Although life in the 1930s was very much about looking out for your own back, John Steinbeck presents friendships as being necessary. He shows how these friendships can be desperate and hard to keep fruitful due to circumstance, and ultimately displays how they can crumble away.[Lovely introduction. You have referenced the context and mentioned Steinbeck's intentions. To improve the introduction, I would try and add a sentence like this: "In this essay I will address ..., In this essay I am going to talk about how..." This will help set your essay up, but your introduction is a great start!]
Characters are shown to seek friendships - no matter how different other people are. George befriends Lennie and although Lennie always does ‘bad things’ and George has to ‘get [him] out’, it is the companionship that George craves for. Without Lennie, George has no one to live for, but by being his interpreter of the world around them, George derives a great deal of satisfaction. Their friendship appears to be genuine, as George is always looking out for Lennie, like[for example] when he says “think I’d let you carry your own work card?”. [Could you go into a little more depth here? Maybe analyse specific words and their effect on the reader.] George even talks for Lennie in front of the boss, at which point the boss ‘turned around and looked for a long moment at the two men’; therefore we learn that their relationship is very atypical of a time when people “get mean” and “don’t want to talk to nobody”, as Slim says. This is because economic hardships after the Great Depression led to a breakdown of trust in other people, and therefore jeopardised friendships. Even Curley’s wife seeks intimacy, despite being a married woman stuck in a man’s world. She has ‘rouged lips’ and ‘her fingernails were red’, revealing how she was always out to get attention from the other men. As she always used the excuse of finding Curley to talk to the other guys, we once again see the desperation of finding friendships, just like in George’s case.[Great! I love the link to the context and then Curley's wife. To get into the top bands, you really do need to analyse key words. For example, when talking about Curley's wife talk about what red symbolically indicates - attention seeking. It is more better to say "red symbolically indicates..." rather then saying "we know she is seeking attention." Moreover, you can easily elaborate on the point about Curley's wife always looking for George - you can link it to loneliness and thereby your point about depression. Remember, Curley's wife and Curley are always seen looking for each other throughout the novella, but are they ever seen together? ]
Even if characters find friendships, Steinbeck presents how they are hard to maintain. Crooks is isolated for most of the novel, but when Candy and Lennie visit him in his room, we see a slightly more social side to him. He is originally hesitant to invite Lennie in, and very cynical, saying that their dreams are baseless and "it’s just the talking". [Why is this? This is a chance for you to embed a link to the novella's context.]But he starts opening up to the possibility, offering to "lend a hand". However, this potential friendship was doomed to fail as Curley’s wife verbally assaults Crooks, telling him to "keep your place, ******". [What does "Niger/Negro" infer?]Crooks is singled out due to the colour of his skin and silenced from expressing himself and therefore making friendships. Steinbeck shows how racial prejudice was so strong that Black people had no chance of interacting with others, especially on a ranch full of white men. Doing so risked the reputation of the white man, and carried the risk of lynching for the Black man. Despite Curley’s wife’s endless attempts at making friends with anyone – even Lennie – there is no avail. No one truly cares for her, even her husband who has a ‘glove full of vaseline’, suggesting the marriage is nothing more than sexual pleasure for the man in its purpose. When she speaks to Lennie ‘her words tumbled out in a passion of communication’, revealing how she has to force the listener to allow her to confide in them, and that without doing so it is impossible to get her voice heard. Her failure to make friendships is down to circumstance – despite being very outgoing and flirtacious, she is simply seen by the men as ‘a jail bait all set on the trigger’.[Very good point! It is highly sophisticated and assured."]
Finally, Steinbeck gives the message that friendships are so rare that when they do happen, more often than not they are destined to break into nothing. Curley’s wife tried excessively hard to seek solace in Lennie ,in section five, as ‘she took Lennie’s hand and put it on her head’, showing a sense of trust and submission. She shared her broken dream and even Lennie talks about his American Dream fo petting rabbits. However, a mentally retarded man and married woman simply were not compatible, resulting in Curley’s wife’s death. In the same way, although George and Lennie’s intimacy seemed unbreakable and Lennie said ‘because I got you to look after me and you got me to look after you’, the two characters belong to separate worlds so their friendship is not permanent. Just as the water snake’s death was inevitable, so was Lennie’s. This view is further supported by the fact that perhaps when characters that are compatible meet, only then do friendships last, because they are natural. We see that Slim takes George to be ‘different’ to the other men, and even at the end comforts him and understands that he had to kill Lennie, saying ‘you hadda George, I swear you hadda’. I think that if the novel was to be continued, Slim and George would have remained close companions to each other, as they were the only two characters that understood each other.
Overall, Steinbeck gives the message that humans crave companionship as we all run away from isolation. However, he aims to show how we sometimes try and make unnatural friendships in the process, and how they cannot be forced (like by Curley’s wife) or be a result of compromise (as in George’s case), because they will always remain dysfunctional and be destined to fail.
Very Good! This essay of yours shows an extensive amount of knowledge of the context of the book. You have used quotations well and, in most cases, embedded them. There is some language analysis, and links to nearly all the characters in the novella, which are clearly developed.
Despite your highly assured links to the novella's context, you fail to deeply analyse the language and structure of the book - which is an entire Assessment Objective. You analyse some language - without looking at the hidden meanings and multiple meanings of some words - but never bring up anything about the novella's structure to support your point. Also, I feel that another very interesting character you should address is Candy, and his relationship with his dog.
Looking at the mark scheme your piece easily fits into Band 3. Your analysis of the context of the novella, alone, can be placed into Band 4 (the top band), but your language analysis and structural analysis would fit into the top of Band 2. The piece is close to both Band 2 and Band 4, hence why the mark I would award this piece would be the middle mark that Band 3 offers: 13/20 (really one mark above the middle mark!) I think this is equivalent to a B.
If you can analyse the language and structure in more depth I think that this essay could comfortably sit in Band 4 (The A/A* band).