In January, we will be reading and discussing The Giver by Lois Lowry.
Please post your questions and comments in this thread.
Printable View
In January, we will be reading and discussing The Giver by Lois Lowry.
Please post your questions and comments in this thread.
Wonderful. I will join this group!Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Some of my 6th graders read this- I am interested in what you all think of it, I have not read it.
seems like my former comment got duplicated...
but i am looking forward to a good read.
I am waiting for my copy to arrive.
I really enjoyed reading The Giver. I think it is a great reminder for humans, that even though scientific thought is the greatest hope for mankind we will need to tread carefully. This book shows us that we will always need to remember compassion, kindness and love as the basis for our mammalian brains.
I am reading this book to my child who is ten years old and know that it is going to be a bumpy road when we get to the explanation of what it means to be "released".
Wish me luck!!!!
Spoilers.
Yes, the scene of the baby being released struck me as quite disturbing, mostly because of how it is done by the main character's (forgot his name) father in such a disconnected, dispassionate way. There's no malice and it isn't gory, but it really did strike me as one of the more effective death scenes I've read.
I don't think there is really an absence of love or compassion in their society, it's just warped.
I'm looking forward to what people have to say about the ending.
Love and compassion are removed from their society as it is not rational. Death is removed because it is not efficient to suffer or mourn.
I would like to believe that IN THE END Jonas and Gabriel live but I get the feeling they may be carried off to heaven. Though it is also possible that the baby they have been waiting for (Gabriel) might be a Christ like savior or prophet.
I understand this is the first book in a trilogy. I am not sure if they are mentioned again in the other books.
Love and compassion are removed in the traditional sense, but that doesn't mean they are completely absent. For example, Jonas's father shows obvious compassion for the baby he releases--he is regretful that he has to be released, but in his mind he is doing the right thing by releasing the child. Jonas parents also show love for Jonas. The love shown is just subdued, or muted--it's intensity has been dialed down. If there was absolutely no love or compassion in their society, we wouldn't see friendships and relationships portrayed the way they are.
Ending spoilers:
I didn't like the ending, I'm quite tired of the ambiguous ending where the reader has to figure out or "decide" for himself what has happened. And, in this case, it seemed like the author didn't know where to go if Jonas to find another society, so she just ended it without actually having to think something up.
I do not think that any of the basic human sentiments are removed in the story. The book revolves around the subtle repression of these, but one can see that the villagers do, indeed, show these kind of emotions.
It is just that sending off people has become so much integrated in their daily lives that it changes the morality of the whole society. Then again, only a designated number of people truly know the happenings... so...
And, in my opinion, the reason as to why Jonas leaves is because he craves these emotions; to feel them to a greater degree. If these didn't exist in the village, why does he have to desire to love and be loved genuinely in return, then? The love and compassion portrayed may be a set-up but the fundamental idea is that they do emote feelings of love and compassion.
Yes I do agree that the sensations such as love, compassion and friendship are there but it might be more accurate to say muted and confused. Without loss (death), conflict, competition how could you truly comprehend love or friendship?
I apologize to my learning community for saying "removed" when I should have used the appropriate description... repressed.
I enjoy compositions that are left open at the conclusion. It allows the possibilities to develop. I dislike when a good read finishes and nothing is left to ponder.
An actual ending to the story doesn't mean one will have nothing to ponder. There are hundreds of examples that show this is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by sadparadise
But you also have to consider the demographic; this is for grade-schoolers, and with this comes the restriction of the length.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi
It wouldn't have taken more than a few pages to come up with something a little more final.
Isn't The Giver part of a trilogy? I just assumed the story wasn't over yet.
I get your point though, MM. It was a terrible way to end a book. It seemed like what you have if you wrote a book, some editor told you to cut 100 pages, so you just took off the last 100 pages.
Yes, it is a part of a trilogy, but it seemed to me that it was also supposed to be a stand alone story. In any case, I never went on to read the next in the series.
I've been harping about what I didn't like about the book, so here's what I did like about it. I felt it was a pretty fresh portrayal of the much dealt with future dystopian society. I liked the idea of them being color-blind, and how his discovery of color was such a revelation. It had me going back before he starts seeing color to see if the author ever used any references to colors, and I don't think I found any, which is pretty commendable if you ask me. I thought the characters were well developed and when the Giver was giving him the memories, I found that particularly interesting and original. For a "children's" book, I didn't find it childish at all. The prose was easy-to-read, yes, but it didn't seemed dumbed down, and I found the ease refreshing at the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi
Ya, but it's also interesting to harp about the negative aspects of the story, such as the number of aesthetic clichés. I mean, the baby having 'golden curls'... wtf... That's a clear sign of conforming, and thus your reason about the ending being abrupt is actually well-reasoned.
Almost half-way through the story and...
Well, welcome to "Brave New World for Beginners"... I have to agree with MM that it is another portrayal of a dystopian society... A sugar coated one but, for some reason, it makes me shudder more than BNW or Handmaid's Tale because of this sugar-coating.
I am not sure how the story will unfold as yet but, so far I, everything is so perfect-seeming that, I cannot help wondering if a young-reader would appreciate the element of "lack of choice" as a disadvantage. Lily considering being a childbearer a good option is a good example of the workings of a younger mind, I think.
Have to admit that it has been a long time since I read something written purely for younger readers and I find the writing style a little cliche and boring (as in lacking excitement); however, that is not a criticism of the author... Not at the moment at least.
So, blue eyes have "more depth", huh? How do you interpret that?
I read it a while back and don't remember the cliches--I'm not saying they're not there. When I pick up a YA novel, I just assume the some cliches will be a part of the territory. Not that's much of, or a good excuse, it's just to be expected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meta Penguin
I keep hearing this book is being read by 6th graders, and I can't help but wonder if that might be a little soon if all the themes are to be picked up on and discussed. It felt more like a 7th-9th grade book.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
As to the writing being boring . . . I agree. Though, I thought the plot and characters made up for it. Like cliches, I think simple prose is just par for the course when it comes to YA literature.
The book was a great read. Rather haunting, and thought-provoking, despite the easy read and rather stiff flow of the writing.
I think despite the intended audience (were children the original intended audience?), adults can take a way an important message- life is more than comfort, human beings seem to universally crave for a deeper meaning, and we can understand that we are complex, emotional creatures longing for love, passion, and something we sort of vaguely understand as "life."
The ending pissed me off- I wish the author would just tell us he died or didn't die... Though the sled at the end tells me that he's either lost in his memories or he died. But... I have to say its approrpriate. There is no beginning or end to the human struggle, to the human...being.
Not sure how the age vs grade works in the US, but I feel it might be a good read for 14-15 year-olds to be able to discuss the issues; however, the writing indicates towards a younger reader, I feel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi
Quote:
As to the writing being boring . . . I agree. Though, I thought the plot and characters made up for it. Like cliches, I think simple prose is just par for the course when it comes to YA literature.
I feel the characters lack depth and the storyline is somewhat predictable.Quote:
Originally Posted by j.hart
I was going to hoof it on over to the library, but the comments so far have dissuaded me. All in all, the book seems like an attempt to indoctrinate children before they reach an age where they can critically think.
Done.I find the ending quite becoming. In my opinion, the story is not about Jonah as an individual but his community so there is no need for us to know what happens to him once we have the reassurance that he gets away from his community. If Lowry had written more elaborating about Jonah's future, it would have taken the focus away from the point, which, I feel, she was trying to make.Quote:
Originally Posted by iamnobody
With this ending, she is giving us some sort of reassurance that there is a hope and it is not the only way left for the humanity; what happens to Jonah as an individual is of little consequence at this stage. However, I also feel that she is offering some kind of hope as Jonah starts to build his own memories and feels the existence of lights and warmth down below.Oh, don't say that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Cunninglinguist
I have to admit that I would have agreed with you till I read the ending of the book; however, now I feel the author manages to salvage the book somehow.
Still, you should not take our word for it and read it for yourself :)
Meh. I still feel like she didn't know how to wrap the story up. I just hate endings where the final pages are being read, and I'm thinking, this isn't going to be answered, is it? I need to go back and reread the ending, because it's been a while and can't remember my specific dislikes about the ending, just that it left me feeling a bit jipped.
And, Cunninglinguist, you should take Scher's advice and give the book a try. It's one of the highest acclaimed YA books there is, so don't let a few opinions here dissuade you. In any case, it's a quick read.
I loved this story when I was younger! I will have to read it again so I can discuss this with you all!
I thought the story was well told. It kept my interest. The part I found most moving was Rosemary's self-release. As far as the ending goes, I think it is obvious that Jonas and Gabe reached the safety of a home in the midst of a Christmas celebration.
Why is it obvious?
What made this obvious was the third and second paragraphs from the end.
Specifically the following: "Suddenly he was aware with certainty and joy that below, ahead, they were waiting for him; and that they were waiting, too, for the babe."
Lowry didn't have to say anything more. Now she could have gone on and described the encounter and introduced new characters, but I think that would have distracted from the original story.
If she had intended for them to die in the cold before they reached safety, this would have justified additional text. However, nothing was leading up to that. From the bizarre finding of the sled at the top of the hill to the twinkling of the lights on the tree recalling the happiest memory the Giver offered to Jonas, she was telling the reader that they were safe.
The ending is ambiguous, but one has to think about how teachers present the novel to the students, how they will characterize it as a dystopian novel, how they will ideologically load their comments about the book, etc. (kids are impressionable little critters!) I think in that respect the ending seems to me clever artifice, which I would find despicable. But! you and mutatis have persuaded me to check out a copy next time I'm over at the library.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
That doesn't seem clear to me. It seems like it could simply be symbolistic description for heaven.
In looking at the Wikipedia review of the book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Giver it seems that others also considered the ending to be ambiguous although I still don't see much ambiguity in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi
Yes, the things Jonas described while on the sled could be symbolic of heaven and I can see your point. He and Gabe could have died in the cold. From the perspective of the main story of Jonas saving Gabe and the Giver trying to change the community so that memories could be shared, the ending wasn't relevant. Were this community the focus of my attention at the end of the book, I would have liked to know what happened to the Giver more than what happened to Jonas and Gabe. Did he survive? It looks like he was expecting to join Rosemary in death.
But by the end of the book after reading of Jonas' and Gabe's week long escape, I had forgotten almost completely about the community. I had put it behind me and I think that was Lowry's intent.
When I reached the end, after reading about the twinkling lights in the trees, the sled waiting for them, the hearing of music, I was now going back looking for hints to an underlying Christmas story that I had missed. I was no longer interested in the mechanics of the dystopian community but rather in questions like the following: Why was December so important in this story? Did it make chronological sense that Jonas and Gabe arrived on Christmas eve? Why was the Giver's "happiest" tale a story of a family opening presents and hugging each other?
So from that perspective, Jonas and Gabe must have arrived safely or Lowry would have had a lot more explaining to do which she didn't seem to think was necessary. The fact that she didn't say anything explicitly about Jonas and Gabe makes me think she also was more interested in the underlying Christmas story at that time as well. She was now telling that Christmas story and letting it show what must have happened to Jonas and Gabe, just as she was previously telling the story of the dystopian community and letting it show the contrasting story of family love in the Giver's memory of opening presents and giving hugs to family members.
What doctrine?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cunninglinguist
Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
I think what they meant is that the novel is typical for a YA novel in a sense that it presents a positive moral subject to an impressionable youth.
Then I guess "indoctrinate" is not so bad after all. The community in The Giver did a lot of indoctrinating as well. Of course the daily medication helped.
What I don't understand is how they were able to keep the climate so controlled. There was no sun and yet they still had cargo planes. I also don't understand why the machines needed us for battery power in the Matrix either, but that's for another thread.
There is no doubt that the ending is ambiguous. The memories that the Giver shares with Jonah are the memories that he held dear (from the ones he received from his giver, and that giver received from his/her giver...). The story is unclear as to the time and setting of the place they live in. I think the author uses Christmas and family to anchor the story with the reader. We can identify with these ideas, and the feelings associated with them. That is probably why Jonah keeps repeating- "and back and back and back...". Time is unknown in this story, except when it pertains to Jonah's life (we know his age).Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
In the end, the way that this society has evolved- it would be quite impossible for Jonah to walk for one day in the woods and find himself on the exact same sled waiting for him at the top of a hill, and he and Gabriel sledding towards a happy family opening presents at the bottom. It seems much more likely that two small children have found themselves in the cold, starving, and Jonah has lost himself in his own inherited memories.
The author could have easily ended the novel with, "Jonah found the sled at the top of the hill, but at the bottom were all the countless bodies torn apart from the war." But instead of that memory, Jonah chooses to re-remember the Christmas one, because it was one of love and ... most importantly... hope.