Um.... Why?
I must admit that I am obsessed with WWII. I can't really explain why. I am fascinated with reading both non-fiction and fiction books and I like to watch some (that's right I repeat some) movies or shows about the war.
Last November a movie came out called "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas." The title was intriguing to me so I looked it up on the Internet. I found out that it was a fictional Holocaust movie that was based on a book written by John Boyne. Being a firm believer in reading books before watching movies, I read the book. I am not quite sure about what to report about the book/movie, however. I was very thoroughly enjoying the story of 9-year-old Bruno and his family. His father became a commandant in Hitler's Army and was placed as the man over "Out-With" (as Bruno calls it because he does not understand everyone saying "Auschwitz".) Bruno soon begins to explore the woods around the house and meets a boy named Shmul who lives on the other side of the fence and wears striped pajamas all day. I loved Bruno's naive look on what was going on over on the other side, the author says at the end of the book that he took this perspective because:
"It's presumptuous to assume that from today's perspective one can truly understand the horrors of the concentration camps... I believed that the only respectful way for me to deal with this subject was through the eyes of a child, and particularly through the eyes of a rather naive child who couldn't possible understand the terrible things that were taking place around him. After all, only the victims and survivors can truly comprehend the awfulness of that time and place; the rest of us live on the other side of the fence, staring through from our own comfortable place, trying in our own clumsy ways to make sense of it all."
Boyne is amazing at bringing in the metaphor of fences, indeed the last few sentences of the books state his opinion in a very sarcastic manner:
"And that's the end of the story about Bruno and his family. Of course all this happened a long time ago and nothing like that could ever happen again.
Not in this day and age."
The book has a very powerful message. You may be wondering at this point why I bring this all up.... I do not like the ending of this book. I am not one that likes either happy endings or ironic unexpected endings, I tend to respect and like both of them for the author's opinion of the end of the story... I recently had a rude awakening with the end of another story I did not expect... The Giver has sequels, in case you didn't know... odd... but I respected Lois Lowry's opinion of the story. I can not say the same for Boyne. The ending was not expected, however, it did change my perspective on things. I would recommend this book to anyone. The movie.... well you can watch it. As usual the movie is very different from the book, but seeing a lot of this played out on the screen made the ending worse for me.
Last November a movie came out called "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas." The title was intriguing to me so I looked it up on the Internet. I found out that it was a fictional Holocaust movie that was based on a book written by John Boyne. Being a firm believer in reading books before watching movies, I read the book. I am not quite sure about what to report about the book/movie, however. I was very thoroughly enjoying the story of 9-year-old Bruno and his family. His father became a commandant in Hitler's Army and was placed as the man over "Out-With" (as Bruno calls it because he does not understand everyone saying "Auschwitz".) Bruno soon begins to explore the woods around the house and meets a boy named Shmul who lives on the other side of the fence and wears striped pajamas all day. I loved Bruno's naive look on what was going on over on the other side, the author says at the end of the book that he took this perspective because:
"It's presumptuous to assume that from today's perspective one can truly understand the horrors of the concentration camps... I believed that the only respectful way for me to deal with this subject was through the eyes of a child, and particularly through the eyes of a rather naive child who couldn't possible understand the terrible things that were taking place around him. After all, only the victims and survivors can truly comprehend the awfulness of that time and place; the rest of us live on the other side of the fence, staring through from our own comfortable place, trying in our own clumsy ways to make sense of it all."
Boyne is amazing at bringing in the metaphor of fences, indeed the last few sentences of the books state his opinion in a very sarcastic manner:
"And that's the end of the story about Bruno and his family. Of course all this happened a long time ago and nothing like that could ever happen again.
Not in this day and age."
The book has a very powerful message. You may be wondering at this point why I bring this all up.... I do not like the ending of this book. I am not one that likes either happy endings or ironic unexpected endings, I tend to respect and like both of them for the author's opinion of the end of the story... I recently had a rude awakening with the end of another story I did not expect... The Giver has sequels, in case you didn't know... odd... but I respected Lois Lowry's opinion of the story. I can not say the same for Boyne. The ending was not expected, however, it did change my perspective on things. I would recommend this book to anyone. The movie.... well you can watch it. As usual the movie is very different from the book, but seeing a lot of this played out on the screen made the ending worse for me.
Comments
Post a Comment