writingservices

In this essay I will explore and compare the characters, achievements and deaths of Lennie Small, from John Steinbeck’s ‘Of Mice and Men’ and Bill Sikes from, Charles Dickens ‘Oliver Twist’. I have read both novels and enjoyed them immensely because of the wonderful characters, language and techniques used by the authors especially when describing the worlds they conjured within their novels. These two books also express perfectly the pioneering views of Dickens and Stienbeck; they both used their writings in an attempt to make their socialist views subtly heard by the masses. In the eras of Dickens and also Steinbeck, problems such as, racism, sexism, poverty and the class divide were simply accepted by society. These two authors saw the problems of their social structures, the discriminative attitudes of the people and wanted to make the public aware, being greatly frowned upon by some. Dickens and Steinbeck were soldiers of the same struggle and that is where the similarities between ‘Of Mice and Men’ and ‘Oliver Twist’ begin. Most of the characters in both novels represent the poverty that plagued both countries at the time the books were set, especially George and Lennie in ‘Of Mice and Men’; the epitome of poverty in the USA. Their lives are an endless trek around California constantly looking for work, scratching a buck or two a day from the back breaking work they do on the ranches. The poverty Oliver lives in (and that Dickens also experienced as a youth) is just the same, with a different back drop, which is why these novels relate so well to each other. Where these two stories really raise a lot of similarities, but at the same time a lot of paradoxes, are definitely the murder scenes and the deaths of the killers themselves. The characters and situations appear to be very alike, but once you read deeper you can see the differences that sneak through. Lennie Small is a very big, powerful, strong man; Steinbeck describes him as a bull. Sikes is also a large burley fellow, but where Sikes is pure evil, Lennie is childish, innocent and inhibited, a man who entirely relies on someone else to guide him, like a dog and master; their personalities are almost an antithesis. They are like this to bring out certain emotions in the reader to make us feel, hatred towards Sikes (and ultimately satisfaction when he dies), but sympathy, love and empathetic humour for Lennie. Their victims, on the other hand, are almost identical; Nancy is a prostitute and, in a way, so is Curley’s wife; she gives her body to Curley in exchange for marriage and money. We have to feel sorry for Curley’s wife when she when she confesses her sins to Lennie in the barn and the unfortunate way she has been mistreated and abused in the past. The sad thing is she is so na�ve that she doesn’t realise. She confesses that she doesn’t love or even like Curley: “I don’ like Curley. He ain’t a nice fella…” is exactly what she says to Lennie, something she has never told anyone. Nancy ‌best essay writing service also repents before she dies and pleas with Bill to do so too: “… let us both leave this dreadful place, and far apart lead better lives… It is never too late to repent.” She even breathes a short prayer of mercy before she dies. In actual fact the whole reason Sikes kills Nancy is because she has been trying to do the lawful, honest thing and try to work her way out of this life of crime and sin she has lived in for so many years. We feel a lot more sympathy for Nancy when she dies because of this and for other reasons. To start with she is killed by a man contained with pure malice, hatred and evil, who is supposed to be her lover. Contrastingly Curley’s wife’s death is a complete accident or if anything, her fault. Also Dickens writes Nancy’s murder scene so graphically and violently it is almost impossible not to feel sorry for this woman: “… Beat it twice upon her upturned face.” She must have died in agony and terror when Sikes killed her in cold, merciless blood. Nancy had to wait for her death in absolute terror for a minute or so, knowing she would be violently murdered, which must have seemed like an age, she even gets down on her knees and begs for mercy before she is savagely and callously slain. On the other hand Curley’s wife dies quickly and painlessly. There is a simple reason why this is. Dickens wants us to feel nothing, but pure, unadulterated hatred for Sikes when he kills Nancy, so when Sikes finally dies we feel justice is done. This is slightly because of Dickens’ audience, the Victorian public, being so religious and believing themselves to be so good hearted, would have demanded the death of Sikes and enjoyed the novel more without Sikes shadow hanging over the proceedings. Dickens being the man he was gives the people what they want. I prefer the way Steinbeck handles his murder scene purely because I think it is extremely clever. Steinbeck’s’ characterisation of these two characters has been leading up to this moment and it comes together perfectly. He intends us to feel sorry for Curley’s wife, but no hatred of any kind towards Lennie. Even though we have just heard of all the false promises she has been made in her life along with her failed ambitions, her belief they could still come true, all the times she has been sexually abused and the fact that she is still oblivious to all of this, we still can strongly empathise with Lennie. He is as innocent as the day he was born, a child trapped in a mans body. Lennie doesn’t have a scratch of malice in him and we could never feel anger toward a character we have come to love. After reading this scene I actually found myself almost as sorry and sympathetic towards Lennie as Curley’s wife, but not only Lennie, Candy and George too because I knew that any hopes of their long awaited dream had now been shattered. Finally in the two murder scenes to makes us feel complete hatred for Sikes and sympathy for Lennie the two authors both use similar metaphors to give the final impression that the two confessed and repented women are forgiven. With Nancy she is released from this world in the form of one of her hairs being cremated above the glowing embers and symbolically having her soul rise to Heaven. The scene after Curley’s wife is killed is heavenly enough, with the soft light of the mid-afternoon sun penetrating between the planks of the barn and the golden straw almost ceremoniously spread across the fallen maidens body, utter peace. A single dove, the messenger of God, flies in through the open barn door circles, almost giving the site its blessing, and exits with Curley’s wife’s soul on a journey to the heavens. Now I will move on to Lennie and Sikes’ deaths. In contrast to Nancy, when Sikes dies he falls straight to hell. His death is showered in chaos and fear twice that of what Nancy felt. It is a chase through the lowest and darkest place of London. A mad crowd of angry people screaming for Sikes’ blood, holding torches aloft like a crazed lynch mob. This ‘hue and cry’ of gentlemen, policemen, thieves and citizens of all kind all share a hatred and loathing of Sikes and what he has done. The way Dickens describes this scene is superb. When reading I could hear the shouts and screams of the crowd, feel the heat of the torches and feel Sikes’ fright: “… a waving crowd in the outer darkness like a field of corn moved by an angry storm!” is probably one of the best pieces of description he uses and it really does make you feel the sense of chaos and vengeance that spurs on this ‘hue and cry. The satisfaction that it gives the reader when Sikes accidentally kills himself is enormous. In his efforts to escape he ties a rope around his waist and falls 40 feet as it moves to his neck and hangs him. Sikes dies in more agony than anyone else in either novel; not from pain, but fear. In the time he falls, his body experiences sensory overload; a panic and fear so great it is enough to kill a man on its own. He falls towards the crowd of flames and symbolically hell, the complete antithesis of the deaths of Nancy and Curley’s wife. Hanging would also have greatly contented the puritan population of Victorian England as hanging was the accepted capital punishment of the period, perfect for Sikes. To eradicate completely any emotion for Sikes his loyal dog also jumps for his master, smashing its head on the ground below. Any empathy we may have is transferred to Bullseye. This is probably the most dramatic of the entire novel. If one scene in ‘Of Mice and Men’ could match the pure drama and tension of Sikes’ death it would have to be the final chapter – Lennies death. The build up of tension in the scene is literal genius. When George produced Carlson’s’ Lugar I was on the edge of my seat right up until the end of the novel. Sikes’ death had to be quick to give a real sense for the excitement of the chase. Lennies death had to be draw out and milked for all it is worth, not solely for tension, but to give a character we have become so familiar with and very fond of, a memorable and proper send off. Thanks to George’s skill with words and his love for him, Lennie could not be more content when he dies. The last thing I wanted was for Lennie to die, but it is inevitable. I found myself sating ‘don’t do it George,’ but it is much better that he dies like this than face the men from the ranch. He must die; he cannot go on being tortured by what he has done. Lennie’s death shares some similarities to Curley’s wife’s; they both die quickly and painlessly and like Curley’s wife his soul is take to heaven. The gunshot rolling up the heavenly hills of Salinas makes you feel that Lennie has been released. To summarise, these to classic novels have many things in common, but also sharply contrast each other. It’s this that makes comparing the two so fascinating, as you new things they share and interesting differences every time you read them. It seems strange, but pleasing that two such comparable novels could come from different centuries, different, different countries, but share the same messages and morals. In this essay I will explore and compare the characters, achievements and deaths of Lennie Small, from John Steinbeck’s ‘Of Mice and Men’ and Bill Sikes from, Charles Dickens ‘Oliver Twist’. I have read both novels and enjoyed them immensely because of the wonderful characters, language and techniques used by the authors especially when describing the worlds they conjured within their novels. These two books also express perfectly the pioneering views of Dickens and Stienbeck; they both used their writings in an attempt to make their socialist views subtly heard by the masses. In the eras of Dickens and also Steinbeck, problems such as, racism, sexism, poverty and the class divide were simply accepted by society. These two authors saw the problems of their social structures, the discriminative attitudes of the people and wanted to make the public aware, being greatly frowned upon by some. Dickens and Steinbeck were soldiers of the same struggle and that is where the similarities between ‘Of Mice and Men’ and ‘Oliver Twist’ begin. Most of the characters in both novels represent the poverty that plagued both countries at the time the books were set, especially George and Lennie in ‘Of Mice and Men’; the epitome of poverty in the USA. Their lives are an endless trek around California constantly looking for work, scratching a buck or two a day from the back breaking work they do on the ranches. The poverty Oliver lives in (and that Dickens also experienced as a youth) is just the same, with a different back drop, which is why these novels relate so well to each other. Where these two stories really raise a lot of similarities, but at the same time a lot of paradoxes, are definitely the murder scenes and the deaths of the killers themselves. The characters and situations appear to be very alike, but once you read deeper you can see the differences that sneak through. Lennie Small is a very big, powerful, strong man; Steinbeck describes him as a bull. Sikes is also a large burley fellow, but where Sikes is pure evil, Lennie is childish, innocent and inhibited, a man who entirely relies on someone else to guide him, like a dog and master; their personalities are almost an antithesis. They are like this to bring out certain emotions in the reader to make us feel, hatred towards Sikes (and ultimately satisfaction when he dies), but sympathy, love and empathetic humour for Lennie. Their victims, on the other hand, are almost identical; Nancy is a prostitute and, in a way, so is Curley’s wife; she gives her body to Curley in exchange for marriage and money. We have to feel sorry for Curley’s wife when she when she confesses her sins to Lennie in the barn and the unfortunate way she has been mistreated and abused in the past. The sad thing is she is so na�ve that she doesn’t realise. She confesses that she doesn’t love or even like Curley: “I don’ like Curley. He ain’t a nice fella…” is exactly what she says to Lennie, something she has never told anyone. Nancy also repents before she dies and pleas with Bill to do so too: “… let us both leave this dreadful place, and far apart lead better lives… It is never too late to repent.” She even breathes a short prayer of mercy before she dies. In actual fact the whole reason Sikes kills Nancy is because she has been trying to do the lawful, honest thing and try to work her way out of this life of crime and sin she has lived in for so many years. We feel a lot more sympathy for Nancy when she dies because of this and for other reasons. To start with she is killed by a man contained with pure malice, hatred and evil, who is supposed to be her lover. Contrastingly Curley’s wife’s death is a complete accident or if anything, her fault. Also Dickens writes Nancy’s murder scene so graphically and violently it is almost impossible not to feel sorry for this woman: “… Beat it twice upon her upturned face.” She must have died in agony and terror when Sikes killed her in cold, merciless blood. Nancy had to wait for her death in absolute terror for a minute or so, knowing she would be violently murdered, which must have seemed like an age, she even gets down on her knees and begs for mercy before she is savagely and callously slain. On the other hand Curley’s wife dies quickly and painlessly. There is a simple reason why this is. Dickens wants us to feel nothing, but pure, unadulterated hatred for Sikes when he kills Nancy, so when Sikes finally dies we feel justice is done. This is slightly because of Dickens’ audience, the Victorian public, being so religious and believing themselves to be so good hearted, would have demanded the death of Sikes and enjoyed the novel more without Sikes shadow hanging over the proceedings. Dickens being the man he was gives the people what they want. I prefer the way Steinbeck handles his murder scene purely because I think it is extremely clever. Steinbeck’s’ characterisation of these two characters has been leading up to this moment and it comes together perfectly. He intends us to feel sorry for Curley’s wife, but no hatred of any kind towards Lennie. Even though we have just heard of all the false promises she has been made in her life along with her failed ambitions, her belief they could still come true, all the times she has been sexually abused and the fact that she is still oblivious to all of this, we still can strongly empathise with Lennie. He is as innocent as the day he was born, a child trapped in a mans body. Lennie doesn’t have a scratch of malice in him and we could never feel anger toward a character we have come to love. After reading this scene I actually found myself almost as sorry and sympathetic towards Lennie as Curley’s wife, but not only Lennie, Candy and George too because I knew that any hopes of their long awaited dream had now been shattered. Finally in the two murder scenes to makes us feel complete hatred for Sikes and sympathy for Lennie the two authors both use similar metaphors to give the final impression that the two confessed and repented women are forgiven. With Nancy she is released from this world in the form of one of her hairs being cremated above the glowing embers and symbolically having her soul rise to Heaven. The scene after Curley’s wife is killed is heavenly enough, with the soft light of the mid-afternoon sun penetrating between the planks of the barn and the golden straw almost ceremoniously spread across the fallen maidens body, utter peace. A single dove, the messenger of God, flies in through the open barn door circles, almost giving the site its blessing, and exits with Curley’s wife’s soul on a journey to the heavens. Now I will move on to Lennie and Sikes’ deaths. In contrast to Nancy, when Sikes dies he falls straight to hell. His death is showered in chaos and fear twice that of what Nancy felt. It is a chase through the lowest and darkest place of London. A mad crowd of angry people screaming for Sikes’ blood, holding torches aloft like a crazed lynch mob. This ‘hue and cry’ of gentlemen, policemen, thieves and citizens of all kind all share a hatred and loathing of Sikes and what he has done. The way Dickens describes this scene is superb. When reading I could hear the shouts and screams of the crowd, feel the heat of the torches and feel Sikes’ fright: “… a waving crowd in the outer darkness like a field of corn moved by an angry storm!” is probably one of the best pieces of description he uses and it really does make you feel the sense of chaos and vengeance that spurs on this ‘hue and cry. The satisfaction that it gives the reader when Sikes accidentally kills himself is enormous. In his efforts to escape he ties a rope around his waist and falls 40 feet as it moves to his neck and hangs him. Sikes dies in more agony than anyone else in either novel; not from pain, but fear. In the time he falls, his body experiences sensory overload; a panic and fear so great it is enough to kill a man on its own. He falls towards the crowd of flames and symbolically hell, the complete antithesis of the deaths of Nancy and Curley’s wife. Hanging would also have greatly contented the puritan population of Victorian England as hanging was the accepted capital punishment of the period, perfect for Sikes. To eradicate completely any emotion for Sikes his loyal dog also jumps for his master, smashing its head on the ground below. Any empathy we may have is transferred to Bullseye. This is probably the most dramatic of the entire novel. If one scene in ‘Of Mice and Men’ could match the pure drama and tension of Sikes’ death it would have to be the final chapter – Lennies death. The build up of tension in the scene is literal genius. When George produced Carlson’s’ Lugar I was on the edge of my seat right up until the end of the novel. Sikes’ death had to be quick to give a real sense for the excitement of the chase. Lennies death had to be draw out and milked for all it is worth, not solely for tension, but to give a character we have become so familiar with and very fond of, a memorable and proper send off. Thanks to George’s skill with words and his love for him, Lennie could not be more content when he dies. The last thing I wanted was for Lennie to die, but it is inevitable. I found myself sating ‘don’t do it George,’ but it is much better that he dies like this than face the men from the ranch. He must die; he cannot go on being tortured by what he has done. Lennie’s death shares some similarities to Curley’s wife’s; they both die quickly and painlessly and like Curley’s wife his soul is take to heaven. The gunshot rolling up the heavenly hills of Salinas makes you feel that Lennie has been released. To summarise, these to classic novels have many things in common, but also sharply contrast each other. It’s this that makes comparing the two so fascinating, as you new things they share and interesting differences every time you read them. It seems strange, but pleasing that two such comparable novels could come from different centuries, different, different countries, but share the same messages and morals.