The Giver (The Giver #1) by Lois Lowry

★★★

*** Warning: This review contains spoilers!! ***

I really enjoyed the writing in this book. It was straightforward and descriptive, and I think its matter-of-fact simplicity evoked a sense of calm and order, reflective of the community in the story.

I can imagine this book making a big impression on young readers, showing them the value of having choice, and how our individuality brings richness to our lives. Readers of all ages may be touched by the reminder that even if sometimes life is inconvenient, painful, or sad, it is the same range of emotions and experiences that allows us to feel joy, love, and excitement.

I was a bit thrown, however, by the uncertainty of the genre. I went into the book believing it was a kind of realistic utopian fiction, maybe futuristic or post-apocalyptic, but within the realm of possibility for humans on Earth. The totalitarian world of Sameness was intriguing; both benefits and disadvantages were clear, though its inhumanity was exposed when Jonas was introduced to the pill, even before we found out what a "release" really meant.  

Then I got to the part about the Giver transmitting ideas to the Receiver telepathically. Suddenly, I had to recalibrate my understanding of this world as one in which some people had a supernatural ability. And the fact that people couldn't see color, how could that be explained? "Memories" had odd, unexpected qualities; they could only be held by one person at a time, and they never disappeared, but needed to be held specifically by someone in the community. As these sci-fi / fantasy components emerged, the book became less of a kind of warning for us humans, and more like an interesting story of some other species, perhaps one that might be encountered on Star Trek: The Next Generation. (Incidentally, some of these details held together better in the movie version, which I watched after finishing the book. In the movie, all citizens were given an injection since birth - this could explain the color blindness - and there was advanced technology that contained memories within the community at the Boundary of Memory.)

I can see the poetry in the final scene (which Lois Lowry called "intentionally ambiguous" (p. x) in the Introduction of the edition I read), but I am personally not a fan of vague endings open to interpretation. I like closure, and I like knowing what the creator of the story intended for their characters. Though I much prefer happy endings, I admit that if I am forced to choose, I might have to say that I think Jonas and Gabriel died in the snow. (I was actually quite pleased when the movie delivered the more uplifting option of the happy ending.)

Finally, the book left me with some lingering questions. First, I understand that the Giver plays a vital role in the story, but Jonas is clearly the protagonist. Why not name the book after the Receiver? Maybe because Jonas became a Giver when he transmitted memories to Gabriel? Or, as my husband suggested, because Jonas, at the end of the book, was the Giver for the entire community?

Second, what happens to the community when they receive all of Jonas's memories? How do they manage, and how is their society changed? Will the original Giver be able to effect change, or will the Committee of Elders squash the potential as they did when Rosemary was released? I wish these questions could be answered in a sequel.