Choices

It was utter confusion that I felt after finishing the pages. Perplexity seized me as I reached the abrupt ending. Although I understand this is a literary trick which suggested Jonas’s memory betrayed him as his consciousness dimmed, I still wondered if he and Gabriel found their safe haven. Aside from my bewilderment, I also learnt some amusing facts about this dystopian fiction.

Jonas is quite an intriguing character, a mirror reflecting the complexity of humanity. To illustrate more, he acted recklessly in his quarrel with Asher. During the process of the game, all of a sudden, Jonas comprehended that the so-called game was a mockery of merciless war. Consequently, he ruined the game in fury even though Asher claimed his expertise in entertainment. To pursue his own faith, he was willing to sacrifice their precious friendship. Nevertheless, every now and then, he seemed vulnerable contrast to his boldness, such as the moment after he realized the true meaning of “release” and witnessing that pawn’s misfortune. Out of despair, he risked everything for an opportunity to flee from the Community. From various aspects, we can have a peak at the image of ourselves facing our daily life. From leisure time to dilemma, we react quite differently. Dogmas and doctrines eventually collapse under the stress, that’s what I see from Jonas.

Sameness, the core value of the Community, appeared pretty impossible at first. Astonishingly, the scientists applied state-of-the-art methods to wipe out biological diversity. In fact, they were on the brink of eliminating human emotions when Jonas rebelled with the Giver. There was no famine, battle, conspiracy, disasters in the Community. Isn’t it luring to reside in that Utopia? The premise is that you can tolerate a world without beauty and art. By exploiting advanced techniques, the experts were able and permitted to erase people’s cognition. It occurs to me as a conduct of dictatorship, since only a few enjoy the privilege to know the truth. Truly, there are philosophers dissenting from democracy like Plato and Nietzsche. Plato believed a nation was supposed to be reigned by a philosopher king, while Nietzsche asserted a person was ought to live up to a higher self; namely, he regarded democracy as an obstruction to seek spiritual ascension. Despite their speeches and publications, I root for rights for everyone. Each of us deserve a choice, don’t we? Democracy is merely a sequence of decisions you make to express your perspective, nothing more, and I can’t cling to the idea that there are minority elevate themselves and scheme the blueprint for all of us.

Viewing the volume from another angle, it also raises the controversy about the leash of technology. “To be or not to be” is always an impasse. Ironically, while we are debating the topic, “Don’t be evil” surrendered before considerable profit and tumbled to be the slogan of Google. In the meantime, clones and nuclear energy are dubious and ethically disputable. In the drama “Orphan Black”, clones were manipulated by frantic scientists hunting for the fountain of youth; as a consequence, brutal experiments were carried out on their bodies. Nuclear weapons had given birth to the catastrophe in the end of WW2. It is our option to continue or to cease. In my opinion, I back for the development of technology, for I have faith in the integrity within us and compassion for those still suffer.

“The Giver” is just a plain novel; furthermore, I don’t think the writer intended to seal plenty of metaphors in it. It’s just a book worth our time meditating. Whether baffled or clear, all of us do get something from reading it. After closing the book, I closed my eyes with the silhouette of Jonas snorting soundly in a cottage. It is my fantasy, and I would rather wish him bliss in his future.