The Giver

            I decided to re-read The Giver by Lois Lowry. I saw a Facebook status about it from Spencer, so thank you Spencer! I had read it in middle school but had focused only on plot, not so much about the symbols or meaning behind it. It was assigned to us so I did not dwell on the meaning; I read it because it was homework. I wanted to read it again because I felt that there was a lot of symbolism I had missed. I wanted to go back and re-read it with a more mature mind and see what had changed for me. I also wanted to focus more on the meaning than the plot.

            One thing that I focused on was why did the community choose Jonas to become the Receiver? I thought it had something to do with his eyes being a different color just as Gabe and the Giver’s were. Later on though, the reader finds out that what Jonas had been seeing was color. Noone else in the community could see it except for the Giver, Jonas, possibly a Six girl and possibly Gabe. I was confused because if they could not see color, then I did not know how the community knew that Jonas had lighter eyes. This was one thing that struck me about the sameness. The color of Jonas eyes also represented specialness. The Giver, Jonas, Rosemary and Gabe all represented a difference from the sameness.

            I thought that the color red seemed important because it was the first color the Receiver saw. I think that it is a symbol though I am not positive about what. Red is usually a symbol of anger but could also be the color of love because of the heart. It could also be the color of blood. I do not know if this has any meaning to the story but I thought it was important that the first color seen is red and also that it is the color of Fiona’s hair, the sled and an apple. It could be important because it was the color of all the times Jonas rebelled against the rules or the sameness of the community. When the Jonas took the apple, he got in trouble for hoarding. When he saw Fiona’s hair he didn’t necessarily break the rules but he also had stirrings for her. So Fiona can represent rebellion as well. The sled was red and this was the first time Jonas received a memory. This is important because if Jonas did not receive any memories, the plan would not have been set into motion and he would not have gained the knowledge he did.

            I also really enjoyed the ending of the novel. I remember when I was in middle school I did not like the ending because it wasn’t a direct ending. It did not give the reader a clear perception of what happened. When I was younger I wanted everything to be spelled out clearly for me. I enjoy the ending now because I like that the reader does not know for certain what happened. It is open to the reader’s perception and opinion.  I thought it was a happy ending because at the end Jonas thought that he had heard music. I thought this meant that the Giver had helped the community and possibly started the end to sameness. This to me was a ending of hope.

            A lot of the parts about the book that I seemed to focus on were obviously that Jonas symbolized the difference from the sameness. Jonas was this symbol because what he had was knowledge. Gabe, the Giver, Rosemary and Jonas all had this along with lighter colored eyes. Gabe was a symbol because he received memories from Jonas. Rosemary also represented this because she received memories, as well as rebelling against the rules by being asked to be released. She rebelled against the sameness. The girl from level Six did not represent this because she never actually gained any memories or gained the knowledge. I think that what I focused on was the specialness of each person which was portrayed by Jonas. Jonas represented to me the specialness that each person has and rebellion against things in the world that tell people that’s not true.

Siddhartha

*-I keep away some of the plot.

          I read Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse. When I first started reading, I thought I was reading about the Siddhartha who would later become the Buddha. *I went into the novel with wrong expectations and was thoroughly confused when Siddhartha began to take lessons from a courtesan, named Kamala, on sex. It was then that I started to think maybe this was not about the Buddha. I looked on the internet and discovered that it was not about Siddhartha/the Buddha. I was also surprised to find out that Gotama was the actual Buddha. I did not make the connection because of his name. I thought that they would call him the Buddha or Siddhartha instead of Gotama. I instead thought that Gotama was an enlightened monk but not the enlightened Buddha. I think that not having any background information about the subject made it hard to understand. I got the message sure, but I also wanted to learn more details about the Buddha as well as be able to really understand Buddhism. I really just wanted to know about the history of the Buddha. I went in expecting to learn about the Buddha and read a story from his point of view. I knew that the author was not the Buddha but I thought that the author had decided to write it from the Buddha’s opinion. I heard about the novel in Mrs. O’Hara’s class where we were beginning to learn about the Buddha. Buddhism sparked my interest so I decided to learn more on the subject and was disappointed when I read Siddhartha. I wanted more of a history lesson, than a novel.

          *There is a lot of parallelism between the character Siddhartha and the story of the Buddha. Both Siddhartha and the Buddha came from a wealthy family where they were loved by many. They also both went and joined the ascetics. In the end of the novel, I belief that Siddhartha had reached enlightenment. I do not know that much about Buddhism so I cannot say for sure if Siddhartha had reached the same enlightenment that was so hard for the Buddha to achieve. Something that struck me about his enlightenment was that Siddhartha gained enlightenment from the river. I really enjoyed that because I think nature is something precious and I was able to relate to that in the novel. I could imagine myself in the character’s place. I understood what he meant when he said the river was talking to him. At one point, Siddhartha thinks the river is laughing at him which I thought seemed kind of harsh for the river to do because it is kind of put on a pedestal. I gave it human features and so looked at the river as a human being. I thought that the river would be like a saint-like human and so it struck me as mean that the river would laugh at him. Another thing that bothered me was Siddhartha’s son. The son runs away and before that he insults his father who only said kind words to him. Siddhartha just wanted to love his son but his son was selfish and bored and ran away. I believe that this had a message which was that people cannot control what others do and that sometimes someone has to sacrifice their happiness so that someone else can be happy. Siddhartha also did that to his own father when he left and never saw him again but it did not strike me as unusual until his own son did it to him. I thought maybe this reflected on the cyclical parts of Buddhism because it was sort of a cycle for father and son. A lot of themes in the novel have a lot to do with beliefs and religious aspects about Buddhism. I believe that if I had more of a background I would be able to grasp more of the themes that a Buddhist would pick up on. Since I do not know any of their beliefs, I probably missed a lot of the symbols.

          I did think it was an interesting book. It made me want to keep reading to find out what would happen. I also thought that it would be predictable but I was wrong. I thought that the son of Siddhartha would come back but he doesn’t. I thought that he might so that there would be a happy ending and reunite. I kind of hoped I would learn more about what happened to him just because I got very curious. The ending was still good because Siddhartha’s childhood friend also reached enlightenment with the help of Siddhartha. They both reached enlightenment which they had worked on for their entire lives.