"The Giver" Lois Lowry

The old man smiled.  "So do I," he said.  "But that choice is not ours.""But sir," Jonas suggested, "since you have so much power---"The man corrected him.  "Honor," he said firmly.  "I have great honor.  So will you.  But you will find that that is not the same as power."

Not the greatest quote for this blog, but the one that meant the most to me personally.

I kept seeing this book on lists everywhere.  And the blurbs indicated an alternate world of sorts, where nothing bad can happen.  I also know there can be some good Young Adult Literature (YAL).  So, I was curious.  But now that I've read the book I wish I had dug farther into the criticism of the book before I had bought it.

I'm warning you now - spoilers ahead.

I was drawn in at the beginning.  I love to read about alternate realities, and the writing is engaging. Jonas is a likable kid.  But the story gets creepy real quick in the same way that "Brave New World" gets creepy.  A big difference is that sex was fundamental in that book, but in "The Giver" sex is against the rules and anyone with Stirrings undergoes treatment to keep them from happening.

We see the Sameness in the behavior of all, and there are rules against being rude, being boastful, taking anything from the playground, and of course, touching anyone else or seeing anyone else without their clothes on. Everyone has whatever they need in what seems to be a perfect society.  Family units serve the purpose of rearing children, but once they are old enough the family disperses.  Here we see the creepiness of the uniform neighborhoods on the dark world in "A Wrinkle in Time."  There are no books in the Community, so there is a "Fahrenheit 451" feeling.  Strong feelings and dreams must be shared and eliminated and an all-hearing intercom system spouts cautions, taken right from "1984."

Is it that any dystopia will sound like any other - that there are certain elements that must be the same?  Is it that I have read enough that this book was too easy to figure out?  I recognize the need for YAL that is accessible, but the simplicity of the writing in the book was too much for me.  It is not that YAL has to be written that plainly to be popular since both "Speak" and "Stargirl" are more complex in style and language and are both popular and effective teaching tools.

We read "1984" in 7th grade and "Brave New World" and "Logan's Run" later in high school.  I found these books accessible.  Of course, I understood more later than I did when I first read them, but I wonder what I would have thought of the ease of reading in "The Giver" back then.  It would have been easier back then for me to have the suspension of disbelief that is needed to read "The Giver" since the numbers and science of maintaining a society describe there just don't work out.

I should review this book as a book for young adults, and not a book for adults, so what is the message?  That uniformity and socialism are bad?  While the book describes the benefits and ills of Sameness, it ignores the need for biodiversity for a sustainable ecosystem.  Possibly that to have happiness and joy we need pain and sorrow as well?  The balance of these emotions is something that school-aged students need to discuss, but there a plenty of books that do a better job.  Maybe it is that change can be made if needed, but changing a culture is hard?  I can buy that, but still, there are better books.

I have seen that many people loved this book.  What did they see in the book that I didn't?