Justice originates among those who are approximately equally powerful, as Thucydides (in the terrible conversation between the Athenian and Melian ambassadors) comprehended correctly: where there is no clearly recognizable predominance and a fight would mean inconclusive mutual damage, there the idea originates that one might come to an understanding and negotiate one’s claims: the initial character of justice is the character of a trade. Each satisfies the other inasmuch as each receives what he esteems more than the other does. One gives another what he wants, so that it becomes his, and in return one receives what one wants. Thus justice is repayment and exchange on the assumption of an approximately equal power position; revenge originally belongs in the domain of justice, being an exchange. Gratitude, too.
Oh, come on. You knew I’d get around to it. I couldn’t get through Banned Books Week without an adolescent fiction book.
Lois Lowry is a damn smart woman and writer. She wrote a book intended for adolescents that transcends well into the adult domain. There are many adolescent books that I recommend to my adult friends because they are powerful. The Giver has been likened to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, but I honestly believe it’s better. For this book she won the Newberry Medal in 1994. Everyone who initially read it was hit with such a strong impact that it was rightfully awarded the Newberry almost instantly. When you’re compared to Huxley and Orwell’s 1984, you know there must be something there.
In my classroom when I was teaching 8th grade, I always started this novel with a definition of “utopia” for my students and asked them to help me make a list of things that they would want for a perfect world. More often than not, classes would get into this and be knee-deep before realizing that there was no such thing. Rarely, I would have at least one in every class who would comment something along these lines: “Gee. This sounds like something Hitler wanted. That’s not so good.”
Kids are smart. I give them a lot of credit for seeing flaws in logic like “utopian societies” and proving them falsehoods so that they can correctly identify them as “dystopian”.
Jonas, the main character, has a special gift in this Perfect World created by the Elders. While they champion “Sameness” in their society, few of them realize that it’s not so perfect after all. There is no such thing as music or sled rides or even the realm of color, even though Jonas catches a glimpse of it sometimes before he masters the art of seeing it all the time. However nice it is to never have to experience pain in his world, he realizes that they also miss something else: the experience of love.
Jonas’ talents make it possible for the Elders to identify him as someone who fits the criteria to be selected for his job as Receiver of Memory, and he meets an older man who has held the memories for the community since he himself was young. He passes them to Jonas through the use of his hands and with each one he gives, he is relieved of the burden.
Since the book was a reflection of the times we lived in during the 90s, Lowry gives rise to issues such as cultural diversity and the politically correct society we created to balance it. Another important thing that happened at the time of her publication was that we dealing with euthanasia because of this man. She deals with it in her book when the old become an encumbrance to the rest of the society or when twins were born. Since they couldn’t have two people walking around looking alike, they have to decide which should live and which should die. Obviously, issues of abortion were still running rather hot and she wasn’t afraid to tackle either issue.
Children in Jonas’ futuristic world are given their life jobs at age 12, live in families where only two children are allowed, and where the parents are never the biological ones. Birthmothers have that job and are kept pregnant to perpetuate the population. They don’t deal with “death”, but rather, call it “release”, so when Jonas finds out what really happens, he is devastated enough to begin thinking on his own about seriously fleeing. By this time, Jonas has realized the harm in keeping memories and original thoughts from the people, but he has also become attached to Gabriel, a young baby who is being nurtured by his father.
Spoiler Warning: Normally, I don’t do this, but the way the ambiguous ending plays out, I have to. Don’t hate.
When Jonas makes his choice to leave, it’s apparent that the Giver of Memories almost blesses his decision. He spends most of the later chapters planning his escape and I remember wanting him to leave and hoping for the best. Even though there is ambiguity I assigned the final chapter as homework so students could decide for themselves what happens.
As soon as I finished the book the first time I sent it through the mail to my mother. When we talked on the phone to discuss it she mentioned how sad the ending was and how it was so tragic.
“Tragic? WHAT? It’s a happy ending, Mom! What are you talking about?”
My conclusions led me to believe that he does, indeed, escape to the Real World away from the confines of this created place he’s grown up in and finally gets to know all the history of the world in a free province. My mother, on the other hand, believed that Jonas dies and never makes it there. Instantly, I re-read the last chapter to see it from her point of view. I’ll be damned. I could see it from her perspective, too.
Since it’s a banned/challenged book that hasn’t been entirely removed from our grasp, you can do the same thing. Read it. Determine for yourself. I have every confidence that people can think for themselves. There’s no chance I’d ever micromanage someone else’s brain so much that I would want to make all their choices for them. That’s exactly what our humanness affords us. We are flawed, but never any less than human for those flaws.
Incredibly, as a banned book, this one has a quote that perhaps those who challenge books have uttered in their quest to keep us from thinking for ourselves:
“We really have to protect people from wrong choices.”
Thanks, but no thanks. I can do that for myself and teach my children discernment on my own.