alive too long, even when the dog was in substantial amounts of pain. The companionship was detrimental because the dog was kept alive through too much pain, when if he would’ve put the dog out of its misery, it would have been better for the dog. Not only can the reader see the negativity of companionship through Candy keeping the dog alive too long, it can also be seen through the motif of comparing Lennie to animals. In the story, when talking to Crooks, Crooks tells Lennie that if George happens to leave him, they will, “ They’ll tie ya up with a collar, like a dog” (79). By Crooks saying this, he is implying that George is the only one saving Lennie, and without George, everyone would kill Lennie or Lennie would basically become the pet. If Lennie wasn’t with George, he would have developed the skill to think for himself and be able to survive, even without George. Another, equally important, point with the animal motif is when Lennie kills Curley’s Wife. When