The Giver Ending (**Big Fat Spoilers - Do Not Open if you haven't read it)

[LauraGB]

I listened to this today. At the end, I thought Jonas died. According to Wiki, he shows up again in the third book.

 

What did you think? Did you think he had succumbed to the extreme cold and hunger and had died when he found the sled and headed down the hill to all the lights and music (a memory, I believe, he was never given)? Or did you think it was reality? The last line that suggested what he heard was an "echo" made think it was all over (and consider when it actually may have happened).

Edited September 5, 2010 by LauraGB

[Murphy101]

It really depends on whether you want a happy ending or not.

 

In the books, it is left an unanswered question/doubt.

 

Personally, I want to think he lived.

 

Cynic that I am, I think he died having a pleasant hypothermic hallucination.

 

I cried then was ticked at the ending.:)

[MamaT]

Me, my oldest son, and sister had this discussion on and off for years. I believed he lived - and since he does show up in the third book, I was right of course. :001_smile:

[forty-two]

I read it as a kid. I've never been sure what to make of the ending. I don't recall thinking he'd died as being one of the options, though, fwiw.

[orangearrow]

IIRC, I read that the sequel(s) weren't written immediately after the first book. I haven't checked that for myself, though... but whatever I read left me with the impression that the author intended to write one book and leave it with the open ending - but publisher/pressure/money caused the originally unplanned sequels to be written.

 

I chose to not read the sequels.

 

And, I choose to believe that he died at the end. That ending doesn't make me happy - but I really think it was "right" for the theme and hopelessness of the book, if that makes sense? - Leaving the others behind to hash everything out on their own...

 

:Angel_anim:

 

I hate books with open endings. Usually, if I know it's open-ended before I start to read, I won't even begin the book. I need closure! lol

Edited September 5, 2010 by orangearrow

[Lolly]

I thought he had died too. Then, I read book 3.

[Leanna Tomlinson]

I always thought he lived. I didn't even know there was a third book! I'll have to read it!

[DarlaS]

There are sequels?

 

off to amazon.... :leaving:

 

That book haunted me. I didn't care for the ending either. I've always meant to read it again, since I read it on a plane and was preoccupied (I'm almost a white-knuckle flyer. :tongue_smilie:).

[Word Nerd]

The author said she intentionally made the ending ambiguous so that it was up to the reader to decide. She wrote the companion books (the second book, Gathering Blue, isn't a sequel per se, as it's a completely different set of characters) later and answered the question with certainty. Good series.

[LauraGB]

There are sequels?

 

off to amazon.... :leaving:

 

 

 

There are. Gathering Blue and Messenger. Dd read Messenger a while before she read The Giver, and she really liked that one a lot. She hated The Giver. And she said she didn't see how either book had anything to do with one another with respect to characters.

 

I'm not sure what I think about The Giver. I, too, dislike open endings, which is why I simply thought he died. If he lived, well, then I don't know if I liked the book as much. I mean, the ending would have been a haunting death and a perfect ending to an equally haunting story. If he lived, then the story just doesn't seem as...I don't know what word I'm looking for...heavy, maybe.

[Granny_Weatherwax]

I always thought he lived. I didn't even know there was a third book! I'll have to read it!

 

:iagree:

[flyingmommy]

I had no idea there were sequels....I'll have to look for those. Personally, I chose to believe he lived. But, I prefer happy endings and I hate to think of anyone going through so much and then dying before it pays off. :) Then the rational part of my brain takes over and tells me he probably died, but died happy. It made me think of the story of "The Little Match Girl." She died, but she died happy....or at least happier.

 

J

[Mimm]

 

I hate books with open endings. Usually, if I know it's open-ended before I start to read, I won't even begin the book. I need closure! lol

 

Ambiguous endings bug me too! I feel like the author couldn't commit to an ending or something. I always assumed he died but then read later that he shows up in a sequel, which makes it feel like even more of a cheat. If she knew he was alive, then tell us, you know?

 

That said, despite my slight annoyance at the end, The Giver is one of my favorite books.

[Forget-Me-Not]

There are sequels?

 

off to amazon.... :leaving:

 

That book haunted me.

 

:iagree: I can't hardly bear the thought of picking it up again to re-read it though. The whole infants being 'released' thing makes me physically ill. I can't stand to read stuff like that since I've had kids. It's the reason I can't re-read Jude the Obscure either.

[creekland]

Having him die would have fit the first book, but I was very disappointed with the ending being open-ended.

 

Since he's in a sequel, he must have lived, but I think he lived due to the need for a sequel, not due to the content of the first book.

 

I was pulling for him to live, but simply can't see it having happened in real terms unless he was "found" in his almost frozen state. (I haven't read any sequels.)

 

The Giver is one of the few modern books I consider worthy of being read similar to a classic. It was very well done and brings up good discussions of Utopian society (pros and cons).

[Cinder]

Having him die would have fit the first book, but I was very disappointed with the ending being open-ended.

 

Since he's in a sequel, he must have lived, but I think he lived due to the need for a sequel, not due to the content of the first book.

 

 

 

I agree. I wanted him to have lived but felt more strongly that he had died. It just fits with the book. At the time I didn't know there was a sequel and still haven't read it.

 

Cinder

Edited September 5, 2010 by Cinder
grammar

[emubird]

I thought he lived at the end, but I honestly kind of hated the book. My two kids, independently, also hated the book. We all kept our opinions to ourselves until we'd all finished, so it wasn't that we were influencing each other.

 

It just seemed like the book was trying so hard to be deep but really wasn't deep at all. Mostly it just struck us as being pretentious without a lot to say. And it's way too heavy for the intended audience.

 

But we felt the same way about The Dark is Rising and Watership Down. Except that Watership Down has provided us with endless hours of giggling entertainment. I rather doubt it was meant to be funny.

 

My kids still haven't tried Lord of the Rings. I wonder if they'll have the same reaction to that.

 

And I have to add: Bridge to Terabithia. Worst book of all time, according to my eldest. I was pretty disappointed in it too. I think one can handle death in juvenile literature, but, really, there has to be MORE to the book to make it work. My youngest has never picked it up. (Actually, the younger one only got around to reading The Giver because she was asked to give an opinion on whether our drama group should put it on as a play. She was definitely against it. Actually, I'm just not a big fan of Lois Lowry, period. We did do Number the Stars as a play. Everyone loved it. I thought it made the whole Nazi experience look like a fun summer vacation. I just don't feel that those events should be "sweetened" up just so kids can appreciate them. If they're too dark for kids, just wait until they're older to seriously bring them up. Otherwise, one runs the risk of making atrocities like that look like less than they really are.)

Edited September 5, 2010 by emubird

[MariannNOVA]

I always thought he lived. I didn't even know there was a third book! I'll have to read it!

 

 

We thought he lived.

 

Want an interesting discussion with older elementary kids? Have them read 'Petey' - bt Ben Mikaelson and then have a discussion comparing and contrasting the two stories.

[Dobela]

Interesting discussion. I haven't read Giver in a long time but did teach it several years in a row when I was teaching middle school in the mid 90s. It has been one of my favorite books and I am looking forward to teaching it to my son in a couple of years.

 

As far as the heavy themes, I think they really relate to what we are seeing in society now. 'Releasing' is euthanasia, or even partial birth abortions, and there are groups that are really pushing those as an agenda, or the agenda that someone only has value if they can add to the monetary worth of a family or group - no disabilities allowed. Even the new health care has raised concerns about who gets to make those end of life decisions. Then you see the limits on reproduction, the increase of medications designed to levelize emotions, and so forth. Even the World Bank is wanting to make countries agree to population control measures in order to benefit from them.

 

When I read the book, I believed Jonas lived, but then I questioned if all the memories could truely be released unless he died. Most of our students seemed to feel he died because the Giver wanted the role of Giver to cease forever. If Jonas died then there was no way it could be revived.

[LauraGB]

When I read the book, I believed Jonas lived, but then I questioned if all the memories could truely be released unless he died. Most of our students seemed to feel he died because the Giver wanted the role of Giver to cease forever. If Jonas died then there was no way it could be revived.

 

That's what I thought, too. It's interesting because I talked further with dd about it last night. Originally, while she was reading it, she said she liked it. Then, when she was done, she said she couldn't stand it. She didn't tell me much about it then because I hadn't yet read it. Last night she said that she felt he lived, which she also felt pretty much negated the whole premise of the story and left her feeling like she just took a misguided tour through some lady's head (meaning the author) and she had other things she'd have rather done instead :tongue_smilie:. And, I guess I kind of feel the same way to an extent. If he died, then there was closure for the people of the village (or district or wherever it was that he lived), which really does alter the way I see the whole story.

[MeaganS]

The Giver was my most favorite book as a kid. I was in 5th grade when it came out, and I remember arguing with my teacher whether or not he died. I always thought that he lived. Then the other two books came out.

 

I don't like them very much. Gathering Blue is about a society completely opposite Jonas' in the same world. He's not even in it. It's ok, but not really a sequel. It's more of a parallel book.

 

The Messenger does allude to Jonas. So if you go with the sequels, then he lived. When they came out I was happy, because I liked that I proved my teacher wrong :001_smile:. Also I always thought it would be horrible if he "saved" Gabriel only to let him die anyways. That seemed rather pointless to me.

 

This was seriously one of my favorite books. I even wrote a paper on it in a political science class on Totalitarianism. I'm excited to share it with my children someday.