Becky,
I have a very urgent question that I absolutely NEED you to answer this very second, so pay attention:

Was George justified in killing Lennie? Why/why not?

And here's some more questions to occupy your brain with:

Why did Steinbeck write George killing Lennie? What was the point he was trying to make?

What does George's decision to kill Lennie tell about George's character? And what does it tell about George's relationship with Lennie?

Well, I hope this keeps you occupied for a while! Enjoy!

Well, Elizabeth, my dearest, most intriguing friend! I have some vague answers for you. And they are obviously opinonated, but I will try my best to back up my answers with textual evidence.
1. I do not believe anyone has anough justification to take another's life. George may have felt like he was saving Lennie from not only a more painful, drawn out death, but he would also have had his dream killed in a worse way. George still didn't have the right to take Lennie's life, and he could have done it another way, but this book wouldn't have been such a classic if it ended in any other way.
2. I believe the point he was trying to make was just one of a friend. He knew if he gave Curley the chance to kill Lennie, it would be a drawn out process and Lennie would have know his dream was forever gone. George probably thought, if he left Lennie with the final thought of his dream, and ended Lennie's life quickly and painlessly, he would think he was protecting Lennie from the harsh realities that George had been protecting him from most of Lennie's life.
3.George deciding to kill Lennie (as explained above) was to George a sign of a caring friend. Also, to me it is the sign that George was willing to do anything to continue his job on the ranch and not have to run anymore. George wasn't willing to let Lennie stand in the way anymore. He did something that will probably haunt him for the rest of his life. But he also did what he thought necessary to keep his job and reputation with Curley.

Well, Eliz, there you go! And thank you for keeping me occupied! Hope I answered your question!

Why is there such a focus on nature throughout the book? It seems like everywhere you look in the book there is some mention of details about nature. What's the deal?

Oh, and the jingling of the horse chains. Did you notice how many times that was presented in the book? What's that all about?

There was plenty of focus on nature. Steinbeck was influenced by the Arthurian legends and stories, such as, Camelot. Camelot references the "perfect city"/garden of eden. This reference influenced the idea of a utopia that george and lennie dreamed of. I also think that the pond in the beginning of the first chapter is George and Lennie's starting point. It's where they take refuge from their problems, it's Steinbeck reinforcing the theme of innocence inside of Lennie. It's where they go to get away from their problems, the initial point of the story. But when Lennie has returned to the pool, signs of dispair arise. There's the sun that has left the valley, and a heron that captured and swallowed a water snake “while its tail waved frantically.” The wind now rushes and drives through the trees in gusts, and the dry leaves fall from the sycamore. No longer a place of happiness, it has become a place of dispair. I think all of the nature is used as a tool of foreshadowing for the readers. It's Steinbecks way of "egging" you on to want to know what's coming next. It's the mood setter.

Oh and the jingling of the horse chains? Well, that noise was used to signal that somthing (the horses) were coming, so get ready (so you don't get run over). Whenever the book mentioned horse chains it was used in the setting and also set you up to know that something big is coming so get ready. Just a thought. So, it was a tool used to foreshadow.