Of Mice and Men

How Far and What Ways is the ending “of Mice and Men” a Fitting Conclusion to the Novel.

i nd help with tht question any seggestion email me

Asked by
Last updated by elvis p #104435
Answers 9
Add Yours

Learn to write in sentences. It is guaranteed to improve your score. But since you seem to feel that "textese" is good enough, I'll use it too. Good luck deciphering my response.

th novls titl is mad clr in the endng geo klz leni n now has no plans so his drm is ovr th drm mad lif wrth lvg n nowits gon lik lnie

What an immature response Charles. For someone who seems to dislike "textese," as you so cleverly named it, you sure made expert use of it. Though I should let you know that you're a little behind the times. We now have t-9 word which predicts your word and lets you type full sentences faster. Isn't technology wonderful?

As for your question, Bob. The ending is fitting because it ties in with one of the main themes of the novel. Life is predatory and unforgivable. The strong dispose of the week; the week have no useful purpose. Many people would beg to differ, but this is the picture Steinbeck was painting of the times back then. Try sparknotes.com for more details. I'm writing an essay on this very question right now and it helped me a lot.


I have never sent a text message in my life. I write everything in English sentences.

"textese" on a computer keyboard takes longer to type and a LOT longer to read and comprehend. I understand its value on a cellular telephone, but on a message board it is lazy and makes a writer look illiterate.

The last line of the novel shows Carlson and Curley unable to understand why Slim and George are walking off. This is a fitting ending because Steinbeck illustrates in that brief sentence how clueless C and C are about friendship and the value of Lennie to George. They gave Candy a moment of silence after his dog was shot, but they think nothing of disposing of George's best friend. It's not manly to show any emotion, so they think George and Slim are weird.

Hey charles...i have an ideah…its called be quiet!

im pretty shure this charley is problibly one of thiese guys that sits in his parents basement all day typing on the computer.

calven--my, what an insightful response! At least add some useful commentary to your useless insults. At least I have something intelligent to say about the novel in question...but you wouldn't know anything about that, since you use the word "retard" in a thread about this novel.

If you don't like my comments, don't read them. I'm "pretty shure" (sheesh) that they are over your head anyway.

Now, back to the novel. Steinbeck brilliantly packs so much into a short book. The ending seems to say nothing, but it says a LOT.

You sad asinine man if you even call yourself a man. You just confirmed that you really don’t have a life...

I am sure when you go to type you’re response it is most likely the highlight of your day. I am not offended by your sorry excuse for an insult. I pity you

Now that I am finished speaking to an incompetent fool named Charles I WILL make a response to you’re question Bob.

Sir John Steinbeck had been for shadowing much earlier in the book all for the purpose to lead up to the ending. You see…after Carlson shot Candy’s dog what were the words that slipped out of the old swamper’s mouth? He said if you can recall “it was my dog, I should have shot him myself.” Those words later on came in to play as I read the final dialogue of the book. That dog was a life long companion to Candy, and

Lennie was a life long companion to George. Lennie was George’s friend so it was only right of him to shoot him. Lennie was executed the exact same way that Candy’s dog was but it wasn’t out of cruelty or revenge. Instead it was out of humanity and love simply because he could not bear to see his friend savagely murdered at the hands of Curley’s posy.

calven--"I am sure . . ."--What a laugh! You aren't sure of anything, but you sure like to pretend you know everything! Arrogant bas***d.

At least you have taken my advice to include a response to the novel in your inane post. Is that pity you are feeling, or shame that I pointed out your useless remarks and I am RIGHT?? Your addition of a literary reference suggests the latter.

BTW . . . a "posy" is either a flower or a brief motto. The correct word is "posse." Caught you again.

Boys, boys, must you bicker over meaningless things?

I like the ending of this novel. It seems to stop abruptly, but really the events after Lennie's death do not matter. George will become a lonely ranch hand like all the others. His dream of owning a ranch would never be the same without Lennie, just as a new puppy will never be the same for Candy after losing his dog. Whenever we lose something, we are changed forever.

The abrupt ending of the novel also mirrors the abrupt ending of several lives in the book: the mouse in Lennie's pocket, the four smallest pups, the old dog, Curley's wife, and Lennie. Just boom--it's over. Same goes for Crooks's and Candy's and George's plans for the ranch.

I think that the ending is really good literature because first time you read the book it's not at all obvious why george killed lennie. It takes another thorough read through the book to realise that george and lennie had such a rare relationship and what george did was really the only thing he could do. It was the right thing to do