**The Boy in the Striped Pajamas by John Boyne**

Bruno, a 9-year-old boy, lives in Berlin during World War II. He has a comfortable life with his parents, 12-year-old sister Gretel, and the maids, including Maria. However, everything changes after a visit by Adolf Hitler. Bruno's father is promoted to Commandant and the family has to move to "Out-With" due to the orders of "The Fury" (Bruno's innocent mispronunciation of "Führer").

Bruno is initially very unhappy about leaving his friends Daniel, Karl, and Martin in Berlin. At Out-With (which is actually Auschwitz), he notices a strange camp where the prisoners wear "striped pyjamas" (prison clothes). One day, while exploring the wire fence, he meets a Jewish boy named Shmuel. Bruno discovers that they share the same birthday.
Shmuel tells Bruno about his family on the other side of the fence. He mentions that his father, grandfather, and brother are with him, but his mother is separated from them. Bruno and Shmuel become good friends, and Bruno often sneaks food to Shmuel. However, Bruno's naivete is evident as he fails to understand the true nature of the camp and the horror that surrounds him. He continues to visit Shmuel, oblivious to the danger and the reality of the situation.
The story of Bruno and Shmuel is a poignant and heartbreaking tale that explores themes of friendship, innocence, and the atrocities of war. It shows how a child's perspective can be so different from that of adults and how easily they can be shielded from the harsh truth. Through Bruno's eyes, we see the horror of Auschwitz in a new and powerful way.

The Evolution of Reading

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

Preciosa.

Dura.

Real. These three words describe a quality that is rare and valuable. Something that is preciosa is precious, something that is dura is tough, and something that is real is genuine.

When we encounter something that is preciosa, we know that it is special and worthy of our attention. It may be a beautiful piece of art, a rare gem, or a loved one.

Something that is dura can withstand the test of time and the challenges of life. It is strong and resilient, able to overcome obstacles and persevere.

And something that is real is not fake or artificial. It is true to itself and to those around it. It is honest and trustworthy, and it earns our respect and admiration.

Together, these three qualities make up a powerful combination. Something that is preciosa, dura, and real is a treasure that we should cherish and protect.

The sharp wire fence separates the dark world outside that is filled with violence and crime, lurking behind the messengers. And the seemingly colorful world of the uniformed ones, haughty and proud of their power, ignorant of the consequences of their ways...

Shmuel, a Jewish boy from Lódz, who has been separated from the peace of his life to experience a slow death with his family in Auschwitz, through friendship and acquaintance with Bruno, the son of one of the leading commanders, who is exactly the same age as him and enjoys a relatively flawless life beside the concentration camp. Later, through a variety of experiences in the world of good and evil, friendship and acceptance of differences are shown...

The unexpected end of this friendship, the path that Bruno takes with a change of clothes for "discovering" the reality of the concentration camp, leads to the exposure of the terrifying nature of the well-dressed commanders and the secrets of the roadside messengers. Their clothing is a symbol of the worthlessness of the lives of the prisoners in the concentration camp and the license for mass murder.

This is a truly remarkable piece of writing that offers a very quick and interesting read.

It has the power to engage the reader from the very first page and keep them hooked until the very end.

However, it's not just a light-hearted and entertaining book. It's also a deeply emotional one that will break your heart and might even bring tears to your eyes.

The author has done an excellent job of creating characters that are so real and relatable that you can't help but become invested in their lives.

As you read, you'll experience a whole range of emotions, from joy and laughter to sadness and grief.

It's a book that will stay with you long after you've finished reading it and make you think about the meaning of life and love.

Overall, this is a must-read for anyone who loves a good story that will touch their heart and soul.

This story or book has really charmed me a great deal.

From the very beginning, it captured my attention and held it firmly. The plot was engaging and full of unexpected twists and turns that kept me on the edge of my seat.

The characters were well-developed and relatable, making it easy for me to invest my emotions in their stories.

Whether it was the protagonist's journey of self-discovery or the secondary characters' contributions to the overall narrative, every aspect of the story was精心 crafted.

I found myself completely immersed in the world created by the author, and I didn't want it to end.

Even after finishing it, I couldn't stop thinking about it and reflecting on the lessons and themes it presented.

This story or book has truly left a lasting impression on me, and I would highly recommend it to anyone looking for a great read.

I completed this book just yesterday, and yet, I find myself still grappling with formulating a clear opinion. Here goes my attempt though. I have spent a great deal of time reflecting on it, which is typically an indication of good writing. However, in this particular instance, perhaps I'm thinking so much because the book has truly unsettled me.

When considering the Holocaust historical fiction genre as a whole, I'm uncertain as to what unique contribution this book makes. It does present a different perspective, that of the child of the Commandant of Auschwitz. But Bruno is astonishingly dense, naïve far beyond his nine years. I'm left wondering what the author's intention was. Bruno converses with his Jewish friend on the other side of the fence for over a year, and he lives in a house that also serves as the headquarters of Auschwitz for the same duration. Am I really supposed to believe that he has no inkling of what is happening in the camp? I understand that children can be narcissistic and self-absorbed, but this book takes that concept to an entirely new level. Bruno's tunnel vision is so extreme that I keep pondering if perhaps this was some kind of message the author was attempting to convey. Maybe it's that kids can fabricate and exist in an alternate reality for as long as they need to. Was that the point?

If not, then what was the purpose? Surely it wasn't the shocking ending, which seemed to add very little to the overall narrative of the Holocaust. The ending served no real purpose. It didn't cause the father to realize the error of his ways, it didn't prompt the guards to question their actions, and it didn't make the tragic deaths of the Jews in the camp any less poignant. What was the ending's significance? My hunch is that it was merely for shock value.

I do believe that the book makes a strong case for being honest with children, even in the most dire of circumstances. By attempting to protect and shield kids, adults may actually be putting them in greater peril!

On a positive note, I thought the non-traditional book jacket was a clever marketing strategy. By not revealing any of the plot details, it piques the reader's curiosity. But overall, I'm completely flummoxed. The book remains an enigma, one that perhaps is best left unresolved.

I REALLY did not want to read this book. I have resisted reading it for years. Then someone whose reviews I respect on Goodreads wrote a five-star review for All the Broken Places. I was excited to check it out and then was conflicted when I realized it's the sequel to this book. I really wanted to read the sequel, and I have a little compulsion about reading serialized books in order. So I finally submitted and read this book first.

The reason I hadn't ever wanted to read this book is because I knew it would break my heart, and it did. I hadn't watched the movie, and I didn't know anything about the book other than it was a sad WWII Holocaust book (which it was!!!). If you do not like sad Holocaust stories, stay away from this one!

I usually really dislike child narrators, and I didn't love Bruno. I know, I know. His innocence was only available to him because of his privileged life as the son of a Nazi commandant. However, he's still just a boy. He annoys his big sister and is annoyed by her. He only wants to play. His world is very small and sheltered. He complains a lot. So he's really not very likeable to begin with. Then he meets the boy in the striped pajamas, and instead of asking questions and wanting answers, he asks questions and couldn't really care less if he doesn't get answers. Instead, he fills in the blanks with a lot of assumptions. I would've preferred him to be more persistently inquisitive. He's eight. My niece, nephew, and godson were far more curious at eight!

Ok, I will give Bruno a break. He was as kind as his innocence and his fear allowed him to be. He owned up when he behaved poorly. He demonstrated empathy when it was called for. He protected his friend when his intuition told him to. Despite the very obvious distinctions, he considered Shmuel to be his equal, and he is wholly loyal until the end of the book. These are traits I see missing from a lot of adults. So he's a good kid with a good heart, whose family largely ignore him and infantilize him, and he doesn't know that he should know better. In fact, he's the only character who acts on his conscience in any way at all. I'd say the rest of his family suck. They buy into the Nazi nationalism. They look the other way when they witness inequities. They ignore Bruno or make fun of him. They feed their loneliness with the comfort of their power.

This book reminds me of Mark Twain's The Prince and the Pauper in that when they boys swap clothes in Twain's books, no one can tell them apart. Similarly, one of the themes of this book is that when you strip away the ideological hate, we are the same. This was true then. It's true today. The problem is that many people refused to know it then, and many people refuse to know it now. Hence, the very last line of the book (which I shall not spoil here) is doubtful to me, especially because it feels very dark and reminiscent in the US of the end years during the Weimar Republic when the Nazis started rising to power.

Overall, I found this book to be a powerful and thought-provoking read. It forces us to confront the horrors of the Holocaust and the consequences of blind obedience and hatred. It also shows us the power of friendship and the importance of standing up for what is right, even in the face of great danger. While I didn't love all of the characters, I was still moved by their stories and the lessons they taught me. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in history, literature, or simply a good story. Rounding up to 5.

Monica Edinger said:

** spoiler alert ** I don't see the point of this book at all. It doesn't work as an allegory, a fable, or anything else. The boy (both boys, for that matter) are naive beyond belief. The German boy's misuse of language is completely not credible.

Want to give a kid a book on this topic? Anne Frank.

I added: Completely agree, Monica. What I find so distressing is how many educators are making this part of the curriculum. They think it is a great and oh-so-moving book and are working hard to convince kids of the same.

It seems that Monica has a strong opinion about the book in question. She believes it fails in multiple aspects, such as not functioning well as an allegory or fable. The naivete of the boys is exaggerated, and the German boy's language misuse lacks credibility.

My addition further emphasizes the concern about educators including this book in the curriculum. They seem to be overly enthusiastic about it, believing it to be a great and moving piece. However, Monica and I both have our doubts.

Perhaps a more suitable book on the topic, like the works of Anne Frank, would be a better choice for students. It is important for educators to carefully consider the quality and suitability of the materials they present to students.

A Nazi concentration camp during World War II is seen through the eyes of two 9-year-old boys. One is an inmate, living in the harsh and cruel environment of the camp. The other is the son of the Commandant, enjoying a relatively comfortable life within the camp compound.

This is an interesting and morally complex juxtaposition. Both boys, in their own ways, retain much of their innocence. They are unaware of the true and horrifying reasons for the existence of the camp.

The end of the book is particularly original and deeply moving. It leaves a lasting impact on the reader. However, aside from that, the story follows a somewhat predictable pattern, almost straight out of a 'Creative Writing 101' textbook. Nevertheless, it is very well written, as one would expect from a writer of Boyne's caliber.

It just occurred to me that the author probably intended this book for children. It will be quite a challenge for the parents to answer the inevitable questions that young readers will ask. But perhaps this is also an opportunity for parents to have important discussions with their children about history, morality, and the consequences of war.

The story presented here is a complex and thought-provoking one. It begins with a dialogue that sets a certain tone.

\\"-Я тепер зовсім такий, як ти.
-Тільки товщий\\"

The book in question didn't initially appeal to the narrator as she had a preconceived notion of what it would be like. She imagined a certain scenario involving a German boy and a Jewish boy on either side of a concentration camp fence. However, as time passed and a full-scale war began, she finally read the book.

To her surprise, her initial expectations were wrong. The author added drama in an unexpected way, and she realized that the entire build-up to the culmination was a fabricated construct.

The character of Bruno, a 9-year-old boy and the son of the commandant of Auschwitz, is described. He is not just a naive child but rather ignorant. His conversations with Shmuel through the fence of the concentration camp lasted not just a day or two but a whole year. Interestingly, no one seemed to discover this "blind" zone in the camp.

Bruno grows up sheltered, with only a tutor teaching him about important subjects like history and geography. «Німеччина – найбільша з усіх країн. Ми всіх переважаємо». He is also quite oblivious, seeing that Shmuel is always hungry but often forgetting to bring him food.

There are numerous illogical coincidences in the story, all leading up to the intended ending.

The narrator reflects on how her perspective on war books has changed over time. What she once saw only as a simple message of "war is bad" now takes on a different meaning when she is living through a war herself. She questions why, to emphasize the horror and macabre nature of the Holocaust, the story has to focus on a German child?

“Bruno had read a plethora of books about explorers, and he was well aware that one could never be certain of what one was going to discover. Most of the time, they would come across something interesting that was simply there, minding its own business, patiently waiting to be unearthed (such as America). At other times, they would stumble upon something that was perhaps better left alone (like a dead mouse lurking at the back of a cupboard).”

A remarkable, straightforward ‘fable’, as the title implies – a parable about a boy who realizes that if he desires answers to his questions, he will have to seek them out for himself. Mostly, he just wants to understand why he has to endure rules, loneliness, and discomfort.

Bruno is a nine-year-old boy leading a privileged life in a large house in Berlin with his parents and his irritating twelve-year-old sister, Gretel. When the story commences, he enters his bedroom and discovers the maid packing up all his belongings. He attempts to figure out what he has done wrong and worries that he is being sent away. No, they are all moving due to Father’s job promotion.

“He wasn’t overly concerned if Gretel was being dispatched because she was a Hopeless Case and only caused trouble for him. But it seemed a bit unjust that they all had to go with her.” Gretel can leave – she treats him with nothing but contempt, anyway (as only an almost-teenaged girl can). But he doesn’t want to part with his three best friends. He doesn’t think Father should have to relocate just because of his job and his shiny new uniform. Even if Father moves, why do the rest of them have to go and live far away?

After the move, he is annoyed by the numerous other men in uniform who come and go from his father’s office in their new ‘home’. Mostly, he dislikes Lieutenant Kotler, a nineteen-year-old soldier who calls Bruno “little man” and with whom young Gretel tries to flirt outrageously. Kotler initially appears handsome and cheerful but later hardens, to the extent that Bruno explains one reason: “. . . why he didn’t like Lieutenant Kotler. There was the fact that he never smiled and always looked as if he was trying to find somebody to cut out of his will.”

What would prompt a nine-year-old to think about wills? I believe this is Bruno, drawing on what he knows of life from an adventure story of someone setting off to seek their fortune (perhaps because they've been disinherited). He lives in his own imagination.

This is written from Bruno’s naïve perspective, informed only by his stories and some eavesdropping. He is perplexed by the changed behavior of their servants. He is openly frustrated by the restrictiveness of their new home, where people whisper (or shout) behind closed doors, but nobody answers his questions about the big fence outside their house and the people he can see in the distance.

His innocence and curiosity are beautifully contrasted with his sister’s feigned sophistication. He begins exploring to learn more about where he is and to attempt to find a friend.

This story began so quietly and simply that I questioned whether it would hold my interest. (It did.) It can be difficult to believe how carefree and trusting a nine-year-old is who has faced no challenges other than how to sneak an extra helping of dessert.

Even quite young readers will be able to read it, although they may overlook the subtleties that are scattered throughout as tiny observations. And they will require some explanation of the names and words that Bruno misunderstands. But they will eventually grasp their significance.

I can’t envision many adults who would remain unaffected by these children. Read the entire thing. (I haven't seen the film, but I think the book says it all.) Sometimes simplicity says it best.