The aspect of the John Steinbeck novels, The Pearl and Of Mice and Men, that is most comparable is how, in both books, Steinbeck denies the main characters of each book, Kino and George and Lennie to change their role in life or to beat fate. Steinbeck's grim outlook of life was perhaps brought on through his early failures and poverty, because all three of the pre-mentioned characters had opportunities to change their fate or role but failed. The elements of discussion are Kino, George and Lennie, a comparison and a contrast.
Kino found one of the most valuable and precious pearls in the world and being convinced of its worth was not going to be cheated by only minimally upgrading his condition of life. Instead he wanted to break the fixed life and role that he and his family had and always would live. Kino refuses the maximum offer of fifteen hundred pesos that would easily ease his and his family's pain and suffering for the coming months. Kino is then determined to trek to the capital to find a fair and just offer. Kino continues determined through the mountains after an attempt at the pearl, his canoe destroyed and his hut set a blaze. Continuing to put his family's life on the line. It eventually takes the death of his beloved son Coyotito to make him realize he needs to stop being so greedy, no matter how hard he tries and to shut his mouth and know his role.
George and Lennie have to continue to move around the country looking for work until Lennie screws up again. The instability of work only makes it that much harder for them to complete their dream of a farm of their own. Candy's participation in the dream of the farm upgrades the dream into a possible reality. As the tending of rabbits comes closer to happening fate curses them with the accidental death of Curley's wife. The end of their wishful thinking is summed up by Candy's question on page 104, "Then-it's all off?"
Things that are similar about the two novels and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document