Of Mice and Men was so much better...

I believe that Of Mice and Men is much better then Flowers of Algernon, because I didn't really care for all the people making fun of Charlie and in Of Mice and Men, nobody makes fun of Lennie cause they don't know. I liked how there was somebody there for Lennie to watch over him, but Charlie didn't really have a friend to look over him just a bunch of doctors. Charlie really couldn't be himself in the book cause all he was, was a science project, and with Lennie he got to be himself around George and do things that he was good at. Even though both Lennie and Charlie are the same, Lennie could be able to take of himself ( if he ever gets is anger under control that is), and Charlie really can't cause people would take advantage of him. They only thing I really cared about from Flowers of Algernon was that Charlie didn't kill any animals, and Lennie has killed a bunch apparently. I'm not a big fan of animal cruelty and that's just sad what Lennie did to the mice and puppy. Of Mice and Men was better also because it had a lot of twists and turns that I thought was interesting. Especially when Lennie ended up killing Curley's wife, didn't see that one coming.

Comparison

Personally, I liked Flowers for Algernon. This book has many different settings and places to explore. While Of Mice and Men, on the other hand, only placed at the farm was less exciting. Although both books had very interesting stories to them, Flowers for Algernon portrays a better feel for what was going on and was very unpredictable at times. I like to be able to guess what is going to happen next, and in Of Mice and Men I feel if was very predictable. Of Mice and Men has a better feel for how people were treated differently and society’s expectations of each individual while Flowers for Algernon is based on Charley’s experiment. Both stories send a message that you have to think about what to do before you do it. Also, do what you have to do with meaning. Do not just do something to get it over with, finish with 110% like you have started. So yeah pretty much I liked Flowers for Algernon better!

Week 4 Post

I like the novel Flowers for Algernon better because it kept me interested to see what was going to happen next, and Of Mice and Men took forever for something exciting to happen. Charlie had his operation mid way through the book and it kept me wondering what was going to happen to him next. The only thing that was exciting in Of Mice and Men occurred in the last chapter. Another reason why I like Flowers for Algernon better is because it is easier to follow and it had a better plot. In Of mice and Men there was a whole chapter of just people talking. Overall, Flowers for Algernon kept me interested more than Of Mice and Men did. Both novels gave good examples of how the lack of intelligence affects the amount of success a person can have. Charlie lived a boring life before the surgery and Lennie was shot because he didn't understand that killing things was wrong. Both Charlie and Lennie had a difficult time fitting in and making a difference in their lives. Lennie and Charlie were also treated poorly due to their mental disabilities. Charlie was often mistreated by the people he worked with at the bakery, and Lennie was treated poorly by his best friend George.

Week 4 Post ( My writing skills are astonishing)

Between the two novels, I really thought both were not good. Honestly if I had to pick I would say I liked Flowers for Argenon better because it had more of a modern problem and solution that Of Mice and Men. I liked Flowers better because of how it showed a useless human being changed over time due to the result of one surgery. If that surgery was a true solution in this society I believe this book would help people decide whether they want to have it or not. I believe that through these books, it shows society accepts smart people and that the smarter people succeed more than the mentally ill. In a society with more normal people than people with disabilities the people who were born with these disabilities are treated differently than those who aren’t and are sometimes even discriminated against because of their lack of mental capacity. For example Lennie is treated differently by Curley because he is a bigger and dumber man than all the rest so therefore Curley believes he can take his anger out on him. Another example is how Nemur convinced Charlie of taking the risk of the surgery because Nemur was smarter and seemed to know what he was doing so Charlie agreed with him and went with the procedure. The characters help the author say that people with the mental disabilities will most likely never make it through life completely by themselves. They always need someone there to watch over them or they could lose their lives like the case of Lennie.

I like the book Of Mice And Men better because it was an easier read. Also, it was less confusing and I understood the whole story. Both stories dealt greatly with the importance of intelligence in society. I interpret it as, if you don't have a sufficient amount of intelligence then you wont make it in this world. Charlie wanted to become smart, therefore he had the surgery. He wanted improvement in his life and was willing to take the chance. Without more intelligence Charlie would be worth nothing. He would just live out his life in the Warren home and make nothing of himself. In Flowers, Lennie never had the chance to improve his mental capabilities. His lack of intelligence lead him to his death. The author was trying to make a point that if your brain lacks certain aspects then the human body will not succeed in life. Lennie was a very hard worker, but not very smart. It wasn't Lennie's fault that he was born that way. He also had no chance at fixing it unlike Charlie. Charlie took the chance but it ended up failing. I would say that it is better to live a short life with intelligence rather than live a long life without it. It sounds very harsh saying that both authors want to convey the importance of intelligence in society with success, but that's almost how it is today. People with the incapability of learning will not go very far in life. To get a good paying job you need to be really smart, and if your brain can't move forward and grow with knowledge, then you are stuck going nowhere in life. The author of Flowers was trying to imply that there are people trying to improve the intelligence of those born without it. But in Mice the author is saying that people with no intelligence will die and they have no significance in society. These books both have differents ways to look at them.

Week 4- Cm

Both novels were similar in context; they each had to deal with individuals who have mental disabilities. I would have to say that I liked the novel, Flowers For Algernon better than John Steinback's Of Mice and Men. Flowers for Algernon was overall a better book with a hands down better plot. In Of Mice and Men, I felt that the plot wasn't really progressing and the ending wasn't all that great. In the book of Flowers for Algernon, I felt that I was reading a good story with an actual thought out plot. I felt that Flowers for Algernon focused more on intelligence and the people around Charlie were concerned for him the whole time. They felt that they had to baby sit Charlie. In of Mice and Men, Lennie could hold his own when he was with the guys working on the ranch. It also helps that he is big as an elephant and like a tank. George could trust Lennie more than the people could trust Charlie in Flowers For Algernon.

week 3

In the book Flowers for Algeron there is a power struggle between the doctors and the experiment or as we call them algernon and charly. Charly in this book seems like he gets a tast of power when he gets his temperary intellegance. He finaly is on top and is as smart and or smarter then most of the doctors that gave him his intellagence. But in the book he doesn’t allways have power or when he does its only minimum. Threw out charlies hole life he has allways been under the power of others because of his mental retardation. When he was a kid his mother was control of him and treated him so bad threatening him punishing him for stuff he cant help. Then when he went to the warren home he allways had someone looking after him. Even the one thing he loved to do which was work at the bakery he was still didn’t have power. He was still just a bus boy doing basic things around the shop. A person that allways had power in the book but lost it at the end was was charly mom. She over powered her son charly and she wore the pants in the family. But karma came back at her because she lost her mind with demensia when charly went to see her. This in my eyes was kinda like peotic justice that charlies mom treated charlie so horribaly and had his sister an gave up on him because he was retarted but in the end she became mentaly handycaped.