Windsor Book Club Reads: The Giver

Somebody in my book club really likes their dystopian fiction.  This time, we are introduced to a world of sameness, where family units are manufactured, feelings are discussed rather than felt and big brother is always watching.

 

Some would consider Lois Lowry’s The Giver to be 1984 for children.  There are definite similarities, but I think this is too dismissive a reading of Lowry’s book.  The protagonist of the novel is 11-year old Jonas, soon to turn twelve.  At twelve, everything changes, because Jonas leaves childhood behind and enters the world of adulthood.  His career is chosen for him and training begins.

 

There are strict rules in this society, called The Community.  And it is very much a community.  Everyone helps and respects everyone else.  Rules are taught and memorized by a very young age.  Violators, non-conformers and the very old are “released”, a euphemism for death.  And most importantly, everything is the same – same colour, same season, same clothing is worn, with minor age-appropriate differences, and everyone, with few exception looks the same. 

 

Over several generations this sameness has been achieved in order to allow everyone to lead a happy existence.  There are no murders, thefts, there’s no hunger or want, no pain or wars.  Everyone works in an industry for which they’ve shown an aptitude during their childhood volunteer hours.  This is a seemingly utopian world, what more could one ask for?

 

On the day his age group turns twelve, and adult work assignments are handed out, Jonas learns he has been chosen as the community’s next Receiver.  This is the most honoured position in the community, for The Receiver is the keeper of the community’s memory.  Jonas meets The Giver, the elder man who will pass on generations of memory to Jonas, memory of the seasons, of sailing on the ocean, all the pleasures that were given up in order to never hunger or go to war again.  But Jonas must also learn about hunger and war, and most importantly feelings, like love.  During his training he soon learns that what the community has given up far exceeds what it has gained and he must be brave enough to leave the community, strike out on his own into the Elsewhere in order to give memories back to the members of his society so that they can once more lead fulfilled lives, full of colour and emotion.

 

The book ends with a thought provoking scene, and we never really know what happens to Jonas, if he succeeds, if his community benefits from his sacrifice.  It’s a very unfulfilling ending in one way, much like living in his community was, and yet, read optimistically, you can’t help but celebrate this ending for Jonas, while still yearning to know: did his sacrifice benefit the community at all?

 

I was left wanting much more from this novel than was delivered, though I enjoyed the reading of it. 

 

What my fellow book clubbers had to say:

 

We had some pretty lively discussion this month, surrounding the ending of the book in particular.  Lois Lowry has said in interviews that she deliberately wrote the ending in order to leave it open to individual interpretation.  I like to think the choice you make: did Jonas die or survive? directly relates to your outlook in life.  Are you optimistic, glass half full, therefore Jonas lives, or pessimistic, glass half empty and Jonas dies?  I hadn’t thought to poll the group, unfortunately.  I know for myself, I prefer a happy ending, tend to have a generally optimistic outlook in life and would rather see the glass as half full than empty, so I wrapped this book’s ending up in a nice neat and tidy bow where Jonas lives happily ever after.  That’s just the charm of me.

 

Some conspiracy theories were bandied about as well, regarding The Giver’s need for Jonas to leave town.  It is explained that when The Receiver leaves, the memories are returned to the Community.  This would be a good thing, because then they would be forced to re-evaluate their society.  But it is also a fact that once Jonas has received all of The Giver’s memories, The Giver will no longer be needed or useful and will be “released”.  My conspiracy theory is that The Giver, who seemed to be the only member of the Community who understood “release” meant death, didn’t want to die yet, and how else to cement his place further in the Community by getting rid of the new Receiver?  Not everyone bought this theory, which sparked some wonderful debate, and being fortunate enough to live in a diverse society, we all went away firmly holding on to our opinions but happy for the opportunity to express them. 

 

The group did agree on one thing, however, and that was we wished this book had been written for adults.  It seemed far too oversimplified and very ambiguous.  Many things were left unanswered and I for one desperately wanted to pull back the curtain and see who was pulling the levers and pushing buttons.  As one member described reading this book: it’s like taking one lick of an ice cream cone, only to have the scoop fall off the cone and land on the ground, leaving you completely and utterly unsatisfied.  Quite a delightful visual and I thank F for sharing it.  I couldn’t have said it better myself.

 

Till next time, happy reading!

L