.png)
4 hours ago
1
Having taught Of Mice and Men for 30 years in multicultural schools in London, I wholeheartedly agree that it is a difficult, problematic novel to teach in secondary school classrooms, particularly because of some of the characters using racist slurs (Would you drop Of Mice and Men from the exam syllabus? The answer isn’t black and white, 6 January). However, to imply that it is educationally redundant does not acknowledge other important positive messages it contains, still relevant today, that do not appear in less problematic alternatives.
During the 1930s, John Steinbeck was inspired by marine biologist and ecologist Ed Ricketts to describe how survival ultimately depends on diverse individuals or groups collaborating and working towards collective benefits. In his novels, Steinbeck champions the inclusive diverse group over the individuals holding power. He provides a counter argument to the sweeping enthusiasm for eugenics in California at that time.
In Of Mice and Men, when some of the oppressed characters temporarily move towards interdependence and teamwork, their dominant oppressors are neutralised. Unfortunately, this precious moment is fleeting. It’s far from a trite tale of triumph over adversity. The characters don’t continue to stick together and protect each other and the opportunity for emancipation is not realised and not seized. Perhaps, too, the full educational potential of Steinbeck’s most controversial novel will not now be fully realised and seized.
Will Smith
London
We should beware of using compulsory education to expose children of colour to racial slurs because racism lessens, weakens, degrades and befouls all of us. The summer race riots showed this. A sound reason for removing books such as Of Mice and Men from curriculums is that some schools are unable to teach them properly. Appropriate teaching involves careful contextualisation, effective mentoring and ongoing vigilance against harmful effects.
I studied Of Mice and Men in the early 1990s. We had to read the text aloud, there was no forewarning and students were offered no option but to read out the slurs. Afterwards, the teacher held me back to explain that he expected me to be “mature” about the whole business. That was the only time it was ever mentioned. I was the only non-white child.
In my life, I cannot think of a single interaction I have had with a white person on the subject of race that has left me better off. Of all the reassurances, anecdotes, counterexamples, reasoning, hair-splitting etc, none of it was for my benefit. This is why books like Of Mice and Men can in good conscience be taken off curricula: they are powerful weapons, but who can assume they will be used against their proper targets?
Edward Lindon
Taipei, Taiwan
I taught English courses to primarily Black students in Philadelphia public schools for 37 years. Among the various literary works we surveyed were Romeo and Juliet, Things Fall Apart, The Great Gatsby, Death of a Salesman, Fences, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, The Chocolate War, A Raisin in the Sun, and A Separate Peace. But by far the most enthusiastic and emotional student response to any of the books prescribed was reserved for Of Mice and Men.
Year after year, my teenage students relished John Steinbeck’s prescient treatment of themes ranging from economic disparity to sexual misogyny to ableism in America during the Great Depression. In particular, his characterisation of Crooks, the Black and embittered ranch hand, remains as powerful and unsentimental a portrayal of American racial inequity as any ever written.
To replace Of Mice and Men on school curriculum lists with The Autobiography of Malcolm X, as Nels Abbey suggests, is to conflate both genre and application. Each book is a milestone in US literature, but their comparison ends there.
Anthony Nannetti
Philadelphia, US
I have taught Of Mice and Men at GCSE.
In the classroom, the racist content is recognised straight away and is immediately shocking. The younger generation are already well-informed about racism. However, the misogynist content is always missed. The only woman in the novel is not even given a name and I found that the pupils would blame her for the way she presents herself and her relationship with Lennie. It always shocked me how quickly the word “bitch” entered the discussion and other misogynist terms for this woman who “was leading the men on”, a perspective presented more than once in the narrative.
I’m not sure the book should be banned as it does lead to discussion in ways more evenly presented articles do not, inasmuch as its content is not as bland or historically distant as most of the curriculum.
Michael Phelan
Bromsgrove, Worcestershire
