"George would live an easier life without Lennie." Do you agree with this statement?
The term "an easier life" is suspect here. If we restrict ourselves to physical comforts (food, lodging, work) it is safe to say that George would be freer to seek activities and work situations that could provide him with more of these comforts; but clearly he would lose the joy, the love, the value of companionship, family, purpose in life. On another level, it is Lennie who maintains the vision of a future for them both, and without Lennie's "dream," with all its details and promises, that keeps George going. He might, without Lennie, just become another perpetual drifter and seasonal migrant worker, and never get out of his meager existence. Finally, there is always a tendency by an engaged reader to imagine a "road not taken" scenario -- what if Raskalnikov had not... What if Anna Karenina had not... What if Bartelby had not...? It speaks to the depth and passion of the authors that these characters come alive long enough to imagine continuations and variations of their lives.