A short but breathtaking
story with inspiring and meaningful subjects: The Reader. Michael, a little boy haunted by illness, madly fell in
love with Hanna, who was almost twice of his age. Not until Michael found out
that Hanna loved him reading to her did their relationship deepened. Their love,
passion, and desire bonded the secret affair. Reading, showering, and making
love had become their meeting ritual. However, one day, Hanna left without any
clues.
Next time when Michael saw
Hanna, who was accused of murder, was in a court. The reunion was hard for both
of them. For Hanna, she was about to be discovered a long-hidden truth: she was
illiteracy. For Michael, he was pulled himself into a dilemma between different
views of justice which determined whether he could save Hanna or not.
The book gave me the feeling
that the relationship between one and the other was so volatile and vulnerable,
but the opportunity to shorten and tense each relationship was in our hand. In
the first glance, Michael and Hanna seemed to build up enough trust and
dependence so that they never tried to intervene in or intended to gain the
power to control each other’s private life. To a certain level, they were
perfect match and the love was transcendent and impeccable. However, Hanna’s
leaving changed everything. Originally, Hanna was a misanthropic woman because
she was illiteracy, which caused a sense of inferiority to her. This negative
self-image isolated her from the world, and finally made her an outsider in the
society. Neither did she easily believe in people nor did she get enough
security. As a result, she seldom told Michael her past, her family, even what
she thought in mind because she was not familiar with trusting people. Once she
gave people recognition, she would be so anxious that the person would betray
her. That was the reason why she got so angry when she woke up but could not
find Michael in the morning. The same thing can also be seen in Michael himself
who experienced a difficult time to accept Hanna’s leaving. That healing
process turned Michael into a defensive and sensitive person. He neither
trusted Hanna nor himself anymore. When Hanna backed to his life, he supposed
to be happy but it turned out to be retreated. On the one hand, he had not forgiven
Hanna’s unsolicited leave and he was not sure whether Hanna still loved him or
not. On the other hand, he was afraid of not being able to make Hanna happy so
that Hanna would unhesitatingly leave him like the previous time. The confusion
and uncertainty finally led Michael to the path of escaping form Hanna. Actually,
the main reason that caused the tragedy was Hanna’s sense of inferiority. Because
of illiteracy, she cannot receive higher education. Because of illiteracy, she
can only find a job requiring no reading and writing skills. Because of
illiteracy, she was unwilling to be labeled as lower class and be discriminated
by the society. Therefore, with strong sense of inferiority, she regarded illiteracy
as a shame. To protect her dignity, she would rather commit to a crime she was
not supposed to be responsible for than tell the truth. Honestly, I admired
Hanna’s courage to protect what she valued the most, dignity, but I did not
agree the way she saw herself. I believed that discrimination is formed by both
sides: Hanna and others. In other words, although other people probably despise
Hanna, if she did not see herself that way, discrimination did not exist at all.
We cannot control how people judge us, but we can decide the way we see
ourselves.
The story also raised another issue: justice.
Hanna worked as a guard in the concentration camp, when WW ǁ finally came to an end, she was charged with murdering the Jews. Germans
who did not join Nazi’s massacre blamed those who worked for Nazi of cruelty,
lack of humanity, and even deserving imprisonment. Hanna, unfortunately, was the pathetic sacrifice after
the war. Actually, the Jews, the victims, probably had the right to fight for justice
from Nazi, but others did not. Ironically, the post-war German society was the
opposite way. The minority could not speak out for themselves; instead, the
main accusers of Nazi’s crime just were those Germans who were not the members
of Nazi. However, did they entitle to blame others? In the critical time, how
many of them had tried to stop the slaughter, how many of them had tried to
save the Jews regardless of their own safety? If they acted like bystanders and
did not try to offer help, what was the difference between them and the Nazi? What
they both did was looking people dying without offering help. In other words, people
who should be responsible for the tragedy were not only the Nazi, but also
those who had the opportunities to do something yet chose not to. Justice is
hard to define or strike a balance satisfying both sides. Be aware that when we
criticize others, do we do the same thing as theirs?
I learned two lessons from
the book: First, the importance of learning to believe, to love, and to
forgive. Instead of tormented by the past, we have to learn how to let go at
the right time. Second, do not criticize people until you make sure that you
are not responsible for the outcome. With the tangled but appealing plot, The Reader undoubtedly depicts human
nature directly and realistically. The nature shared by all human beings when
it comes to love and separation. It will be the book I would like to read all
over again.
No comments:
Post a Comment