Yeah my ELA class and I are reading and doing quick writes for it. And today our question was; "Characterization of George & Lennie's relationship?"
I wrote a full page describing both their personalities, like Lennie is forgetful, at times naive, sensitive to others criticisms, and if feels he is doing enough to better himself. While George is poor at understanding people (such as Lennie), irritable, practical. Everyone was called on to answer and for once I was pretty eager to (mostly because I felt like some kid was gonna say some ignorant stuff). And someone did. A boy was called on and thought a good description for the very obvious disabled/neurodivergent character was the "dumb" one.
No, seriously, like me and some others groaned, and we're taken aback. The teacher sitting behind me who helps guide kids with accommodations (there were two including her and I do use accommodations) just laughed it off in a 'wow he just said that' way. My ELA teacher just said "maybe that isn't the best word to use, maybe 'mentally challenged or special'". I raised my hand soon after and asked my ELA teacher if he could change "special" to disabled or neurodivergent? And he did cross out "special" for disabled instead. And when we did our notebook swap to grade and comment on our classmate's quick write for today I saw the terms "stupid", "stupidness", "not smart", used to describe Lennie but George as "smart".
But I graded her writing and grammar in total a 15/15 and made a little note to not default to comparing intelligent with characters, especially for disabled people. Our teacher also looks out and grades quick writes, which is good because it truly seems like he doesn't believe this book to be ableist or problematic. He did the typical "now you may see some outdated elements in this book given the time period" short note. But it's sad that this discussion of disability, racism, and misogyny ends there (and none of the problematic stuff were specified it was left vague).
And I knew the N-word would appear in this book and I was nervous that our teacher would say it aloud and thought I would say something if he did. For context I'm African-American and our teacher is White. We got to the part and without hesitation he said the N-word. I unfortunately didn't say anything (because I'm a pussy) but I quietly groaned and some people seemed to shift a bit, which he probably heard because I skipped the word entirely the next few lines. It's like I'm not that offended and I know he's just reading the text as written, and I've never been called a racial slur directly, but I still feel a little uncomfortable when a non Afro-descent person says it. And I don't know if this contributes to my discomfort but a kid in Sophomore year in my Japanese class sitting behind me (who wasn't African) did randomly say the N-word and I sadly didn't speak up but just looked at him. And I have had my hair touched and fondled by random older women in East Asian countries, which definitely grossed me out and never wanting to live in a homogeneous place ever.
Anyway the point I'm trying to make is we should have had a discussion about the stereotypes and problematic elements and characterization in this book and after before reading it. It's so disappointing that schools even mine that appear to have a pretty progressive environment and study body still fall back on using pretty iffy language and ways to describe people. We really only focus on racism in the past instead of also talking about it in the present. The same goes for refusing to talk about modern day misogyny and women's rights and only laser focusing on the past. It's probably why some people (like my father unfortunately) have said "women have all the rights" or "that bigotry is all in the past". But at least women and ethnic minorities get taught in history class, because I've never in life got taught about disabled in a genuine way in a classroom. Their history isn't talked about and so they are relegated to pretty ableist books from the past written by I believe a neurotypical person or at least someone with a different way of thinking to Lennie, (and doesn't have "special" super strength told to kill animals because he's super dangerous).
I haven't finished the book but I think it would've been better to have at least two disabled characters and to be down Lennie's exaggerated behaviors. That's what I did for most of my characters is make more than one character for ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and neurodivergence. I may go to teacher to recommend he start with a discussion before reading the book, use more updated language, refrain from using the N-word even if 'it's just a book', and actively shut down and explain why referring to a disabled character as "dumb" for example is ignorant, reductive, and a shallow way to look out character analysis. We really should de-normalize looking at a neurotypical and neurodivergent character and instantly comparing the perceived intelligence between the two.
This is the year 2025 and highschoolers who are privileged enough to have so many different devices don't use it to ask questions and seemingly not find varying creators of different topics and backgrounds to be more educated about the world and the people inhabiting it.
It's disappointing how my generation (Gen Z) would rather dumbify themselves, than learn about people when it's so simple to type something into Google do some reading. Or if your visual learner and like personalities explain things (like me) then find creators (usually the small ones are the best) who spend the time editing, and scripting such interesting stuff. It's clear there's a refusal to learn and discuss things that need acknowledging.
I am disappointed in myself for not getting on these people and properly explaining what they said is wrong. Because even if I'm not great at explaining things and being put on the spot makes me nervous, that side of themselves shouldn't be an excuse to be like everyone else and give disapproving noises. A short "maybe we shouldn't say that" is to curt and tame as a response for what these kids say, write, think about, and project like it's normal. Because when things aren't explained and we just move on like it never happened then is anyone really learning right from wrong, bigotry from acceptance. Now that and some others will probably only recognize what they did as wrong because they got a negative reaction not because reducing character traits down to "smart" or not is a shallow read of someone. I can understand if he was describing a specific event Lennie, George, or whatever character did as "dumb" but he specifically called a disabled character "dumb" and most likely believed his speech patterns and stimming behaviors as factors in his perceived 'low intelligence'. And if everyone was going to try to move past it then I should've said something instead of being a sheep, I know better so I should've done something where that behavior could have been criticized and discontinued.
Hopefully next time I'll be better and say something. The book is alright so far it's just the lack of acknowledging Lennie's disability and how his traits are framed as negatives and my class's ableist behavior just makes me wanna get this book over with.
