The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

Nov 12, 2007 Brandy rated it 1 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2007reads, audiobooks, teen, historical, library

I hardly know where to begin bashing this book. Do I start with the 9-year-old boy and his 12-year-old sister, who read about 6 and 8, respectively? The imperial measurements (miles, feet) despite the German setting? The German boy, raised in Berlin, who thinks that Der Führer is "The Fury" and Auschwitz is "Out-With," despite being corrected several times and seeing it written down? The other English-language idioms and mis-hearings, despite our being told that he speaks only German? And that h...more I hardly know where to begin bashing this book. Do I start with the 9-year-old boy and his 12-year-old sister, who read about 6 and 8, respectively? The imperial measurements (miles, feet) despite the German setting? The German boy, raised in Berlin, who thinks that Der Führer is "The Fury" and Auschwitz is "Out-With," despite being corrected several times and seeing it written down? The other English-language idioms and mis-hearings, despite our being told that he speaks only German? And that he believes that "Heil Hitler!" is a fancy word for hello, because he understands neither "Heil" nor "Hitler"?

So maybe these are fussy issues, and I shouldn't trash the book on these minor linguistic flaws. Instead, I can start with the plot holes big enough to drive a truck through: that Bruno, whose father is a high-ranking official in "The Fury"'s regime, doesn't know what a Jew is, or that he's living next door to a concentration camp. Or that the people wearing the "striped pajamas" are being killed, and THAT's why they don't get up after the soldiers stand close to them and there are sounds "like gunshots." Or that there's a section of fence that is (a) unpatrolled and (b) can be lifted from the ground high enough to pass food and, eventually, a small boy through, AND that nobody would try to get OUT through this hole. Or that Bruno's friend Shmuel, a frail 9-year-old boy, would survive over a year in a Nazi camp. Or even the author's refusal to ever use the word "Auschwitz," in an effort to "make this book about any camp, to add a universality to Bruno's experience."

That last is from an interview with the author that appears at the end of the audio version. I can't speak to most of what he said, because it was a lot of "here are all the places that are hyping my book," but the worst part of it, to me, was where he was addressing criticisms: "there are people who complain that Bruno is too innocent, too naive, and they are trivializing the message of this book." Um, no. I'm not trivializing the message; I'm objecting to his trivializing of the Holocaust. I find his treatment of the Holocaust to be superficial, misleading, and even offensive.

As an audio recording, I'm pretty neutral. The narrator did the best he could with the material and there was some differentiation between the characters' voices, but the music that was added... some chapters ended with appropriately-somber music. Other chapters had no music at all. Sometimes the music appeared in the middle of a chapter.

Two other incidental notes: first, normally you can't say anything negative about a Holocaust-themed book without being an asshole, because the books are so tied in with the Holocaust itself. In this case, though, I feel like, due to the fictionalizing of it, the book is far enough removed from Auschwitz that it's okay to be negative about the book without being insensitive about the Holocaust. Second, this doesn't land on my "run away! Save yourself!" shelf, because that's more for books that are comically bad--books that I can bash with glee and mock with abandon. I can't find anything funny about what makes this book so bad; it's just plain offensive and shallow. (less)

215 likes · like · see review

Feb 10, 2011 Wayne rated it 1 of 5 stars

Recommended to Wayne by: I'm too kind to say

Shelves: books-i-ve-thrown-across-the-room, the-holocaust

I seriously suggest you read about what happened to real children in the Holocaust. It won't fill your thoughts for many days or shock you; rather it will fill your LIFE and make you feel sick to the core of your being.

Paul Friedlander, himself a survivor, recounts in his recent highly praised book the incident of 90 Jewish infants all under the age of five, orphaned after their parents were murdered in a mass shooting.
These children were subjected to indescribable mistreatment for days.
Then the...more

72 likes · like · see review

Nov 06, 2012 Jennifer Wardrip marked it as to-read

Shelves: trt-posted-reviews, trt-gold-star-award-winner, fiction, lendle-spot-booked-copies-available, teen

Reviewed by Sally Kruger, aka "Readingjunky" for TeensReadToo.com

What an incredible story! John Boyne has created innocent, naïve Bruno and given him a powerful story to tell. This moving book should be required reading for everyone.

Set in the 1940's in Berlin, Germany, the story centers around a nine-year-old German boy named Bruno. His family leaves Berlin to move to the country because his father has been reassigned by the "Fury." Bruno's youth and innocence has protected him from the harsh...more

16 likes · like · see review

Sep 19, 2012 Cecily rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: miscellaneous-fiction, overrated

A powerful concept, but very poorly written (even allowing for the young adult target audience) - and the only book I can think of that was better in the film version.

Bruno is 9 and lives in Berlin in 1943 with his parents and 12 year old sister. They are wealthy and his father is an important soldier who is promoted to be the Commandant at Auschwitz. The trick of the story is that Bruno doesn't realise the horror of what goes on behind the barbed wire, where everyone wears striped pyjamas, even...more

19 likes · like · see review

Feb 24, 2010 Madeline rated it 1 of 5 stars

Shelves: assigned-reading, kids-and-young-adult, ugh, the-movie-is-better

As Michael Kors once sighed to a clueless designer on Project Runway: Where do I start?

Let's open with some descriptive words that sum up this book, and I will then go on to explain them in further detail: Patronizing. Insipid. Smarmy. Just plain bad.

Patronizing: I believe that to write good children's literature, you have to think that children are intelligent, capable human beings who are worth writing for - like Stephen King, who probably thinks kids are smarter than adults. The author of T...more

90 likes · like · see review

Dec 01, 2010 Arlene rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: read-2010

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is truly an amazing yet daunting novel that I will never forget. The author John Boyne did a masterful job of depicting the setting in such vivid detail and exposing the events in a manner that I felt a constant emotional pull as the story unfolded and impending doom lingered on the horizon.

I was recommended this novel a while back while reading The Book Thief, but after finishing that story and experiencing such deep sadness, I knew I couldn’t jump into another no...more The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is truly an amazing yet daunting novel that I will never forget. The author John Boyne did a masterful job of depicting the setting in such vivid detail and exposing the events in a manner that I felt a constant emotional pull as the story unfolded and impending doom lingered on the horizon.

I was recommended this novel a while back while reading The Book Thief, but after finishing that story and experiencing such deep sadness, I knew I couldn’t jump into another novel about the Holocaust for quite some time. I’m glad I waited because as with other works that cover this topic, distance and perspective is key. I feel the author did a grand job of juxtaposing two resounding themes in such a flawless manner; one being of the evil that was the Holocaust; against the second theme that of the innocence of a child.

I thought it was brilliant of Boyne to tell the story from the perspective of a nine year old German boy as you experience the events of this abominable and unthinkable time in history as a mere complicit bystander, which ultimately leaves you with a sense of hopelessness.

The story unfolds the day Bruno arrives home to discover his family is moving from Berlin to Auschwitz where his father will serve as a Commandant for the concentration camp. Bruno is forced to leave his three best friends for life and discovers that life in Auschwitz is lonely and desolate. All that changes the day he meets a boy his exact age and they begin to forge a friendship over the course of year. However, as much as he finds he and Schmuel have in common, living on opposite sides of the fence proves to have a devastating consequence to their friendship.

After completing this book, I did some research on the author and the novel and found that he not only received well deserved praise for this book, but also harsh criticism. As with any piece of literature, when words are committed to page and presented to an audience for their interpretation there will be varying degrees of acceptance and backlash. Couple that with such a sensitive topic and you’re bound to get a reaction. Well, my hats off to John Boyne for tackling a story through a unique perspective and presenting a poignant fable that as a reader I willingly suspended my reality and experienced the events in a way that exposed my emotions and feelings to such a raw level. Well done IMHO.(less)

53 likes · like · see review

Feb 15, 2010 e.c.h.a rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: Momo Ivashkov

Recommended to e.c.h.a by: Roos

Shelves: sejarah-budaya, milik-sendiri, fiksi-sejarah, persahabatan

SESAK DADA INI

Oh God, biarpun saya sudah tahu akhir kisah ini membaca kisah kehidupan Bruno tetap membuatku terpana, terenyuh, tersenyum dan tak bisa berkata banyak.

Bruno, memandang kehidupan dengan caranya sendiri - cara seorang anak memandang kehidupan yang sebenarnya tragis di tahun 40-an saat rezim Hitler berkuasa. Simpel di mata Bruno tapi menyesakan di mata saya.

Oh Bruno...kenapa? kenapa?

9 likes · like · see review

Feb 17, 2008 Bill rated it 1 of 5 stars

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

24 likes · like · see review

Nov 09, 2008 Cheryl Klein added it Recommends it for: People who need a reason to stab their eyes out

Shelves: children-s

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PAJAMAS is The Book I Have Hated Most in My Adult Life -- or perhaps my whole life, as I don't remember hating any book this much as a child or teenager. I loathed the main character, I loathed the fact that the story to me had no point, and I especially loathed the author's air of self-satisfaction at having created "A Fable." I reviewed it on my blog a long time ago; go here for the full text, or read the main argument below. Seriously, if someone can explain to me why y...more THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PAJAMAS is The Book I Have Hated Most in My Adult Life -- or perhaps my whole life, as I don't remember hating any book this much as a child or teenager. I loathed the main character, I loathed the fact that the story to me had no point, and I especially loathed the author's air of self-satisfaction at having created "A Fable." I reviewed it on my blog a long time ago; go here for the full text, or read the main argument below. Seriously, if someone can explain to me why you saw this as a good book or how you understood its point, I'd appreciate it.

+++

I didn't like the main character, so I hated the story, and I didn't see the point Mr. Boyne was going after, so I felt he wasted my time. Throughout the book, Mr. Boyne can't decide how ignorant either his readers are or Bruno should be. Bruno knows at one point that there's a war going on, but later, when his sister Gretel moves pins around a map of Europe, he doesn't understand what she's doing. He has never heard of Hitler (whom he calls "The Fury"), nor of Jews. If the author had made him five or six rather than nine, then this might have been believable; as it is, it feels completely author-constructed and -manipulated, and it made me have zilch respect for Bruno -- or less than zilch, actually, as he's also a spoiled, selfish, ignorant brat. The author seems to like him, or at least think he's an okay kid doing the best he can, but when Bruno deliberately turns a blind eye to his "friend's" suffering and beatings . . . not okay! Who wants to hang out with a kid like that?

Boyne continues the ignorance game by keeping the name "Auschwitz" away from his readers with that "Out-with" -- a ploy I couldn't figure out, because if readers were approaching the story from the same ignorance as Bruno, they wouldn't have heard of Auschwitz, so it wouldn't matter if the name was included; and if readers knew anything about the Holocaust, they would see through it, and then it would come off as cutesy and evasive. The same is true of the ending: Without a knowledge of the Holocaust, readers would have had no idea Bruno went to the gas chamber, and therefore the story would have had no meaning for them. "He disappeared? Is that all?" If you have that knowlege, then I suppose you can recognize that Bruno has been punished for his ignorance, but without the main character grasping the message, the story is neither satisfying nor clear.

And is that even Boyne's point? According to a number of reviews, yes; they claim Bruno's deliberate ignorance is an allegory for the willful blindness of adult Germans during the War. Perhaps so, but in that case, Boyne should have shown us Bruno's death scene so readers understood the consequences of such ignorance, no matter their prior knowledge of the situation; and the message would have been infinitely more effective if the book were written in first person or Bruno was at least respectable (if not likeable), so I gave a damn when he died. The musical "Cabaret" focuses on that same willful ignorance, but the moral power of the show arises from the audience's awareness of that ignorance throughout the debauchery onstage, and its creators' final condemnation of that ignorance and display of its effects in the last scene of the show. If this is Boyne's point also, he's removed all the teeth from it. And if it's not, then, as Roger Sutton said in his Horn Book review -- "If Auschwitz is the metaphor, what's the real story?"(less)

18 likes · like · see review

Jul 31, 2010 cindy rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: about-living, org-europian, indonesian

Harus saya akui bahwa sebelum mulai membaca buku ini, saya sudah memiliki bayangan tentang isinya, bahwa ini bukan dongeng anak-anak, ini kisah kamp konsentrasi. Oke, bukan masalah, meskipun belum pernah benar-benar membaca kisah kekejaman Der Fuhrer dalam bentuk buku, saya sudah melihat beberapa film tentang ini, Schlinder's List (hiii...masih merinding mengingatnya), La Vita e Bella (yang kocak tp tragis) dan The Pianist (yang sangat menyentuh hati).

Pertama memegang bukunya, kesan yang saya d...more Harus saya akui bahwa sebelum mulai membaca buku ini, saya sudah memiliki bayangan tentang isinya, bahwa ini bukan dongeng anak-anak, ini kisah kamp konsentrasi. Oke, bukan masalah, meskipun belum pernah benar-benar membaca kisah kekejaman Der Fuhrer dalam bentuk buku, saya sudah melihat beberapa film tentang ini, Schlinder's List (hiii...masih merinding mengingatnya), La Vita e Bella (yang kocak tp tragis) dan The Pianist (yang sangat menyentuh hati).

Pertama memegang bukunya, kesan yang saya dapat adalah, cukup tipis, tidak setebal sangkaan saya semula. Sampulnya yang bergaris-garis biru pucat-abu-abu (sesuai dengan judulnya), langsung menangkap ingatan saya tentang seragam para tawanan di film-film yang pernah saya lihat. Yang lebih menggelitik adalah sinopsisnya di sampul belakang.
... Dan cepat atau lambat, Anda akan tiba di sebuah pagar, bersama Bruno...
Hhmmpphhh.....

Saya tidak berharap banyak dari buku ini, tapi saya mendapatkan lebih. Jauh melebihi ekspektasi saya.

Buku ini mengambil sudut pandang yang sangat tidak lazim. Kisah kesengsaraan dilihat dari mata seorang bocah. Bukan bocah yang mengalaminya, tapi bocah lain yang seumur dengannya, berada di dekatnya, tapi sangat sedikit bersentuhan dengannya. Bermain bersamanya tapi selalu berada di dua sisi pagar nasib yang berbeda. Bahkan ayah bocah inilah yang sedikit banyak bertanggung jawab akan kesengsaraan sekian ribu jiwa di halaman sebelah.

Kenaifan yang murni berasal dari ketidaktahuan ini yang memungkinkan terjalinnya persahabatan aneh antara kedua bocah tersebut. Ketiadaan rasa marah ataupun sombong, absennya patriotisme dalam arti sempit, ideologi ataupun kesadaran akan kebangsaan, menciutkan rasa curiga dan membuahkan jalinan kepercayaan kanak-kanak yang melampaui batas-batas peperangan.

Jika ini semua berujung pada pilihan yang dilakukan Bruno di pagar itu, apakah kita harus menilainya sebagai kebodohan fatal seorang yang tak tahu apa-apa, ataukah ini adalah sebuah pelajaran berharga (pahit memang, tapi sangat berharga) yang ditujukan pada orang-orang dewasa yang merasa tahu semuanya.

Akhir kisah yang dituturkan sangat pendek dari klimaksnya, justru membuat buku ini sangat berkesan. Bahkan setelah buku ditutup, gaung rasa sesalnya masih terngiang-ngiang dalam benak.

****

A pure naivete which come from cognisances, made it possible for those two children to tangled an outlandish friendship. The absence of anger nor arrogance, ignorance of narrow patriotism, ideology or nationalism, diminished any suspicion that may arose and gave away for childish trust which went beyond the boundaries of war.

If all of these ended in a choice which Bruno took in that fence, must we judged it as a fatal stupidity from someone who knew nothing, or should we took it as valuable lesson (bitter as it was, still priceless as it is), a lesson for all adults who felt to know everything.

The ending which recite very shortly from its climax, made the impression even harder. In fact, after the book has closed, the rue still lingers in readers' mind. (less)

7 likes · like · see review

Nov 26, 2009 Al Bità rated it 1 of 5 stars

There is nothing to learn from this book. There is much to dislike. From certain perspectives, it can even be said to be detestable.

First of all, there is the authorial conceit that the work is written from the perspective of a child. The worst example of this come in the use of euphemisms for the Fuhrer ('the Fury') and for Auschwitz ('Out With') which become increasingly irritating as the work progresses. Bruno's 'difficulty' with these words is somehow supposed to charm us, and apparently giv...more There is nothing to learn from this book. There is much to dislike. From certain perspectives, it can even be said to be detestable.

First of all, there is the authorial conceit that the work is written from the perspective of a child. The worst example of this come in the use of euphemisms for the Fuhrer ('the Fury') and for Auschwitz ('Out With') which become increasingly irritating as the work progresses. Bruno's 'difficulty' with these words is somehow supposed to charm us, and apparently gives the reader 'in the know' a soft, patronising glow which is presumably there to create a certain kind of sympathy for Bruno. It is interesting to note that Bruno apparently had no difficulty with the Boy in the Striped Pyjamas's name of Schmuel (maybe he could have referred to him as the 'mule'?). The same tweeness is in the description of the prison garb as 'striped pyjamas', ahtough that is less irritating. It is really pushing the envelope to assume that Bruno is as naive as depicted. At age 8/9 he would have been in school, and subject to the indoctrination of the Hitler Youth; and he certainly would have been fully aware of not only Hitler, but how to pronounce Fuhrer!

Indeed, it is this apparent ignorance of even the most basic things about Hitler's Germany, and it's attitude to Jews, that would have been brainwashed into the minds of German Youth, that is hardest to come to grips with. The author's 'childlike' writing permits him to draw several obscuring veils over the whole question. Even at the end, as Bruno and Schmuel go hand in hand into the 'darkness' and 'disappear' there is really nothing to indicate what happened to them. A child reading this, without any awareness of the horrors of Auschwitz, could be forgiven for believing simply that they 'disappeared' into some mysterious unknown. Thus despite its cutesy language, the book is obviously intended to be read by adults who presumably DO know what happened to them; and that fact alone makes the writing condescending and patronising to say the least.

Since the reader is presumed to know these things, they will also know that the situation described in the book could never have happened. There is sufficient doubt whether any 8/9 year-old child would have ever survived past the first few hours at Auschwitz, except as possible 'medical experiment' subjects; it is hard to believe that Schmuel could have consistently been able to meet Bruno for the period of a whole year without being discovered and dealt with; and in any case, would he really have had access to a depot where other 'striped pyjamas of Brunos' size were stored?... And, by the way, isn't it lucky that Schmuel speaks German. Had he been from some other country and spoken a different language, who knows how the story might have gone?

These are just some of the many irritations to be found in the book. The author has tried to justify it by arguing that the story is a fable, and that these things don't matter. But if it is a fable, then fables usually teach a moral of some kind. What is the moral in this story? Don't trust in the friendship of Jews? Innocence and ignorance is no protection for awful things to happen to you? The fact that people feel saddened by the ending, or even shocked by it, is even more repellent: the sadness seems to be reserved for poor, innocent, ignorant Bruno, who goes to his death still innocent, and still ignorant. Because of the 'hiding' of the reality of the Auschwitz atrocities, the whole situation regarding Schmuel and the other victims seems to disappear, just as Schmuel and Bruno do. Sad, isn't it?

I cannot help but feel deep repulsion towards this 'fable'. That such a deeply offensive approach is somehow apparently easily disregarded because of a twee authorial trick of using sweet, sugary language, and helps make it such a popular, 'safe' book (no nasties crawling about here!) makes me despair at the dulling of any critical facilities or acumnen on behalf of the public who love it. The book is inane, badly written, historically inaccurate, lacking in any sense of moral teaching (no one in the book 'learns' anything, or even changes their attitude to anything) and is hardly inspiring. It is banal.
(less)

30 likes · like · see review

Feb 11, 2008 J-Lynn rated it 1 of 5 stars Recommends it for: I'm not sure

Shelves: historical-fiction, young-adult-and-adolescent-lit, nyra-2009-books, jewish-kid-and-ya-lit, childrens-lit-chapter-books

I finished this book yesterday and I am still having trouble forming an opinion--but here it goes. I have thought about it a lot which is generally a sign of good writing, but in this case, maybe I am thinking about it because the book disturbed me.

If I look at the Holocaust historical fiction genre as a whole, I am not sure what this book adds to the group. It does show another point of view, from the child of the Commandant of Auschwitz, but Bruno is so terrifically dense--naive well beyond hi...more I finished this book yesterday and I am still having trouble forming an opinion--but here it goes. I have thought about it a lot which is generally a sign of good writing, but in this case, maybe I am thinking about it because the book disturbed me.

If I look at the Holocaust historical fiction genre as a whole, I am not sure what this book adds to the group. It does show another point of view, from the child of the Commandant of Auschwitz, but Bruno is so terrifically dense--naive well beyond his nine years--that I am not sure what the point is. Bruno talks to his Jewish friend on the other side of the fence for over a year--he lives in his house which also serves as the headquarters of Auschwitz for over a year--and I am supposed to believe that he doesn't have any clue what is going on in the camp? I know children are narcissistic and self involved, but this book takes that idea to a whole other level. Bruno's tunnel vision is so great that I keep wondering if maybe that it was some sort of message that the author was trying to get across. Maybe that kids can create and live in an alternate reality as long as they need to? Was that the point?

If not, what was the point? Surely it wasn't the shocking ending that served little in adding to the greater story of the Holocaust. The ending served no purpose. It didn't make the father see what was wrong, it didn't make the guards question what they were doing, it didn't make the Jews who died in the camp any less tragic, what was the ending's purpose? My guess is just shock value.

I do think the book makes an excellent argument for being honest with children in even the worst circumstances. By trying to protect kids and shield kids, adults put them in greater danger!

I will say one positive thing, I thought the non-traditional book jacket was a good marketing ploy. By not giving away any of the plot points, it makes the reader intrigued. But, overall, I am flummoxed. The book is an enigma which, possibly, is better left unsolved.(less)

24 likes · like · see review

Nov 08, 2008 Betsy rated it 1 of 5 stars

I'll give it this much. Few books have caused me to actually shake SHAKE in anger. Wow. I think I need to go boil my eyeballs for a while. What was the author thinking?

33 likes · like · see review

view all 14 comments

Matilda Hmmmm. I have thought about this further and I actually now think that the book itself is a form of either Holocaust denial or Nazi propaganda. I'm wi...more Hmmmm. I have thought about this further and I actually now think that the book itself is a form of either Holocaust denial or Nazi propaganda. I'm with you (inevitably) on the misspellings and the infantalising of the infant who is not an infant (he is nine, though it's condescending to six year olds) - these strangulated attempts to make the child seem as if he is - oh just the same as the Jew child who in fact would never exist because all the children were murdered anyway, or if not had to live on their wits and full well knew what was happening - Boyne makes the Jew as ignorant as the Nazi, which is despicable, and mysterious in a sick way - and I come to the conclusion that what we have here is that fake, deaf consciousness of making a terrible act one that no one is responsible for, because no one knew, and if they did, well, as Elizabeth says, the only trouble with that was that the wrong people might get killed so make your gates more secure.

But the gates in Auschwitz WERE secure; they were electrocuted. And pretending the Holocaust is innocent of itself is a very guilty matter.

Why has John Boyne written this book? He's written it to make an idea of peace and universal love applicable where it is not applicable, and he has pretended - as so many do - that abuse is not very nice to talk about so we will all act as if nothing has happened or that everyone is nice, or that none of us can spell (see that other astonishingly ugly book, The Reader) so how can we possibly know, illiterates or youngsters as we are, or love and innocence is everywhere, where it is patently not. I don't like that. I don't like it in real life, in literature, in art, at school, at home or on television, and I particularly do not like it with regard to the Holocaust.

Yes, there are good books on the subject of the Holocaust (Holocaust, for example, which was good enough for me when I read it as an 11 year old though I still don't know who wrote it and want someone to tell me (1978); The Drowned and The Saved (Primo Levi), Night (Elie Wiesel), anything by Paul Celan (Black Milk), etc), but that is not the point here. The point is that THIS book, on the subject of the Holocaust (while saying it isn't at the same time, though it's under History as a genre) is not just a bad book - badly written, badly researched - but a book that is in itself bad - harmful, evil, wicked; an act of bad faith; and this from me who is more than happy to read American Psycho - of course I am. That book takes some responsibility. It is a book where one does not breathe in gas on every page and conclude that one deserves to die. That is what I felt, reading Boyne's book, and why I physically could not complete it.

Look at what Rabbi Blech says about The Boy In The Striped PyJamas (no one yet has considered how manipulative the actual title is, as if it's all about sleeping and just a bedtime story, something no one needs to take seriously, the actual business of being in a death camp a front, a childish delight, Wee Willie Winkie, a nursery rhyme). Blech read it, and he went and visited some Auschwitz survivors and he asked them what they thought - they said the smell of burning bodies was apparent for miles around, that the trains drew up daily and the death was visible to the point where it was all that WAS visible. To pretend no one knew this, no one living right there on the edge of the camp, is a hideous distortion, similar to the distortion of the Germans later, after the war, on their ignorance and lack of complicity with it. These are his words:

'True, Bruno in the story was but a boy. But I have spoken to Auschwitz survivors. They tell me how the stench of burning human flesh and the ashes of corpses from the crematoria filled the air for miles around. The trains traveling with human cargo stacked like cordwood screaming for water as they died standing in their natural wastes without even room to fall to the ground were witnessed throughout every countryside. Nobody, not even little German children who were weaned on hatred of the Jews as subhuman vermin could have been unaware of "The Final Solution." And to suggest that Bruno simply had no idea what was happening in the camp his father directed yards from his home is to allow the myth that those who were not directly involved can claim innocence.'

He doesn't like the way the denial in the story chimes in with the denial of the Holocaust itself. He thinks the two things are identical. So do I; in fact one of the problems with the Holocaust was the way it self-erased itself anyway, by making the death of so many merely the death of no one, nothing, because Jews were never human to begin with, that anti-semitism itself didn't exist because hating Jews was beautiful, Godlike, a love of purity and peace, the true way of being, and that anything against ant-semitism was perverse, and that the prejudice eradicated itself by the poetic vision; none of it existed. THIS is the POINT. This is the fabric, the meat and texture and meaning of the Final Solution, to absolve itself of evil because it does no wrong: all it does is purgation, all its act are beautiful, charitable. What could be more innocent and true than wiping the world of degeneracy? It is cleaning up, not genocide. It means well; it is sweet, indolent, childlike in its understanding. And that is just what this book does, and it does it in many ways, ways that worry me are the ways of many of its readers, and that is why it is a book that perhaps is divides people, and that is why we need to look at what is human yet again.

Blech goes on to say this:

'My Auschwitz friend read the book at my urging. He wept, and begged me tell everyone that this book is not just a lie and not just a fairytale, but a profanation.'

OK. So I think that the book is not nebulous and silly and wrong-headed and evasive, but plain and simple evil. I think my original response to it was correct, and I am annoyed that it should be seen as anything other than a way of making people not face facts and cause the misery to happen all over again. And I am right. If it makes Auschwitz survivors weep and beg the world to know it is a 'profanation', then we have a serious problem, and no, it is not a work of art or a piece of fiction, it is an offence. This isn't about disturbing a faith or a religious belief like banning The Satanic Verses, this is about pretending evil is good. That I won't have. I dropped that book in disgust, and I was right to do so. It is pornography for rapists.

What is interesting here is that anyone likes this book, that the words I say are considered 'harsh'; that I myself am thought of as destructive in condemning it, that 'being angry' is just not kosher. I think these are the exact same words that would be used when someone objected to having a yellow star put on them, and dared to oppose the beautiful generosity and kind-spitedness of the German people in ridding themselves of a plague. I think the ONLY way to respond to this book is with a loathsome tremor. And indeed, not only Jews died for the idyll of Final Solution, but Germans too. Sophie Scholl was guillotined because she raised objections. She was rare, and it looks as though even in a democracy, and even with free speech, it is pretty unlikely that anyone will object to a malefic vision that leaves blood in its wake, precisely on grounds of the fact that it really sounds innocent and nice-natured. The book appeals the psychotic in denial. This disturbs me a great deal. I want you all to be equally disturbed.(less)
Sep 11, 2011 05:17pm

Angie I have now read enough negative reviews of this book to be certain that I do not really want to read it.
Apr 03, 2013 12:01pm

Jul 13, 2012 Kelly Maybedog Hawkins rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: how-audio-book, what-ya-and-children, what-historical-setting, what-general-fiction

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. Firstly, I want to start out by saying I get what Boyne is trying to do: talk about complicity and complacency and ignorance and how it still happens today. I agree it's an important message and I like that he attempted it, but I don't think he was as effective as he thinks he has been.

I was disappointed in this book. I felt that what made it unique was the confusion about the time and place. Once that was clear, the continued mispronunciations felt contrived to me.

I do think the text is well st...more Firstly, I want to start out by saying I get what Boyne is trying to do: talk about complicity and complacency and ignorance and how it still happens today. I agree it's an important message and I like that he attempted it, but I don't think he was as effective as he thinks he has been.

I was disappointed in this book. I felt that what made it unique was the confusion about the time and place. Once that was clear, the continued mispronunciations felt contrived to me.

I do think the text is well structured and I do think it has a good message about genocide, bigotry, and repeating historical horrors over and over again. The world was clear for the most part. I did have some problems with the book, and I am more than a little irritated with the author interview at the end (I listened to the audio version of this book.)

The boy seemed extremely dense to me. Not just naive, but really, very stupid. I would have found it much more believable if we were talking about a 6 year old. Boyne makes a good point that the atrocities were not well known when they were happening and it took a long time for people to even believe something like that could happen. (To this day many people still don't believe it!) But this story takes place in 1943 when even a child living in Berlin would have to be completely blind to not notice that a lot of people were moving away. I can see that he might be sheltered and not know what was happening to them, but to be oblivious to the fact that something was happening when many of his classmates and neighbors would have disappeared, just doesn't ring true to me. In addition, as a wealthy child, he would be well aware of class: servants aren't the same as "regular" people and yet he expects Schmuel would be welcome in his house despite being dirty and obviously very poor at this point?

Plus, I find it hard to believe that someone as high up in the Nazi party as his father wouldn't mention Jews and brainwash his children against them. Bruno has never even heard the word before. That makes no sense to me. The fact that he can't pronounce Fuhrer or Auschwitz is a little odd, too, given his age. (Never mind that the plays on words are based on someone who is speaking English--"Out With" which would not have the same meaning in German.)

But putting that aside, assuming he really is pretty oblivious and goes to a surprisingly segregated school, once he starts talking to Schmuel he should have had an awakening. They talk every single day for a year and yet he doesn't get that Schmuel's life is horrible. What the hell did they talk about? Bruno knows enough to be scared of the Nazi soldier and deny knowing Schmuel but he then still talks about Schmuel coming to visit some day. By 10 years old he should know a prison outfit when he sees one, just from books and movies (which as a rich person he should have seen at points).

My 16 year old who is in special ed and who is very ignorant listened to the last disk with me and, without knowing what the story was about or what was going on ahead of time, within a short time said, "Is this about concentration camps?" and kept saying, "what a dumb-ass" when he continued to not read perfectly obvious clues.

What irritated me the most, though, was that in his interview, Boyne said that anyone who criticizes his work because they think Bruno is too naive is being offensive to the memory of the Holocaust and the survivors. Hunh? I can't find fault with particulars of his book without denying the Holocaust? That is offensive. He's not perfect. He didn't win the nobel prize for literature for this book. That's just so obnoxious. It is also not, despite his claims, the first book written from the perspective of a child of a Nazi. I can't remember the name of it but there was a book I read as a teen that did exactly that.

Anyway, I do think this is an okay book. It was fairly enjoyable to read if you ignore the plot holes (a chain link fence with a hole big enough for a child to get through is not noticed by either the guards or adult survivors?) and the material is different from the standard. I just think it could have been much, much better.
(less)

14 likes · like · see review

Dec 12, 2008 Endah rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Kesalahan pertama saya dalam membaca buku ini adalah mengira bahwa buku ini sebuah buku cerita anak-anak yang lucu dan jenaka. Asumsi ini saya tafsirkan dari judulnya : Anak Lelaki Berpiama Garis-Garis. Terdengar lucu dan riang. Kesalahan kedua, saya, seperti biasa, melewatkan membaca sinopsisnya yang tercantum di sampul belakang buku. Seandainya saya mau menyempatkan diri membacanya terlebih dahulu, barangkali saya tak akan terkecoh.

Terkecoh? Ya, sebab kiranya buku tipis dengan ukuran font besa...more

9 likes · like · see review

Jan 25, 2009 Dianne Ascroft rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: anyone interested in historical fiction

I decided to read this book because a friend told me that, in some respects, it reminded her of my novel, ‘Hitler and Mars Bars’. So I wanted to find out what she meant. The most obvious similarity is that the main character in each book is a German boy who is caught up in the events of the Second World War.
Both books are simply written but effective and moving. Unlike my own book, Boyne’s novel is completely unadorned. Yet it also captures the character’s emotions and the situation he finds h...more I decided to read this book because a friend told me that, in some respects, it reminded her of my novel, ‘Hitler and Mars Bars’. So I wanted to find out what she meant. The most obvious similarity is that the main character in each book is a German boy who is caught up in the events of the Second World War.
Both books are simply written but effective and moving. Unlike my own book, Boyne’s novel is completely unadorned. Yet it also captures the character’s emotions and the situation he finds himself in. Even though the reading level is elementary, the narration draws you into the story. It doesn’t need to be more complex because, with few words plainly written, he makes you care what happens to the characters.
Some reviewers have criticised Boyne’s main character, Bruno, saying he is too naïve for his age. Bruno may be an exaggeration of a sheltered, middle class child or he may be typical of a child raised in a more innocent era. But, either way, his naivety and his responses to events add poignancy to the story. His guileless viewpoint presents the concentration camp, where the story is set, in a stark manner.
In my book, my main character, Erich, develops a greater awareness of the world around him than Bruno does but the story is told over a longer period. Bruno doesn’t have a chance to learn and grow.
Even though Bruno is young and naïve, he develops a strong, caring friendship with Shmuel, a boy in the concentration camp. Friendship and human bonds are the book’s central theme. Unnecessary details are pared away so that the friendship and interaction between the two boys stands out.
What struck me most about The Boy In The Striped Pajamas is the powerful ending. I was not expecting the turn the story took and was shocked when I reached the end. Usually I don’t like sad or disturbing endings and maybe that’s why my novel ends on a hopeful note. But such a raw, horrific ending was the best one for this story. This book will make you stop and think. It is a completely different angle from which to view the Second World War and Boyne has done it well.
(less)

18 likes · like · see review

Jun 06, 2008 Milan/zzz rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: 2008

Well this is book for Young Adults and therefore I must admit that the style was a little bit problematic for me. I guess because I'm only an "adult". It's very simple, very on the level of the main character but after a while I get used to it and I might say that this naiveness was even charming. Big part of the book is like as if we are waiting something (big) to happens, the main thing but I wouldn't say the book is boring; again it was charming.
I usually find myself very irritated with the...more

9 likes · like · see review

Oct 26, 2012 Maree rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: in-the-bookshelf, thought-provoking, ya-historical-fiction

Holocaust dramas are always gut-wrenchingly sad and John Boyne's The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas is no exception, but what makes the sadness of this novel sting long after the final page is turned is the fact that, while it still displays some of the darkest days in human history, it is shown through the wide, blue eyes of an innocent eight-year-old German boy, named Bruno.

The novel follows Bruno and his family as they move from a secure and wealthy life in Berlin to the forlorn and desolate Pol...more Holocaust dramas are always gut-wrenchingly sad and John Boyne's The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas is no exception, but what makes the sadness of this novel sting long after the final page is turned is the fact that, while it still displays some of the darkest days in human history, it is shown through the wide, blue eyes of an innocent eight-year-old German boy, named Bruno.

The novel follows Bruno and his family as they move from a secure and wealthy life in Berlin to the forlorn and desolate Polish countryside where his SS Officer father has been promoted to commandant of Auschwitz concentration camp. Bruno, who wants to be an explorer, is immediately curious when he sees a 'farm' out of his bedroom window. However, he is forbidden from investigating further by his mother, who is well aware of who the 'strange' children are that Bruno wishes to play with.

Of course, being a precocious eight-year-old, Bruno ignores her and ventures through the woods where he comes across Schmuel, an eight-year-old Jewish boy, with whom he forms an intense friendship that is not hindered by racial prejudices and hatred, despite many attempts by Bruno's anti-Semitic tutor to convince him otherwise. The dramatic climax to this heart wrenching tale is nothing short of amazing and will leave audiences both astounded and devastated.

Bruno, being eight, has a very innocent and naive perception of the world; however, throughout the novel after many short, but poignant exchanges with Schmuel and Paval, Bruno begins to understand more about the world around him and his innocent view begins to change. Bruno is lied to by many people in his life and in a way Schmuel is one of them. He has already faced some of life's harshest realities, and in some ways protects Bruno from having to confront these issues. Although, there are still many occasions where Bruno portrays his innocence and does not seem to comprehend the severity of Schmuel’s situation.

As the novel is centred around Bruno’s subjective view of the world there are many events which take place that he may not observe or comprehend. In some cases this limits what can be said and what must be implied to the audience. Sometimes Bruno’s information can be wrong; it is up to the audience to work this out. This invites the audience to feel sympathy for Bruno, Schmuel, Paval and Bruno’s mother who are all, along with millions of others, victims of one of the darkest and most brutal times in human history.

Bruno’s world is filled with secrets and lies; he is lied to by his parents who are lying to each other and, most of all, to themselves. Bruno’s father is forced to keep secret the real purpose of the camp and Bruno’s mother seems to be unaware, or unwilling to admit to herself, what is actually happening at the camp. (view spoiler)

The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas is a masterpiece; it is gripping, heartbreaking and teaches audiences that sometimes the things that divide us can also unite us. Do yourself a favour once you finish reading this: eat some chocolate, grab some tissues and watch the movie. It is one of the best movie adaptations I have seen in a long time with a cast that brings this marvellous, haunting novel to life.
(less)

5 likes · like · see review

Jun 05, 2009 Bibliophile rated it 1 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: 2009, fiction, germany, historical-fiction, ww2

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is a Holocaust “fable” by the Irish writer John Boyne, in which a nine-year-old German boy named Bruno arrives at Auschwitz (or as the novel coyly and annoyingly calls it “Out-With”) when his father is named as the camp’s new commandant. Bruno is incredibly naïve (to the point where I began to wonder whether he might not be mentally retarded, in which case he would most likely have been murdered under the Nazi euthanasia program long before the timeline of the book...more The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is a Holocaust “fable” by the Irish writer John Boyne, in which a nine-year-old German boy named Bruno arrives at Auschwitz (or as the novel coyly and annoyingly calls it “Out-With”) when his father is named as the camp’s new commandant. Bruno is incredibly naïve (to the point where I began to wonder whether he might not be mentally retarded, in which case he would most likely have been murdered under the Nazi euthanasia program long before the timeline of the book, thus sparing us this novel!) and thinks that the men in the striped pajamas whom he can see from his upstairs window are all on vacation, until he meets another boy (in the striped pajamas) named Schmuel and befriends him.

Apparently, calling this book a “fable” precluded any attempt at historical accuracy or psychological acuity on the author’s part. First, the premise that a nine-year-old boy in Nazi Germany wouldn’t know who the Führer was or what Heil Hitler meant is absolutely ludicrous (as is his ridiculous “mishearing” of Führer as “Fury”, which only works in English and not in German, where the word for "fury" is "Zorn" or "Wut"!) Bruno, at nine, is one year shy of mandatory membership in the Hitler-Jugend, and his sister Gretel, at 12, would have been in the BDM for the previous TWO years and moreover the children of a high-ranking SS officer would absolutely have known who Hitler was and not mixed up his name. So that gave me pause from about page 5 on. Bruno would be marginally more believable as a four- or five-year-old but then John Boyne wouldn’t have been able to give him a Jewish counterpart. Even though there were some – VERY FEW! – little children who managed to survive Auschwitz, the chances that a five-year-old would have done so would be much smaller than even a nine-year-old’s capacity to survive the initial selections and the work that was meant to slowly kill the inmates.

Then add in all the other implausibilities such as not Bruno's not knowing what “Jews” were or even the word "Jew", when Bruno would have been assaulted by propaganda against Jewish people virtually since his birth in 1934! Apparently, Bruno also doesn’t know what an air-raid is, even though he’s lived through them. REALLY? Then there is the part where the fence at Auschwitz is not only not electrified, and doesn’t have guards and guarddogs, but even has a hole at the bottom. PLEASE! People didn’t wander in and out of Auschwitz at will, or it would have been a very different place! Boyne’s Nazis read like Colonel Klink in terms of their planning, not like the highly efficient mass-murderers they were. And let’s not get started on how Schmuel apparently has the ability to mysteriously vanish from the constant Appells and the backbreaking labor that’s probably the only reason he’s still alive. And more trivially, Bruno wouldn't be reading Robert Louis Stevenson's Treasure Island - he'd be much more likely to be reading Karl May!

All of my criticisms make me think that Boyne did absolutely no research on German history, the German language, Nazis, the Holocaust or Auschwitz, and I'm beyond irritated to find out that this book is being touted as "the new Diary of Anne Frank" and indeed, replacing that work for kids in some schools. This book trivializes the Holocaust and the murder of millions by turning these things into a feeble allegory about the universality of ethnic hatred and positing that all we really need are two boys who can crawl under the fences to each other. Blech! I don’t understand why Boyne chose the Holocaust as its setting, as the novel says nothing meaningful about the Holocaust at all, its maudlin chocolate-box sentimentality (UGH, THE ENDING!) and simplistic narration in fact undercut the idea that Germans were willfully blind to what was being done in their name. Bruno’s not just ignorant; he’s actually stupid. Perhaps the story would have worked from the perspective of, say, Bruno’s mother, and her blindness to what her husband was doing because his work assured them of a comfortable existence. But then again, I’m not sure anything could have saved this pretentious twaddle!

Save your money and buy the non-fiction The Diary of Anne Frank or Night by Elie Wiesel, or if you’re set on a fictional tale about the Holocaust, then choose The Book Thief by Markus Zusak, which is a hell of a lot more believable even if it is narrated by Death himself!
(less)

28 likes · like · see review

Feb 23, 2009 K.B.L. rated it 2 of 5 stars

In the jacket summary, the author claims that the book is not for children, (and yet it is found in the children/young adult section) and that the book is meant to teach adults something. Then he states that he "didn't want to tell what the book was about because it would spoil it"--thus there *is* no actual summary...
But by the third chapter, I wondered just how stupid he thought that the readers were. Word usage, such as where they move being "Out With" and "Fury" (which makes no sense because...more

5 likes · like · see review

May 16, 2008 Lorraine rated it 3 of 5 stars

Recommended to Lorraine by: Lesley

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. I like that this book is written from the perspective of the Commandant’s young son who doesn’t have any idea of the world he’s living in and the role his father has in it. We get to know Bruno as a sweet, well-behaved boy but who also has the self-centred and competitive nature that any child of a young age has.

When he and his family are uprooted from their Berlin home and moved to Poland so his father can oversee a concentration camp, Bruno has to come to terms with the fact that he is miles...more I like that this book is written from the perspective of the Commandant’s young son who doesn’t have any idea of the world he’s living in and the role his father has in it. We get to know Bruno as a sweet, well-behaved boy but who also has the self-centred and competitive nature that any child of a young age has.

When he and his family are uprooted from their Berlin home and moved to Poland so his father can oversee a concentration camp, Bruno has to come to terms with the fact that he is miles away from everything and everybody he knows. On his first day he looks out his bedroom window and is shocked to see so many people on the other side of the fence, all wearing striped pyjamas. There are so many questions for Bruno to ask, but when he does, he never gets a full answer. I don’t think anybody feels they can talk freely about the situation, and how do you explain something so incomprehensible to an 8 year old innocent?

Bruno considers himself to be a bit of an explorer but it is months before he even gets as far as visiting the bench that faces the house in the garden. When he does head further afield and meets Shmuel, he finds a ‘friend for life’ who he has so much in common with… same age, birthday, families who love them, friends at a home which they have been forced to leave behind … the only difference between them is the side of the fence they sit on.

On the face of it, Bruno lives in ignorant bliss of what surrounds him but with all that he’s seen… The Fury’s visit to his house in Berlin, his Grandmother’s argument with his Father, Kotler’s treatment of the people in the striped pyjama’s, Pavel’s admission that he’s not really a waiter and Shmuel’s family going ‘missing’.. I think he begins to realise. Why else did he take so long to go exploring? Also, when Shmuel mutter’s “you don’t know what it’s like here” Bruno is “pretending he hadn’t heard that because then he wouldn’t have to answer”.

This book is an easy and simple book to read, it is heart-warming and very sad. It never details what is happening, always just hinting at it, but you get to know so many characters and how each of them have been affected by the situations they’ve been put in. Bruno’s grandmother can’t forgive her son, Bruno’s father juggles family life with his responsibilities, Bruno’s mother succumbs to alcohol (and a possible affair with a younger man), Bruno’s sister enters her teenage years, Kotler tries to hide his past (was his father jewish?) and further his career, Pavel still holds on to his kindness and humanity in a place where he gets treated so inhumanely, and Shmuel tries to understand what’s going on, just like Bruno.
(less)

3 likes · like · see review

Mar 29, 2009 Putri rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: young-adult-fiction, movie-tie-in

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

5 likes · like · see review

Apr 30, 2013 James Mackintosh rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

When I started reading 'The Boy in The Striped Pyjamas' I was expecting this really heavy, sad book, that would show the horrors that happened during World War II. Ok there were some sad bits here and there but nothing over the top... so it made me feel that the book was sort of censured.

The main character, Bruno, was kinda weird, a bit unrealistic. There are some things I didn't like about him. He is 9 years old. He has no idea whats going on around him. I mean the kid is the son of a nazi com...more

2 likes · like · see review

Apr 15, 2013 Sampurna Ray rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: sometime-else, favorites

'The people I see from my window. In the huts, in the distance. They're all dressed the same.'
'Ah, those people,' said Father, nodding his head and smiling slightly. 'Those people...well, they're not people at all, Bruno.'
Bruno frowned. 'They're not?' he asked, unsure what Father meant by that.

And that's how it all began. Any review I write for this book will be all wrong, since I can't say how "innocently cruel" this book is. This was such a wonderful book simply because nasty despicable peopl...more

2 likes · like · see review

Apr 28, 2009 Lucy rated it 2 of 5 stars

Written in the voice of Bruno, a nine year-old boy whose father is promoted up the Nazi chain of command and given the position as director of Auschwitz, a Polish concentration camp, The Boy In The Striped Pajamas exposes the well-documented horrors of gas chambers, crematoriums, savage beatings and starvation through eyes that have no comprehension of this kind of evil. Instead, when he meets Schmel, a Jewish boy his own age sitting on the other side of a fence, he sees a potential playmate who...more

9 likes · like · see review

Oct 06, 2008 Tawnie rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: young-adult

Grades: 9 to 12 Genre: Historical Fiction
While Bruno has enjoyed growing up in Berlin, his father has been transfer to “out-with” and they all must move. His new home is out in the country, but there is a strange giant fence in his backyard where there are lots of people in strange striped pajamas. One day when walking along the fence, Bruno meets Shumel who sits on the other side of the fence. The two boys share the same birthday and a friendship is formed. Each day Bruno sneaks off to talk to...more

2 likes · like · see review

Sep 07, 2008 Tyas rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: general-fiction

Bruno’s life in Berlin was happy. Not quite perfect, but happy. His family owned a big house, he had best friends, and his father was an important person, wearing a gorgeous uniform with shiny medals on front. And their leader, The Fury (Bruno could never pronounce his name correctly), regarded his father so highly that he appointed him to a great task: taking charge of a place named ‘Out-With’ (again, Bruno could not pronounce it appropriately, no matter how his family taught him the correct pr...more Bruno’s life in Berlin was happy. Not quite perfect, but happy. His family owned a big house, he had best friends, and his father was an important person, wearing a gorgeous uniform with shiny medals on front. And their leader, The Fury (Bruno could never pronounce his name correctly), regarded his father so highly that he appointed him to a great task: taking charge of a place named ‘Out-With’ (again, Bruno could not pronounce it appropriately, no matter how his family taught him the correct pronounciation). But Bruno hates Out-With. There’s nothing there, except sickening soldiers and strange people across the fence, wearing striped pyjamas all the time, looking miserable all the time also.

This is a tale of one of the most tragic mistakes in the modern times, told from the innocent eyes of a nine-year old German Boy who knew nothing about what was really happening. He made friends with Shmuel, a boy in the striped pyjamas, who didn’t really understand anything either except that he and his family were forcibly taken to Out-With, stripped of anything they had ever had. Their friendship grew, and although not a single violence is portrayed blatantly, we could feel the horror exactly because they were missing from the account, of Bruno’s reluctance to remember or talk about them. (And witness how subtle Boyne shows us that Bruno’s mother was having an affair with the disgusting Lieutenant Kotler.)

Unfortunately, the last few sentences somehow enraged me so, and altered my overall enjoyment in reading the book. Probably Boyne trying to tell people “We’re not going to do it again, right?”, but to me by telling that the same thing wouldn’t happen again in the present times, it’s as if Boyne negating that there are millions people out there still suffering from discrimination, genocide, and other ill-treatments on a scale not less gargantuan than what had been inscribed to our history in the first half of the 20th century.

Well, probably not where you live, Mr Boyne, not where you live. But remember: it’s not even 20 years since Europe and the world had to witness the atrocities of the Balkan wars, where men were slain and women were raped for no more reason than that they were different. And look at Sudan now. Look at Iraq now. Look at Palestine now, where people are living divided, contained by walls even longer than the Berlin Wall had been, robbed off their lands and properties and even their loved ones. Just because they’re different. What is so different about it and the occupation of Poland by Germany? What would you call it?

WHAT WOULD YOU CALL IT?

People are dying, Mr Boyne, not exactly like what happened to Shmuel and his people, but they are dying nevertheless, and to me it’s naive if not stupid to end your story by stating that it doesn’t happen anymore in these times. I’m sorry, Mr Boyne, probably you hadn’t meant what I managed to read from your otherwise beautiful work, but you should have chosen wiser closing sentences.
(less)

2 likes · like · see review

Aug 19, 2008 Beth rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: ya-lit, audio, want-to-teach

I would love to teach this book in my literature class in pairing with studying WWII in social studies. This is the story of Bruno, a naive, 9-year-old boy whose father is a high-ranking Nazi commander at Auschwitz. Bruno befriends a boy on the other side of the fence, but he never understands why they can't play together. While this book is not meant to be historically accurate, it still can incite wonderful discussion in a classroom full of older students. No one would ever anticipate the way...more

8 likes · like · see review

Jun 21, 2008 Ceci rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: all who want to learn more about themselves

I think this is a wonderful book. The naivety and simplicity of the protagonist which affects the story as well is a narrative gimmick... and it works well, throwing the horrors of the holocaust into stark contrast. It's a dark adult fable, and I dare say that an adult reader will get more of it than an adolescent. At times, the narrative is almost like poetry, with the many ellipses and phrases that are repeated over and over again.

I also believe that this is an important book for the German d...more

13 likes · like · see review

Ginny What's wrong with The Little Prince??? I loved that book! I had to read it for French Lit in college--in French! It was challenging, but exhilarating....more
Jun 25, 2008 06:42am

Ruth Mcdermott Hi there

I noticed you have some strong views about The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, which makes you an ideal person for me to ask if you would you like...more
Feb 05, 2010 09:38am

Tonner This is quite interesting how you put this, a lot I see on here is basically saying he's too naive. I thought this somewhat, but I don't think it did,...more
Sep 07, 2010 05:27pm

Jun 30, 2008 Kelley rated it 3 of 5 stars

I realize that I keep changing my rating and comments on this book, but I really can't decide how I feel about it. If you do decide to read this book, I suggest also reading the interview with the author found at the end of the book- it adds some new insight.

I've lost sleep over this book the last few nights, listening to my mind's self battle as it bounces back and forth between thoughts and opinions. (I've obviously found the book to be very thought-provoking if I'm still losing sleep over it....more I realize that I keep changing my rating and comments on this book, but I really can't decide how I feel about it. If you do decide to read this book, I suggest also reading the interview with the author found at the end of the book- it adds some new insight.

I've lost sleep over this book the last few nights, listening to my mind's self battle as it bounces back and forth between thoughts and opinions. (I've obviously found the book to be very thought-provoking if I'm still losing sleep over it.) I've read a lot of historical fiction books about WWII, but never from the viewpoint of the son a gestapo agent. The ending of the book has especially raised questions in my mind.

While the ending of the book was thought-provoking and somewhat startling, I found the these things in the book to be unrealistic:

#1- I struggled to believe that the main character could possibly be as naive as he was portrayed. I have a seven year old who, in every way, would have asked a million and twenty+ questions and seen the situation for what it was if he had grown up right next to "Out-With." Me simply giving him pat answers would not have sufficed.

The author taking the stance he did made a little more sense to me when my friend explained her mom's viewpoint that children who lived during the the 1940's did not ask as many questions as children do now days. For the most part, they accepted what was told to them from the adults they knew. She explained that this is how it was in her generation, and that the WWII era was even another generation back. This makes sense to me and I tell myself that there is a possibility that a child could be that naive, esp if his parents were trying to shield him from the war. So now I try not to compare all characters I read about with my own 7 year old.

However, that being said, I still have the following questions in my mind:

#2- Did Bruno's father loathe himself or know what he was doing is wrong and try to shield it from his son? I know that Bruno's grandmother didn't agree with what the Nazi Regime was doing and suspect that his mother wasn't a whole-hearted supporter either.

From what I have read about the indoctrination that was so prevalent in Germany at the time of WWII, I had to question the validity of a little boy whose father not only works for the Gestapo but is the head of Auschwitz, not knowing anything about what Hitler and his followers cunningly indoctrinated many of the German people with. Because of his father's job, it would have make more sense to me if Bruno had grown up in an environment where he was taught to hate Jews, where he was prepared to enter into the Hitler Youth Program, etc. even if his family was moved to Poland for a short time.

(less)

4 likes · like · see review

topics	posts	views	last activity
Best Sellers Bo...: What Do You Think Of The Schmuel Character?	3	3	May 13, 2013 12:08pm
author, anyone read anything else by him?	13	148	May 13, 2013 09:21am
Best Sellers Bo...: Who Is The Boy In The Striped Pajamas?	2	3	May 12, 2013 06:37am
Best Sellers Bo...: What Sort Of A Man Do You Think Bruno Would Have Become?	7	6	May 11, 2013 06:32am
Best Sellers Bo...: Post Comments About Any Of The Other Characters In The Book?	2	3	May 11, 2013 02:31am
Best Sellers Bo...: You wear the right outfit and you feel like the person you're pretending to be?	2	1	May 11, 2013 02:22am
Best Sellers Bo...: What Do You Think Of The Bruno Character?	2	1	May 09, 2013 12:40pm

title link	preview: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas
avg rating	preview: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas Goodreads rating: 4.03 (109033 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/39999.The_Boy_in_the_Striped_Pajamas?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1366228171l/39999.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/39999.The_Boy_in_the_Striped_Pajamas?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Boy in the Striped Pajamas by John Boyne[/url]

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (102)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About John Boyne

Books by John Boyne

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About The Boy in the St...

Quotes from The Boy in the Striped...