With No Past or Present, Where Do You Go?

Feb 23, 2018

Though there are many disconcerting elements in The Giver, the most disturbing aspect is the complete and utter stagnation of society. The overbearing micromanagement of each and every element of the characters lives (from their childhood, to their careers, adult lives, and even deaths) prevents them from making any choices of their own or even learning how to inform their own decisions. The society is entirely automated along a cyclical assembly line structure, where each stage of life is prepackaged and contained. Everyone robotically engages in the same behaviors the previous generation participated in: going to the same schools, getting the same job, completing the same work, living the same lives, and going through the exact same motions as their parents. The younger generations basically exist as spare parts for the societal machine when older workers can no longer complete their tasks and are literally removed from the machine.

Additionally, because the only individual with access to books and memories is the Receiver, no other member of society can even conceptualize life in a different manner, which is the saddest part. None of the children Jonas used to play with, and none of the adults he knows other than the Giver, have any other frame of reference for what life could be like, and therefore cannot imagine a different lifestyle. They have no memories from anything beyond their established society to inform alternative options for their lives, and therefore have no concept or comparative framework of how life could be different in any way.

Because the individuals in this society have no past, they cannot learn to improve or change the present; the micromanagement of every element of their present lives ensures that they cannot change the future either; therefore: society has stagnated.

5 responses to “With No Past or Present, Where Do You Go?”

kaitlynegp

February 23, 2018 at 6:21 pm

Well said! I think you really accurately describe the innate problem of this system, or at least what seems innately wrong to American readers. In fact, I think that what you are saying leads to what is perhaps the greatest fear associated with this: Americans value individuality to the utmost extent, and Jonas’ world strips that away entirely. I mean, the entire Cold War stemmed from American fears of loss of individuality, capitalism (which monetizes individuality), and democracy (which politicizes individuality); Lois would have been growing up during the high parts of the Cold War, so perhaps the American fears and propaganda play a (however conscious) role in her creation of Jonas’ world. Because, to anti-communist Americans, Jonas’ world is probably the perfect example of dystopia.

LikeLike

Reply
sarahweinberg24

February 23, 2018 at 10:00 pm

The first word that comes to my mind when I think of this society is ‘unsettling.’ The situation is almost more ominous than than flat out chaos because the society is buried under the pretense that everything is fine and how it should be. I like what you said about having no past significantly hinders the present and the whole societal machine. The people really are more like cogs than actual human beings, and its depressing to see these people reduced to mere echoes. Time becomes basically meaningless, with the adults not even counting ages after twelve and no attempts made to craft a different future or even fully interact with the present. Instead, The Giver’s society has taken the knowledgeable tools used to engage the present and given them to a single person who they don’t even consult often. I think the solitary nature of the position also lends discouragement for action. All this potential and understanding and knowledge of the world contained within a single soul (besides the new Giver) must cultivate an almost debilitating loneliness.

On another note, the deliberate ignorance in return for “comfort” and an easier life seems a common experience. It’s very jarring in this novel to see so much information so hidden away, but to a lesser extent, things are ignored or pushed aside all the time in search of a more manageable or less painful life, to varying degrees. Of course, in this case the extremity of the situation—with people not even given the option to know about books and memories—conflicts with individuality and the ability to conceptualize different frameworks, leading to the ongoing stagnation.

LikeLike

Reply
helenagruensteidl

February 26, 2018 at 5:57 am

@kaitlynegp Nice analysis of the Cold War as a current event during Lois Lowry’s childhood! What really struck me about the society as a whole and its unsettling nature was something that Lowry summed up really nicely in the interview that we watched in class. I believe she said something to the effect that when first beginning to read the novel, she wanted readers to believe that the society is flawless because seemingly no one is ever unhappy or in pain and everyone is considered equal, but as the novel progresses, the reader starts to realize that the society isn’t flawless at all but instead muted and stagnant. With the lack of unhappiness, also comes a lack of happiness, and with “equality” comes a lack of diversity. In this way, I think Lowry’s society deals nicely with her experience with the Cold War.

LikeLike

Reply
zaffiroe

February 26, 2018 at 8:28 am

I really like your point about how society is structured to replace the old pieces with new ones. Especially when each generation consists of 50 children. It makes me wonder, however, what happens when there are only 49 children that are in a class year, such as with Gabriel’s first cohort that he was separated from. Does this mean that there is an older member of society who has to work anther year because there were not enough children to replace the adults that year? I also question the ability for every person to find the job that they enjoy, and not just one that they must do. I have a difficult time believing that everyone enjoys their placement, but there is no easy way to change it afterwards besides being released. I really enjoyed your last paragraph as well, it is important to understand why we need to understand the past as a society in order to improve upon the future.

LikeLike

Reply
edwardslo

February 27, 2018 at 1:55 am

I liked your analogy comparing individuals in this society to parts of a machine, because individuals in this novel have been dehumanized without their individuality, emotions, and freedom. Tying into the lack of change due to individual’s lack of imagination of a better society, citizens are socialized to accept stagnation in governmental processes. Even though there are (small) things individuals are discontent with–such as the age in which bicycles are given to children–they don’t care enough to press the Council into changing the rule.

The Council in The Giver was something that I was really interested in; I’m interested in how the differences in power dynamics work in this society. The Receiver of Memory is described as a job with honor but not power, so I wondered how citizens in power acted. The lack of figurehead–the Council members are never described–makes this societal way of life seem to not have a root, to be ubiquitous and unescapable. But this sense of impossibility – how do we change this society – reminds me of strategy from my class on nonviolent change. To enact change on a large-scale, activists have to target the pillars that society depends on. In this case, rather than targeting the political pillar, Jonas and the Giver targeted the pillar of comfort the citizens relied on by giving citizens uncomfortable memories to deal with. By attacking this pillar of comfort, Jonas and the Giver destabilize and therefore change the society.

LikeLike

Reply