Lord Of The Flies By William Golding Philosophy Essay

Lord Of The Flies By William Golding Philosophy Essay In this paper I chose to analyze the book Lord of the flies written by William Golding as I believe it matches very well the field of organizational theory by presenting the contrast between different styles of leadership and the opposed actions of two very different leaders. I will emphasize four types of leadership styles: democratic, autocratic, laissez-faire and charismatic. I chose this book because in the novel, leadership plays a very important role, as it does in real life for us, because the characters need to feel some sense of security in order for them to survive. The situational leadership theory proposes that leaders choose the best course of action based upon situational variables. Different styles of leadership may be more appropriate for certain types of decision-making: for example in a situation where the leader is the most knowledgeable and experienced member of a group, an authoritarian style might be most appropriate, in other instances where group members are skilled experts, a democratic style would be more effective. The fundamental underpinning of the situational leadership theory is that there is no single best style of leadership. Effective leadership is task-relevant, and the most successful leaders are those that adapt their leadership style to the maturity of the individual or group they are attempting to lead or influence. Effective leadership varies, not only with the person or group that is being influenced, but it also depends on the task, job or function that needs to be accomplished. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situa tional_leadership_theory) The existence of mankind on earth relies on various factors: the basic needs for humans to survive are food, water, shelter, but these are only the physical needs of man. Humans also have social and mental needs which require the existence of law in order to be able to coexist peacefully with themselves, the nature and the environment. The only way that law and order can be achieved in human society is by a higher authority, or some form of government or leader. William Golding tries to touch on some of these aspects of our civilization through the various characters he creates in his novel Lord of the Flies. (http://www.bookrags.com/essay-2005/12/13/185154/04/) The main theme of the novel is the conflict between two opposed instincts that exist within all human beings: the instinct to live by rules, act peacefully, follow moral commands, and value the good of the group against the instinct to gratify ones immediate desires, act violently to obtain supremacy over others, and enforce ones will. The two main leaders in the story, through their similar and different leadership characteristics and objectives fight back and forth to gain the discipline of the other boys on the island in order to gain the power to make the decisions that they feel should be made, sometimes for the better of the entire group, and sometimes for their own purpose. The leaders which are presented throughout the novel all have their own method of leading, and serve different purposes. The elected and democratic leader is Ralph while the self-appointed leader who tries to run a totalitarian society is Jack. In the beginning they work towards common goals, but eventually their different views on how to lead the group lead them into conflict. From the very beginning Ralph assumes primary responsibility for the groups tasks when he starts organizing their living, because he realizes that not doing so will result in savagery and moral chaos (Hynes, 59). Being aware of the situation in which they are, Ralph uses Piggys idea of the conch and takes the role of gathering the survivors. When the boys arrive in the island they automatically seek for some kind of law and order, since there are not any grown-ups. They want to belong to a group, with someone in charge to lead them, and make them feel safe. Ralph becomes this person, after being chosen in a democratic election. He tries to hear what everybody has to say. Let him be chief with the trumpet thing (Golding, 30). The conch is a symbol of democracy because it entitles everyone to having an opinion in all matters of importance. It also symbolizes law and order, everything which Ralph stands for. Although he is accepted as a leader in the beginning, his priorities as a leade r and way of thinking create conflict with some of the others. Theres another thing. We can help them to find us. If a ship comes near the island they might not notice us. So we must make a smoke on top of the mountain. We must make a fire. (Golding, 49) When one observes Ralphs actions, it becomes obvious that he is not only a task-motivated leader, but also a democratic leader, which results from the fact that he leads an expedition through the forest in order to find out if the island is deserted or not. Ralph also wants shelters to be built where they can sleep, branches to be collected for a signal fire and a specific place beyond the bathing-pool to be used as a lavatory. Furthermore, he introduces rules when he tells the boys that they have to have Hands up like at school (Golding, 31) and that only the person holding the conch is allowed to speak. In addition, the conch makes the boys feel they participate; when holding it they get a chance to speak their mind and the others must listen. It is a significant trait for a democratic leader to aim for an environment of equality. Without a doubt, Ralph is also a relationship-motivated leader. He is compassionate and caring when he tries to comfort the littluns (Golding, 61) by saying there is no beast to be afraid of. He is interested in what the other boys think and he listens to them and what they have to say before he makes decisions. His closest follower, Piggy, thinks a great deal about what has to be done and how they can do it and Ralph brings up Piggys ideas at the assemblies. In brief, these are all examples that support the fact that Ralph is a complex leadership figure. He wants to be a sympathetic and egalitarian leader who does not avoid his responsibilities, but he is only twelve years old and has neither the experience needed for the task, nor the support from the other boys. In the beginning, all the boys stand by the rules set by Ralph. After a while this society starts to break up as man has a way of choosing the easiest way out. The boys get tired of the responsibility and want to play, hunt and have fun. They do not want to get rescued as they are enjoying themselves too much. When moving on to the authoritarian leader, represented by Jack, we find a character who starts his advance for the role of leader at the very first assembly when he states that he is the rightful leader of the schoolboys since he is the head boy in the choir. He is arrogant and disrespectful when he yells at his choir and bullies Piggy by screaming Shut up Fatty! (Golding, 17). Jack feels humiliated when Ralph is elected. Although he temporarily gives in, Jack soon starts using different strategies to undermine Ralphs authority, and at the same time making himself more powerful. He stirs up the group by lying about Ralph having said that the hunters are bad at hunting. And even though Jack is the one who suggests that they need rules, and is quick to point out that the one who breaks them will be punished, he soon breaks them himself when he, for instance, speaks without holding the conch or makes himself heard above the other speakers (Olsen, 13). These actions are unopposed and we aken Ralphs leadership, and according to Kirsten Olsen it is the breaking of old rules and making his own (Olsen, 14) that paves the way for Jack coming to power. After being publicly humiliated when his attempt to have Ralph unseated fails, Jack decides to leave the group and have a fort of his own. Cunningly he tries to win people over from Ralphs camp by accusing him of being a coward and a bad hunter. Jack also offers the hungry boys meat if they leave Ralph and join his group instead. Not surprisingly most boys rather eat pork and play than pick berries and do tiresome chores under Ralphs command. As a result of Jacks behavior, one notices how Ralphs leadership style gradually changes into a laissez-faire leader. At one point he wonders what is going on: Things are breaking up. I dont understand why. We began well; we were happy (Golding, 87). Later he talks to the assembled boys and asks: Which is better, law and rescue, or hunting and breaking things up?(Golding, 200). According to Ralph the first alternative is the only possible one, but the others do not seem to agree with him. Jack is a charismatic leader who paints his face with clay before he goes hunting for pigs. The hunters join Jack because they feel as if the mask on Jacks face commands them to do so. Most boys just do what the leader says, or what the majority does, without thinking in terms of right and wrong or friendship, since they are afraid to be on their own, or even worse, a target of the other boys aggressions. Compared to the democratic leader Ralph, Jack is an authoritarian leader who yells at his peers to make his point, threatens them into obedience, makes them commit crimes as well as actually hurting them physically. An example of Jacks tactics when he finally is in power is the situation where he orders his subordinates to tie up the twins Sam and Eric, and then turns to Ralph, saying: See? They do what I want (Golding, 199). As a consequence of Jacks increasing number of followers, Ralph finds himself being the leader of only a few boys. One person, though, who never abandons him is Piggy, the representative of common sense. He desperately tries to adjust the situation on the island to conditions more like those at home and he asks: What are we? Humans? Or animals? Or savages? Whats grown-ups going to think? Going off hunting pigs letting fires out - (Golding, 98). Compared to Jack, who leads a primary group, the choir, Ralph, with the exception of Piggy, does not have a group of close and loyal allies. A typical example of how Ralph is betrayed by some of his followers is the actions of twins Sam and Eric. They try to avoid conflicts, and therefore never openly take a stand for Ralph. The end of Ralphs leadership is a fact when Jack and his band of hunters have killed Simon and Piggy, the two most devoted boys. There are no more boys to lead, and without followers Ralph can no longer be a leader. In conclusion, both leaders have different characteristics and priorities, which make them lead the group in different ways. Ralph is considered to be the elected leader and Jack the self-appointed leader. These leaders have different skills and different views on how to create society, which leads them into many conflicts. This just goes to show that humans cannot be trusted with power, as power corrupts. The moment Jack becomes the leader of his own group he turns into a savage and does things without thinking. The same can be said about governments in the world today, who start wars with the purpose of fulfilling their own needs, and they do not mind harming others to achieve their goals and objectives. Maybe humans really are savages that cannot live in peace and coexist on this earth with all the animals and the environment. It might be quite possible that Goldings view of humans as being the worst creatures on earth, is not very hard to comprehend, as you can relate to the conf licts created by leadership that are seen throughout the world.

Hume on Revolution :: Government Politics Papers

Hume on Revolution David Hume offers a well conceived plan for the formation of government and its political workings. Furthermore, he grants that in special circumstances the citizens of a particular government may revolt. However, with respect to obedience and disloyalty, Hume gives no formal rules for revolution. We would like something more from Hume regarding revolution and, more specifically, what he considers justified revolution. Some authors, such as Richard H. Dees, find the basis for Hume’s account of justified revolution in his historical works. By connecting Hume’s historical writings with his political theory, we find a fuller account of revolution. Such an account, however, does not require him to give a rule or maxim prescribing revolution since such a rule or maxim would obviously go against his political theory as stated in the Treatise and his political essays. In sum, justified revolution for Hume centers around the established political practices and the principled ca uses held by factions. Unjustified revolutions, however, are denoted by lack of adherence to established practices and want of a genuine cause. They are, rather, motivated by speculative factions subject to fanaticism and enthusiasm which are the foundations of Hume’s political worries. These central tenets of Hume’s view of revolution are delineated within this paper. Introductory Remarks In "Of Passive Obedience," Hume chastises those who endorse at length the maxims of resistance. Disloyal acts are considered to be immoral because they strike us as being contrary to preserving order in society. The desire to preserve peace and order in society, for self-interest, motivates people to obey authority. We are, thus, to regard disobedience towards authority as something to be avoided. Hume writes, Besides; we must consider, that, as obedience is our duty in the common course of things, it ought chiefly to be inculcated; nor can any thing be more preposterous than an anxious care and solicitude in stating all the cases, in which resistance may be allowed.(1) For Hume, it is of major importance and consequence that obedience is taught and demonstrated for its benefits. First of all, liberty and commerce depend on obligation to promises. Secondly, submission to government is necessary for the performance of promises. Disobedience and revolution put both of these advantageous in jeopardy. Hume, however, in his explanation of the formation of government claims that government can be overthrown in times of egregious tyranny. To be sure, Hume had admittedly agreed with the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and sympathized with the American colonial situation but he finds too much liberty of resistance pernicious.

Uniform Knowledge Attributions Essay -- Philosophy

There is a philosophical tradition going back at least to Gilbert Ryle’s 1948 The Concept of Mind of distinguishing â€Å"knowledge how†from â€Å"knowledge that†, in which the latter is taken to be a kind of propositional attitude, while the former is taken to be a kind of ability or capacity. Paradigm examples are, respectively: Sally knows how to ride a bike. (1) Sally knows that she owns a bike. (2) More recently, this distinction has come under renewed scrutiny, notably with [Stanley and Williamson, 2001] arguing that there really is no such distinction, and that â€Å"knowledge how†is really a species of propositional knowledge, though the proposition is known under a different â€Å"mode of presentation† than the types of knowledge typically expressed by â€Å"knowledge that†attributions. Their suggestion is that all knowledge claims are syntactically and semantically uniform, so that philosophical argumentation would be needed to support Ryle’s distinction. In addition, they show that Ryle’s argument was flawed, and provide an account that deals with many other philosophical worries, while giving prima facie evidence that, contrary to what one might expect, (1) is not actually talking about an ability. They argue first that Ryle’s argument in favor of a distinction was incorrect. Then they suggest that linguistic evidence recommends a uniform analysis for all uses of the word â€Å"know†. Finally, they consider various philosophical arguments that might motivate a departure from the linguistic structure, and find them wanting. Thus, they suggest that we should stick with the uniformity of knowledge ascriptions that is suggested by the linguistic data. I will argue that the linguistic data are not as clear-cut as they suggest. ... ...y and Williamson allege for (1). (Interestingly, I haven’t been able to come up with any such counterexamples with â€Å"how†, â€Å"whether†, or â€Å"why†, just with â€Å"who†, â€Å"when†, and possibly â€Å"where†.) This different structure can then give rise to a different sort of meaning. Thus, although some attributions of â€Å"knowledge wh- to†are similar in kind to attributions of â€Å"knowledge that†, I suggest that the linguistic evidence does not immediately imply that all of them are. References [Lahiri, 1991] Lahiri, U. (1991). Embedded Interrogatives and the Predicates that Embed Them. PhD thesis, MIT. [No ¨e, 2005] No ¨e, A. (2005). Against intellectualism. Analysis, 65:278–290. [Schaffer, ] Schaffer, J. Knowing the answer. Unpublished manuscript. [Stanley and Williamson, 2001] Stanley, J. and Williamson, T. (2001). Knowing how. Journal of Philosophy, 98(8):411–444.

Discuss the ways in which Steinbeck explores the concept of the ‘American Dream’ is central to the novel Essay

The American Dream was a dream that nearly everyone had throughout the twentieth century. It was hope for a better life and people believed strongly that it would come true. The main characters in ‘Of Mice & Men’ have a dream which was to get a plot of land and live on it and become self-sufficient. The American Dream was not an achievable goal for many people. Steinbeck shows this failure through the characters of Lennie & George. The American dream was a great thing. We first heard about it when Lennie and George were sitting by the river at the beginning of the book. The dream was a hope that every rancher had an opportunity for a better life. Lennie and George, the two main characters, had such a dream, â€Å"Some day were gonna get a little place and a couple of acres†. The idea was to get a piece of land, grow crops and have an improved life there. They also new exactly what they were aiming for and what they wanted. They realised that their imagination should not be set too high for fear of disappointment. The two men also knew that they should not tell other people about the plot of land in case it was snatched from under their noses. This frequently happened then, as so many people were seeking the same desire., â€Å"Well it’s ten acres said George. Got a little win mill. Got a little shack on it and a chicken run. Got a kitchen, orchard, cherries, peaches, cots, nuts, got a few berries.† This shows that Lennie and George had ambition and again, knew what they wanted. It also shows that there were places where the dream had a chance of coming true, and that affordable land was for sale. Lennie and George intended to get the land by working extremely hard for a couple of months. They would earn standard migrant labour workers wages which was of course not very much, as the great depression was around at the time the book was set. The men hoped to save money and put it towards the plot of land, â€Å"Look, if me an Lennie work a month an’ don’t spen’ nothing we’ll have a hundred bucks†. Sooner or later people started to realise that the American Dream was turning into a nightmare. This is shown in the book by all the travelling and unemployment. Steinbeck shows that people were determined to get a job and willing to travel around to find one, he reinforces this through Lennie and George. At the start of the novel Steinbeck told us that they were walking, so we obviously know that they have had a nomadic life. During their rest they have a conversation about their travels â€Å"The first thing you know is that they are pounding away at some other ranch†. This backs up the fact that people travel around for jobs. We know how Lennie and George frequently lose their jobs, this is due to Lennie constantly getting the pair of them into trouble which jeopardises their current job. Because of this they have to travel from one ranch to another in search of another job. Also you can corroborate the fact that people travelled by George quoting, â€Å"The hell with what I says. You remember about us going into Murray and Ready’s and they give us work cards and bus tickets†. Murray and Ready are a typical work agency that sprung up in America during the Great Depression. In the 1930s the Great Depression spoilt the American Dream, it damaged everything that had a promising future, from buying food to making investments in the stock market. Through out the novel we do not see this very much. It is shown only as a high unemployment rate. George is very passionate about work as he wants to achieve his dream. As you read on through the book George comments on other people in his situation, â€Å"They aint got nothing to look ahead to†. Implying that George is fed up of losing his job to other people. He now knows you should not think about looking ahead to long term ambitions as anything can happen. The rate of unemployment was a serious issue at the time of the book, as the economy was decreasing rapidly. It is shown through various characters such as Carlson, Slim, Lennie, George and many more. We know that they all have been travelling from ranch to ranch in search of jobs during this time, they have started to feel like they do not have a home and don’t belong anywhere. â€Å"Guys like us, they got no family and don’t belong no place. They come to a ranch an work up a stake then they go into town and blow their stake†. This was quite normal for young and old men in their quest, not just for the dream, but for survival. Because of that, it made it hard for people to keep a job as other people who were as desperate, came along and accepted less pay to work at the same job, just so they could get some money. The idea of the American Dream was to be happy but just as well as the Great depression, racism also crippled the illusion. The dream was merely for the whites, as many of the blacks were unlawfully discarded from the opportunity or status to achieve it. Steinbeck shows this in the book through a character called Crooks, who was a crippled Negro stable buck and had suffered years of abuse in his life. Although Crooks could read and write, he was very lonely and because he was black, he could not join in with the usual endeavours of other men on the ranch. â€Å"Suppose you had to sit out here and read books. Sure you could play horseshoes till it gets dark, but then you got to read books†. This shows he only had books for company. It was still very racist in the 1930’s so there was not much chance of Crooks achieving the dream by himself and certainly no one at that time would try to help. In the course of the book Crooks also tells us about his life in the past, how his father did actually achieve the dream, and how his family was the only coloured family in Soledad, which is where the book was set. â€Å"There wasn’t another coloured family for miles around. And now there aint no coloured man on this ranch†. Crooks felt strongly about this, he was neglected by everyone and still felt as if he was being treated as an unequal by every other man. He wanted so much to be included in the games that everyone participated in. â€Å"Suppose you couldn’t go into the bunk house and play rummy cause you was black†. Because Crooks was being denied these privileges he turned into a bitter man who was equally as malicious as the offenders. This portrays the dream in a bad way, which is unusual as the dream is usually portrayed as being happy and being the provider when it actually created tensions between different races and cultures and caused many tribulations between people. Although Crooks is abused by many people on the ranch there is one person in the book who does not discriminate him because he is black, that person is Lennie. Lennie does not understand or see the racism in the world and he sees everyone as being the same. Crooks feels he can talk to Lennie about many things, â€Å"A guy can talk to you an’ be sure you won’t go blabbin†. Because of this it reassures Crooks and makes him feel better as he knows he can talk to some one instead of read books At first there was a chance of the dream coming true. One reason was because of Candy, willing to give his life savings so he would know that he had somewhere to go after he was incapable of working on the ranch, † Tell you what suppose I went in with you guys thas three hundred and fifty bucks I’d put in†. This endorses the fact that he was willing to put every last coinage that he had, to assist him to have a happy finale to his life. Also Crooks, the negro stable buck, offers to help, â€Å"If you guys would want a hand in work for nothing just his keep†. He did this just so he could have a friendship with someone and feel liked. In addition no one else knew about this certain plot of land, which made it a secret of the group and easy to obtain. We know that the owners needed to get the money fast, â€Å"The ol’ people that owns it is flat bust an’ the ol’ lady needs an operation†. Because of all this Lennie, George and Candy s tood a very good chance of achieving this reverie. The American dream ended due to a series of unfortunate events. Steinbeck shows this through Lennie and George not getting the land. They did not get it because of many things. The main reason for them failing was Lennie. He spoilt the dream for George, as he was constantly getting into trouble and destroying any chance that he had to achieve the dream. After a while other men on the ranch begin to question their past, for example, Slim, â€Å"What happened in Weed†. We know that they have been travelling around and losing jobs, but it was not just because of other men stealing their jobs only to get paid less, it was also Lennie destructively destroying their chances, because of this they, had to move on to another ranch. In the end they had no hope what so ever, of the dream coming true because of Lennie, once again, getting George into trouble, as he was responsible for Lennie, when he unintentionally killed Curly’s wife. If given the chance most men on the farm would attempt the dream even if they thought it was impossible. A good example is Crooks, at one point in the story, he was putting down the fact of any one achieving their goal, â€Å"Jesus I seen it too many time. Too many guys with land in their head. They never get none under their hand†. When Crooks found out that there was a chance of it happening, he decided on trying to get in on it, â€Å"If you guys would want a hand to work for nothing, just his keep, why I’d come an lend a hand†. You can see also that people always put down the achievement of the dream, but they all had a secret burning ambition to get it if the chance came around. Through out the book Steinbeck managed to portray the conditions of the Great Depression in the 1930’s. He also gave us a glimpse of The American Dream that every one pursued and showed us that it was not an easy achievement. Steinbeck has managed to show the different levels of hardship and suffering that people faced during that period of time and also managed to show more hopeless situations of people from a minority. The concept of the American Dream is at the heart of the novel ‘Of Mice & Men’ and therefore allows Steinbeck to make comments on American Society and the time of the Great Depression.

Financial Schemes Essay

When the question of developing a new project at Puerto Penasco, Mexico has arrived, we would suggest that rather than going for traditional time share or new mixed use hotels, we should generate the energies towards developing a Condominium. The most important fact for advocating a Condominium is because this concept is already very popular in beach areas of Mexico. Tourists from across the world come here to take the experience of beach village which is rather not possible in mixed use hotels. Financial Advantages of a Condominium over other forms: Limited capital investment initially: First of all, the amount of capital invested in a Condominium is lesser than that of other traditional hotel forms. Hotels usually are occupied by the tourists at peak months only. Apart from that time, they always face lack of tourists which ultimately result in loss of revenue. Renting the property at non peak months: The Condominium could be rented to students and other people apart from the tourists during the non peak months and hence it in a sense gives guarantee to the owners for a uniform cash flow across the year. Disadvantages to the other schemes: It could be very well noted here that at times Condominium could lose the advantages to classic hotels in terms of hospitality and luxury. The tourists often feel that the Condominium could not provide the room service and the luxury that the time share hotels could provide. This is true to an extent that the Condominium does not beat the traditional hotels in terms of luxury. The reason why we have chosen a Condominium over other forms of hotels is because least risk involved in this project. As the amount of capital invested is least, the chances of losing money are less. Apart from that, we are also ensuring smooth and uniform revenues across the year. References: Puerto Penasco: Retrieved on 4th August, 2010 from website: http://www. puerto-penasco. com/

African Penguins

The topic of my report is african penguins who are also known as black footed penguins . I chose this topic because through out my life i have seen penguins only in Antarctica which made me wander how can they survive on islands. The main characteristics are that they are 26-27 inches in height and there weight is 4-11 pounds. There back is colored black and there front is colored white which has a black stripe. They have large black beak and feet. They sound like donkeys when they communicate with each other. Another interesting haracteristics is they have pink glands above each eye and their average swimming speed is 4-12 MPH. The African Penguin are found in South Africa which is in the southern hemisphere. After penguin choose their partner for life, breeding occurs throughout the year. Although the main breeding begins in February, Nest are constructed and two eggs are laid and they incubate for 38-42 days. When the eggs hatch the parents care for the baby penguins for 8-18 weeks. African Penguins like to hunt in the nutrient rich cold water and like to eat mainly fish such as squid, anchovies and a few other things The major facts about african penguins are that they are only found in south coast of africa. There is no other place in the world where these penguins are found. There is no fixed breeding season it can happen throughout the year. The enemies of penguins are sharks,killer whales and other dangerous marine creatures. In conclusion i very much enjoyed researching about this animal because they have a lot of interesting facts that the penguins in Antarctica don't have. The most interesting fact i learned was they have pink glands above there eyes.

Of Mice and Men †Life in America in the 1930’s Essay

â€Å"Of mice and men† by John Steinbeck tells the story of life in 1930’s America during the great depression, about the dreams, lifestyle, racism and sexism, which had become a way of life for the characters in Steinbeck’s book. I will be discussing these points to determine exactly what life in 1930’s American was like. Life in 1930’s America was very lonely, George tells us that â€Å"†¦guys like us†¦are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no family. They don’t belong no place†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . Many of the other ranch hands share the same feeling. This is also made apparent by the fact that most people think that there has to be something wrong if two men travel together because nobody takes that much care of somebody else, Slim’s comment to this is â€Å"†¦ I never seen one guy take so much trouble for another guy†¦Ã¢â‚¬  George and Lennie’s new boss is also suspicious, he asks George, referring to Lennie, â€Å"†¦what stake you got in this guy?†¦Ã¢â‚¬  George feels he has to lie and tells the boss that Lennie is † †¦my†¦Cousin†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . The other ranch hands don’t interact with each other this is shown when Candy says to George â€Å"†¦a guy on the ranch don’t never listen nor he don’ t ask no questions†¦Ã¢â‚¬  this quote emphasises how private the menn keep their lives. Slim is an exception to this as he is always willing to talk if others wish to. However many of the others, despite their urge to talk, seem to be less inviting or trustworthy. George and Lennie seem to be an exception to this general life. They â€Å"†¦got somebody to talk to that gives a damn†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Slim describes what living on a ranch does to a man and really how lonely it is that â€Å"†¦they get mean†¦ they get so they don’t want to talk to anybody†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . The average ranch hand gets â€Å"†¦ fifty bucks†¦Ã¢â‚¬  they â€Å"..go in old susy’s place†¦ you can get a shot for two bits†¦Ã¢â‚¬  they describe this as â€Å"†¦ jus’ the usual thing†¦Ã¢â‚¬  and George describes how most ranch hands are constantly moving from ranch to ranch â€Å"†¦they come to a ranch an’ work up a stake and then they go into town and blow their stake, and the first thing you know they’re poundin’ their tail on some other ranch†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . The conditions in which the migrant workers lived were primitive. Bunkhouse walls were whitewashed, the floor unpainted. There were eight bunks in the bunkhouse, which showed that there was a lack of privacy for the men. Even their few personal belongings were on public display â€Å"†¦over each bunk there was nailed an apple-box with the opening forward so that it made two shelves†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . The only places for the men to sit were boxes. George saw that the conditions were also unhygienic when he found a can in his apple-box which said â€Å"†¦positively kills lice, roaches and other scourges†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . The life style in 1930’s America was not one of luxury, it was full of hard times, low wages and little opportunity. Crooks the Stable buck dreams about going back to a world much like his childhood, without prejudice. Many of the men on the ranch are very racist, including the boss, even though the boss is described as a â€Å"pretty nice guy† he â€Å"give the stable buck hell†. An example of racial prejudice is when Carlson casually refers to the stable buck as a â€Å"†¦nigger†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . George does not react to this reference, which shows that it is a commonly used word. Also the prejudice against coloured people is again shown as the stable buck, who is a coloured man, is not permitted to sleep in the bunkhouse along with the other migrant workers. The stable buck is also not usually allowed to join in with any activities and we are shown this when Carlson explains how, at Christmas, â€Å"†¦they let the nigger come in that night†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . The conditions in Crooks room are just as bad as the rest of the ranch, Crooks bed is â€Å"a long box filled with straw, on which his blankets were flung†. Even though Crooks has his own room his life is extremely lonely, being the only coloured man on the ranch the only contact he has with others is when he is asked to do something. Crooks teases Lennie referring to George â€Å"well, s’pose, just s’pose he don’t come back. What’l you do then?† the point crooks was trying to make by teasing Lennie was how its like on your own with no one, and that Lennie is very lucky to have George because, Crooks has no one and isn’t allowed in the bunk house. Again disrespect for the ranch workers is shown when Curley’s Wife refer’s to them as â€Å"†¦a bunch of bindle stifts – a nigger an’ a dum-dum and a lousy ol’ sheep†¦Ã¢â‚¬  the ranch workers world seems to contain quite a lot of prejudice, both racial and sexual. Curley’s Wife lashes out at Crooks when he tells her â€Å"you got no rights comin’ in a coloured man’s room† Crooks is forced to draw into himself and add covers of mental protection, because Curley’s Wife show’s how racism is very much a part of life in the 1930’s, her next words to Crooks are some of the harshest â€Å"well keep your place, then, nigger. I could get you strung up on a tree so easy it ain’t even funny†. The Sexual prejudice in 1930’s America is very obvious, the men at the ranch make this point clear because, they assume that Curley’s Wife is â€Å"†¦a tart†¦Ã¢â‚¬  because she comes into the bunk house and supposedly gives Slim and Carlson â€Å"†¦the eye†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . It later becomes clearer that what she actually wishes to gain from her visits to the bunk house is company. This shows that the ranch is a very lonely place for her too. Curley’s Wife has a dream, although her dream is different from the men on the ranch. Instead of something to call her own, she wants fame. She is unhappy with her husband , and his constant stories of who is going to beat up next: â€Å"sure I gotta husban’. You allseen him. Swell guy, ain’t he?†. When she is talking to Lennie, alone in the barn, she recounts her obviously well told stories of her offers of fame. She seems to have a deep regret that she didn’t take up either men on their offers â€Å"if I’d went, I wouldn’t be livin’ like this, you bet†. The scene in Crooks room revealed that Curley’s Wife isn’t really â€Å"†¦a tart†¦Ã¢â‚¬ , she is just extremely lonely, and all she really wants is company and someone to talk to. I think the reason she lashes out at Crooks is because she has just had enough of people not wanting to talk to her, or asking her to go away Crooks tells Curley’s Wife â€Å"now you jus’ get out, an’ get out quick. If you don’t, I’m gonna ast the boss not to let you come in the barn no more†. Tragically Lennie and Curley’s Wife die, I feel very sorry for the both of them, Curley’s Wife, because she always wished for fame and a comfortable life. Curley’s Wife did not seem likely to achieve her dreams. Even if she wasn’t murdered, she was stuck in a rut with Curley, a rut that she would have gone round and round in until he left her for a new woman, or she finally built up the courage to leave him. Also someone who is referred to throughout an entire story as someone’s possession does not make a likely major character. Their marriage did not seem to be one that was destined to last until they died of natural causes. But Curley’s Wife did die, and her death seemed to be a release â€Å"†¦ discontent and the ache for attention were all gone from her face†. I also feel very sorry for Lennie, he was also described in the story as some kind of possession, he was George’s companion. Lennie’s child-like-mind and behaviour don’t make the ideal major character, I think all Lennie really thought about during the whole story was â€Å"Livin’ off the fatta the lan'† and â€Å"tending the rabbit’s†. I think Lennie knew what the dream was but for him it was tending rabbits. George and Lennie’s dream is a simple one – they want land to call their own. Candy sums the feeling up well: â€Å"Every body wants a bit of land, not much. Jus’ som’thin’ that was his†. Crooks has also seen it all before: â€Å"I seen guys nearly crazy with loneliness for land, but ever’ time a whorehouse or a blackjack game took what it takes†. This shows that the dream of owning land is very common among all ranch workers. George’s dream, although extremely similar to Lennie’s , is probably more detailed and complicated. Lennie thinks as far as â€Å"tendin’ the rabbits†, but George has to worry about whether it would be possible to really â€Å"live offa fatta of the lan'†, or would they starve? I think Candy grasped so readily on George and Lennie’s dream because, Candy knew that â€Å"Jus’ as soon as I can’t swamp out no bunk-houses they’ll put me on the county†, I think he also knows that if he doesn’t get a place soon he is just going to die on the ranch, sad and alone because the men on the ranch wont care. Maybe Lennie did get his dream, in one way or the other. As George is preparing to kill Lennie, he tells him one last time about â€Å"how ità ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½s gonna be.† This last bedtime story for Lennie seems to describe not a little farm that they might buy, but the heaven someone might go to in their afterlife. As Lennie begs George â€Å"Leà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½s do it now. Leà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½s go to that place now†, and George replies â€Å"Sure, right now. I gotta. We gotta†, and then pulls the trigger, the pair seem at peace with themselves, and each other. George knows what he is doing is right, and he knows that Lennie would agree if he had the time to explain his reasoning to him. If Lennie could comprehend the reasoning behind Georgeà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½s actions, he would realise that George was taking Candyà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½s unknowingly offered advice: â€Å"I ought to of shot that dog myself, George. I shouldnà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½t ought to have let no stranger shoot my dog.† The American dream is very common in 1930’s America, it seems that every character in Steinbecks novel has a dream which all of them are unlikely to achieve. The world of the migrant workers in the 1930s, during the Great Depression, was monotonous and lonely. Generally speaking there was a lack of realistic ambition for the workers. The conditions in which they lived were cramped and unhygienic and encouraged prejudice and a lack of respect towards everyone. I think that Steinbeck’s novel paints an accurate picture of life and culture in 1930’s America.