Editor's Choice
What are the similarities between Animal Farm and Of Mice and Men?
Quick answer:
Both Animal Farm and Of Mice and Men critique economic systems—communism and capitalism, respectively—for failing those at the bottom. In Animal Farm, the pigs corrupt the animals' dream of equality, while in Of Mice and Men, the American Dream eludes the working class. Characters like Boxer and Lennie, depicted as physically strong but mentally limited, evoke sympathy but are seen as threats and ultimately eliminated, highlighting systemic failures and offering no redemption.
Both works show how an economic system that was meant to do good and help people prosper has instead crushed the people (or animals) at the bottom.
In Animal Farm, the communism that the animals are overjoyed to institute when they take over Mr. Jones's farm is quickly derailed. They dream of everyone working together for the common good and sharing equally in the fruits of their labor. They envision enough to eat, a peaceful retirement, and heated stalls with running water. None of this comes to pass because the pigs twist the initial concept into a police state in which they commandeer all the profits for themselves.
In Of Mice and Men , Steinbeck, who was a communist, likewise critiques capitalism. It is supposed to allow everyone the equal opportunity to pursue their economic vision, such as George and Lennie's dream of owning a small farm. However, as...
Unlock This Answer Now
Start your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
Steinbeck portrays it, capitalism in the 1930s has gone awry and is not delivering on the American Dream. Instead, people at the bottom have to work very hard with no chance of job security or putting down roots or in any way getting ahead. Steinbeck is saying this is not what the "land of opportunity" is supposed to be about.
In both works, our sympathies lie with the struggling animals or people at the bottom, who have good hearts and want so desperately to succeed and have better lives. Neither work offers a happy ending: George ends up having to shoot Lennie, and the hardworking Boxer is sold to the glue factory and denied his retirement.
In my mind, the most striking similarity between both works is how they display characters who are so helpless and yet seen as such a danger to the system. Due to this, these characters have to be eliminated, leaving a sense of despondency in their absence. Boxer and Lennie are characters that cannot but help evoke a sense of empathy in their depiction. Both are not very bright. Both depend on other characters in the novel in their entirety. Boxer defers to Napoleon, chanting that "Napoleon is always right." Lennie is dependent on George, not being able to do anything outside of him. Both characters are extremely strong from a physical point of view. Lennie's strength is what makes him a desirable worker, as with Boxer. Both are seen as a threat to the established order, and therefore must be eliminated. Boxer is seen as a threat by Napoleon and when the horse's lung collapses, the shrewd pig sees his chance to eliminate him. Lennie is seen as a wanted man after it is surmised that he has killed Candy's wife. In both developments, a beloved character, from the point of view of the reader, becomes someone seen as a danger, with their elimination almost guaranteed. In the death of both, a rebuke of redemption is also evident.