Of Mice and Men question

Johnny wrote: "So I've been reading some discussions now that I've finished the book, and there's something about the ending that bothers me. So yes, it is ultimately a tragic act of friendship to save Lennie fro..."

What matters is that George was placed in a position that he was forced to make the choice to kill someone he cared about, thereby forcing the reader to contemplate whether they would make such a difficult choice.

Candy allowed Carlson to kill his dog, which left him with the regret that he allowed someone else to perform that act of mercy.

Curley's wife threatens to have Crooks hanged, just because she could, an act of cruelty which made her feel she had power in a setting where she had so little power.

After witnessing her cruelty toward Crooks, Lennie accidentally kills Curley's wife, an act which may complete a karmic circle, but which sets in motion his own judgment.

George knows all this as well as Lennie's background and is therefore the only one in a position to render a fair capital judgment against Lennie. It is his burden also be cause he is the one closest to Lennie, has struggled on Lennie's behalf, loves him.

Which would be worse for George, to live the rest of his life knowing he could have prevented Lennie from living out his life chained like an animal to an asylum wall, knowing he could have prevented Lennie from being brutally murdered by a blast from Curley's shotgun or knowing he had stepped forward with Carlson's Luger and prevented such suffering and injustice? One of the cardinal rules in animal husbandry is not to allow an animal to suffer. The euthanization of Candy's pet illustrates this. Allowing Lennie to live would mean treating him with less respect than an animal.

These are the only options that matter. Anything else would be inconsistent with the buildup of the story.

Steinbeck gives us a quick insight into Lennie's mental state while he's waiting in the bushes for George. His momentary fantasy about a giant rabbit suggests that George's mental condition is hopeless and possibly deteriorating. This further suggests that George has done the right thing.

Even if Lennie had been captured alive, imagine any lawyer trying to plead his case. George's situation was hopeless and was resolved in the best way possible.

It could be said that Lennie was an agent of karma, meting out punishment to the story's two cruel characters--Curley and Curley's wife. Curley had violently attacked him. He crushed Curley's hand. Curley's wife had insulted vulnerable workers and threatened to have Crooks hanged. Lennie punished her with accidental death. Lennie accidentally kills an innocent puppy. He's a danger to society. His life was sacrificed by George. The karmic circle of justice was complete, and George could spend the rest of his life in peace, knowing he had ended the suffering of an innocent being.

I think that it is neither. We are shown that Lennie's getting in trouble has been escalating. The novel begins with the two on the run, and the events of the story take place over a few days. The two hadn't been at the farm long. Murder, albeit accidentally, is the last straw. George can no longer protect Lennie and he knows that if he doesn't kill him, then Curley will. Steinback frames it as a mercy killing and George truly believes he is doing what is best for both of them.

Hello, I am a student in 1st in France and we studied this novel. For our final spot on it, we have to do a debate on the ending of it. Can you help me by telling me what ending you thought this novel would have: we need to find another ending to this book. How do you see this ending? And for the real end, how will you defend her? Thanks to everyone who will respond.

I think it is a combination of both; compassion for his friend who cannot help himself and fatigue with a life of constant upheaval which is nobody's fault.
It is admittedly an extreme solution but I believe it comes from a despair at what we can only assume is a recurring theme in George's life. Maybe he thinks this is the only way to break the cycle and have a life.

I firmly believe that George wanted what was best for Lennie, it sounds weird to think that he had no other choice but to murder him but George could see that this was what lennies life would always be like! Maybe the threat of one day George wouldn't be around to save him was enough to push George in to thinking this was the only option? Plus, is it not unfair for George to spend his life constantly pulling Lennie out of these scenarios?

I would agree with you Sarah (see above). George acts out of compassion and a despair at the downward spiral Lennie is on.

I feel it is like today if someone who is not socially or mentally capable to function in society it can end bad or in jail.

I see it differently. In my opinion it is the question of responsibility. Lennie is like child - not fully responsible for his actions, and George is only person able to influence him. So in the same way as parents are responsible for child behavior George is responsible for actions of Lennie. He is guilty of Curly's wife murder and will be responsible for everything Lennie will do in the future. He kills Lenny because he realize he is not able to control him and it is his responsibility to make sure nobody else will be hurt by him.