by Katie,
The Reader is a novel set around World War II. It is a novel about a young man and older woman who have a love affair that ends as abruptly as it seems to begin. Years later the young man comes across the woman under unusual circumstances. This novel became a major motion picture that was nominated for five
Academy Awards.
Kate Winslet, who played Hannah, won an Oscar for her performance. As a novel it won many awards in the Author's home country of Germany. Have either of you seen this movie? I haven't. I don't know if either of you ever read Nabokov's Lolita. But this sounds a little like that but in gender reverse. Do we find Hannah's seduction of a minor less offensive because the minor is male? Does this taboo make the beginning of our novel more difficult to read? And what about Hannah's secret? Is it shameful enough to risk going to jail for war crimes rather than reveal it? Looking forward to another interesting book with you both!
Hello Ladies
ReplyDeleteHope you and your families have had a very happy Christmas – and that it wasn’t too exhausting. Bet you were in the swimming pool Nancy. Benjamin must have really enjoyed himself, Katie – hope you and Franklin did too. Mum and Dad had a good time – though I’m beginning to think the hazelnut dormouse has the right idea: puts on lots of weight, closes the door on its home, then sleeps right through ‘til April when it wakes up thin and hungry. Can’t even imagine thin and hungry now.
Though our book should have helped me there. I saw the film a long time ago so, as I read, Hanna was always Kate Winslett. Really not a good idea to see the film first. I haven’t read Lolita. Never been interested enough. I should be, given my country’s current uncovering of all kinds of past and present pedophile activities. Media attention rightly concentrates on the exploitation of children, but I didn’t see Hanna as exploiting Michael. He enjoyed many aspects of the relationship. Having said that, it was clear that her impact on his life was anything but good. Keeping his relationship with Hanna a secret affected his friendships with people his own age. He says that even today “ . . . after spending the night with a woman I feel I’ve been indulged and I must make it up somehow.” He talks, too, about being humiliated and hurt by Hanna, feeling guilty for betraying her, distancing himself from her. To protect himself, he became arrogant and superior. But aren’t these feelings and reactions common in any unhappy relationship? Was the fact Hanna was so much older than him any bigger problem than the fact she was illiterate and hid that from him?
Importantly, did the relationship mean he made a greater effort than others to understand the generation that perpetrated the war? To recognise that human beings are not one-dimensional? Initially perhaps not, because he says he felt guilty for having loved her. But I think eventually he does recognise that she might have committed suicide because of the guilt she felt – as a war criminal and as his lover.
I haven’t come to grips with Michael’s character at all. I really should read the book again. He was a shadowy figure in the film, too – as my book cover suggests. And I think my failure to sympathise with his struggle means I haven’t fully understood what the author wants to communicate. I have not, in fact, been a good reader myself.
So, it’s been a challenging book, for which I thank you, Katie. Good to be challenged at this very self-indulgent time of year.
It’s my parents’ 67th wedding anniversary today – Mum’s having her hair done and we’re going out for lunch. Quite a day. Hope you both welcome 2016 in style – and that it brings us all whatever we desire. It will certainly be memorable for you, Katie. When is the baby due? How are you feeling? So much to look forward to.
Happy New Year to you both and to your families
Much love
Sue
Hello Ladies! Hope you are both well and that your holidays were lovely. Ours was relatively quiet which was nice. Benjamin had a lovely time and now my house looks like a toy store.
ReplyDeleteI feel terrible but I could not get into this book. I don’t know if it was because of the holidays or “pregnancy brain”, but I just could not absorb much from this novel. The words on the page went in and came right back out. So I’m glad that you have led the charge, Sue. I think I processed enough to be able to converse based on your notes (I don’t think I could have started the conversation).
I agree that Hannah and Michael’s relationship led to an unhealthy road for Michael. While most of his classmates were shy toward girls, his relationship with an older woman made him view them as less formidable. This probably contributed to his superior and arrogant personality. If the two of them had not started a relationship, maybe Michael would have been a little meeker toward girls. This in turn could have led to him being a humbler person and led to stronger relationships with his family.
I was wrong about this being like Lolita. That novel centered less on the child involved in the affair and more about the adult. The Reader is more about the effects on Michael. I found Hannah and Michael’s relationship no more or less offensive than the one from Lolita. All parties involved where fictional characters in both novels which is probably why the corruption of a minor did not faze me in any regard. Maybe if either novel’s relationship had been based on actually people it may have bothered me more.
As for Hannah’s illiteracy and its effects on her trial, I think her shame was unfounded. I’m sure that illiteracy was quite common in the 1930’s and 40’s. Maybe it was not something to be proud of, but I don’t view it as a secret worth going to jail over. Would Hannah have been acquitted of her crimes if she had just admitted her ignorance? I don’t think so but maybe more of the other female prison guards may have been convicted with her.
I still feel quite bad that I couldn’t get into this novel. Maybe I will pick it up again at some other time. Congratulations to your parents Sue! 67 years seems so unbelievable these days. The baby is due March 15th. This pregnancy is flying by. I think, and maybe you would agree Nancy, that having a toddler around doesn’t leave much time for thinking about pregnancy.
Love to you both!
Katie