The Relevance of Less Significant Characters

Whit:

Steinbeck included every character for a reason. The character of Whit may not say much throughout the novella but instead silently observes what is happening without physically making a change to the plot. In this way, we could say that the character Whit represents the reader as we read the plot but do not have a part in it.

Whit is the control character in the novella. Each character without their specific personality trait would be Whit:

• If Crooks was not a black man, he would be Whit
• If Curley wasn’t the Boss’ son, he would be Whit
• If Lennie did not have a mental disability, he would be Whit
• If George did not have to look after Lennie, he would be Whit
• If Curley’s wife was not a woman, she would be Whit
• If Slim wasn’t so ‘perfect’, he would be Whit
• If Candy didn’t have a physical disability, he would be Whit
• If Carlson didn’t shoot Candy’s dog, he would be Whit

In Section 2, Candy makes a reference to another character: “This here blacksmith-name of Whitney”

By giving this character this name, Steinbeck has shown the reader that the name “Whit” was commonly given to those of the working class and was not just used for ranch workers, but for any labouring man i.e. a “blacksmith”.

Eli Whitney was the inventor of the cotton gin. This was a device that made cotton picking much easier for ranch workers in California. This is particularly ironic as Curley’s wife “wore a cotton house”. Steinbeck may have created the character of Whit as someone who is not really invested in the plot of the story but more to depict a typical itinerant worker in the 1930s.

Aunt Clara:

We have very little evidence about the character of Aunt Clara other than her taking Lennie in when he was a child and being a potential mother figure to him before her death.

• During Lennie’s hallucinations Aunt Clara is described wearing “bull’s-eye glasses”. This is ironic considering Lennie was previously animalised in the early sections as being as “strong as bull”. The fact that this was a description of her glasses shows how focused she was on Lennie’s well-being that she was worried about him and cared for him despite his surges of uncontrollable anger, releasing what Steinbeck refers to as his bull-like strength.

• On the other hand, this can be interpreted more literally as a “bull’s-eye” target showing the obligation felt by Clara in having the responsibility of bringing up a mentally disabled child. Her reference to a target shows her feelings of frustration of carrying Lennie as a burden and makes the reader question whether she assigned George the responsibility of Lennie because she could not handle him.

This next point is more of a speculation of whether the identity of Lennie’s Aunt Clara and the Clara from “Clara’s house” are the same character.

• What makes these two less significant characters so intriguing is Steinbeck’s choice of giving them the same name. Male domination is predominant throughout the novella linking to the context of women being objectified in the 1930s. ‘Of Mice and Men’ features so little female characters that it seems fairly strange that Steinbeck chose to give two of them the same names. 

• This leads us to a theory that Aunt Clara is in fact the same Clara that owned the beer house. If it was one of her prostitutes that gave birth to Lennie whilst still drinking alcohol and continuing their normal lifestyles during pregnancy, this may be a suitable explanation for Lennie’s mental disability.

Furthermore, George specifically chooses not to take Lennie with him when all the other workers go down to Suzy’s place. Could this be an indication that George does not want the whore-house to bring back previous memories from Lennie’s childhood?