Editorial Note
The editorial staff received the following essay from a local student, along with the margin notes of his teacher and the final grade. The student asked us to publish it together with the comments and the grade – in his own words:
“If you also find it at least questionable that I was punished with an F for my response to a book with a topic like The Giver, then I ask you to publish my essay and my teacher’s comment – if you dare.”
Well, we all read it together during a break in our editorial meeting – and the wide range of different and unexpectedly intense reactions and discussions it triggered convinced us to publish it – precisely because we know how controversial it will be – and to use the teacher’s own words: “and why that is important.”
(redacted) – 7th Grade Essay (2029)
English – (redacted)
Essay Topic: How does Jonas see the world differently from the others in “The Giver,” and why is that important?
My answer is: It is not important at all, because this world is completely illogical – and if it weren’t, Jonas’s view of things would be at best irritating and at worst a danger that has to be eliminated. But this isn’t even about his personal view of the world, only about a view from someone who is no longer drugged with pills – probably a lot of people in this world would see things differently too, if they weren’t constantly drugged and if, like Jonas, they were allowed to ask questions, get answers, and even be allowed to lie. The whole assignment for this essay is pointless.
Jonas is chosen as the new Giver or successor of the Giver – which already makes the name for this role quite nonsensical. This person is really just a keeper, who is explicitly forbidden to pass on the information he keeps, except to his successor. That’s where it already starts. It is totally absurd that this whole society would entrust all memories to a single human being.
If they believe that memories, emotions, etc. were the reason for all the terrible things in the past and they found a way to get rid of them or suppress them – then why keep the memories at all? And in such an unsafe “container” as a normal person? He could blurt them out at any time, get Alzheimer’s and forget them, or get run over by a car. The whole idea is just ridiculous.
And then: Jonas is not allowed to tell anyone, just like the Giver before him. But then he gets this job at a ceremony … is he there undercover? Or do they say: “Congratulations, from today on you will be the Receiver of Memory – but don’t tell anyone, that’s secret and no one must know – oops, and I must self-destruct after this ceremony.” But of course that doesn’t happen, instead Jonas is publicly “given” this job as a highlight, so that it becomes clear it is considered a special honor and highly respected. And a list of rules that not only isolate him from everyone in his community from that day on, but should also make it clear to everyone that he is being influenced by medication. Kind of bizarre no one reacts – just as no one finds it odd that in a society where everyone is equal and that equality is supposed to guarantee everyone’s happiness, the one who is different should be considered an honor.
But let’s assume this society really did behave so illogically – then the next question is: Who controls this society? If they have no feelings, notice no differences – then why is it a problem that they are controlled? And controlled by whom and for what? It is simply not imaginable that something like this works without control, someone must be making those pills, distributing them, and making sure everyone swallows them – but that can only work if somewhere in the system there is someone who knows.
But according to the description that doesn’t seem to be the case – so are the people in this society maybe the result of something that some people once came up with to suppress the others – and those people are now gone? Dead? Maybe even reintegrated into society? Then this society is like a ship full of drugged children without a captain, course, map, or rudder.
Back to: What a ridiculous topic!
The book is called The Giver! Not: “Isn’t it great that little Jonas is so different.”
The book goes on and on about what happens to people who do not conform or who rebel – but how that is even possible is never explained. Because it shouldn’t even be possible – and not even Jonas, who unlike the others does have the ability (before the Giver), rebels. So why do others? And why are they killed – while Jonas is “rewarded” with a job?
My first question was: Who is the Giver? He seems to me like a similarly ridiculous figure as God: walking around with almighty knowledge, which he shares with no one, except for a chosen one, who handles it just as badly as the Giver himself. Because it not only isolates him, but the very fact that he receives this knowledge in and from a society where he can never in any way use it or even tell anyone he has it is so absurd that any Giver would freak out completely within a very short time. Or maybe this society actually needs the Giver as a kind of substitute for God, since religion no longer exists there. So they created a “being” that has all knowledge but shares it with no one, and that bears the terrible burden – to know and to suffer for the people, all alone. Not that he had a choice. Somehow this does sound familiar.
Why is that important? And here we come back to the starting point and answer the question with: Not at all, because it isn’t. Maybe with the addition: If you, Mrs. Turner, wanted to hear that it is important to have real feelings or to remember the past … or maybe even why – and if you assume that we don’t already understand that – then you should have formulated the question accordingly.
This essay is disrespectful and completely fails the assignment. You call the topic “idiotic,” describe central ideas of the novel as “ridiculous,” and compare the figure of the Giver with God – absolutely inappropriate. No textual evidence, no analysis, no answer to the question asked.
Grade: F (Fail).
Editorial Postscript:
“We deliberately leave the evaluation of this essay and the judgment of the teacher to you, our readers. Write to us: Is this disrespectful provocation – or critical thinking that schools should be able to handle, and that should be encouraged for the sake of a healthy society?”
Kommentar hinzufügen
Kommentare