At the end of the novella, George takes Carlson's gun and shoots Lennie. When he does this, he reader is left wondering whether George did something noble or ignoble, moral or immoral. On the one hand, he killed someone. He took the life of his friend. On the other hand, he might have spared his friend from greater suffering and death at the hands of an angry mob of men.
In view of these points,...
At the end of the novella, George takes Carlson's gun and shoots Lennie. When he does this, he reader is left wondering whether George did something noble or ignoble, moral or immoral. On the one hand, he killed someone. He took the life of his friend. On the other hand, he might have spared his friend from greater suffering and death at the hands of an angry mob of men.
In view of these points, some would say that George did what was best. He spared Lennie from an angry mob that would have killed him brutally. So, he actually saved his friend from greater suffering. In this sense, he acted compassionately and morally.
Others would say that George did not try to save his friend. Perhaps he could make the men understand that the death of Curley's wife was an accident. Candy suggests this route. Or he could have tried to run away with Lennie together.
In the end, we don't know what would have happened. Therefore, the act of George will always be debated.
No comments:
Post a Comment