"The Boy in the Striped Pajamas" would undoubtedly top my list of "Worst Books about the Holocaust."

I write as someone who was actually there. I, too, was once a boy in striped pajamas and a survivor of six German concentration camps. This book shows such a blatant ignorance of the historical facts regarding concentration camps that it effectively spits in the face of Holocaust history.

John Boyne's premise is that the nine-year-old son of the Auschwitz commandant, bored with his isolated life, takes walks to the fence surrounding this infamous camp and befriends a nine-year-old inmate on the other side. The two boys meet daily.

Well, here's some news for Mr. Boyne. The 10-foot-high barbed wire fence surrounding each camp was electrified. Touch it once and you're dead. There was a no-man's land on either side of the fence, with guard towers along the inside perimeter. Each tower was manned by an armed guard around the clock, and each guard was responsible for a specific segment of the fence within his line of sight. It was his duty to prevent anyone from approaching the fence, whether from the inside or outside, and he was under orders to shoot anyone seen approaching the no-man's-land.

In addition, prominent signs along the outside perimeter declared, "STOP - Danger - High-Voltage Electricity." And to ensure that even a dense nine-year-old understood, a skull and crossbones was pictured at the top of each sign.

Let me also add that a nine-year-old boy arriving in Auschwitz-Birkenau on a cattle train would take only one walk in this camp: from the train to the gas chamber.

"The Boy in the Striped Pajamas" makes a mockery of these fundamental facts. It is a fantasy that causes untold harm to the pursuit of truth about the Holocaust. This book has only one purpose: to make a fortune for the author and the publisher. And it succeeds in this regard. The publisher recently boasted in an ad in the New York Times that over one million copies have been sold and sales are still strong. And that doesn't even account for the profits from the revolting movie based on this book.

Peter Kubicek

Author of "MEMORIES OF EVIL" - a factual book about the Holocaust that will never grace any list of best books about the Holocaust because my book tells it like it was: there was nothing cute or benign about the concentration camps. They were places of brutality, starvation, and sheer terror.

How could I give this book less than 5 stars?

Even though I had seen the film years ago and still have a very vivid memory of what it's about and how it ends, it was a highlight of my reading life.

A book about whose story it's best to say nothing at all! A book that every (adult) can and should read! That's why there's no mention of the upcoming reading month either, because I'll keep it as the blurb says: It's better if you don't know what it's about, but simply immerse yourself in the story of 9-year-old Bruno!

This book has a unique charm that grabs you from the very beginning and doesn't let go. The way the author tells the story makes you feel as if you are right there with Bruno, experiencing his adventures and discoveries.

It's a powerful and moving tale that will make you think about life, friendship, and the consequences of war. I highly recommend this book to anyone looking for a great read that will stay with them long after they've turned the last page.

I have perused numerous excellent comments regarding this book; many assert that this book was a beloved favorite. However, my perspective will diverge.

Indeed, the story is beautiful and poignant; it delves into a complex and delicate subject, and everything related to the Holocaust and Nazism holds a certain allure for me. Nevertheless, it was not a personal favorite.

I failed to appreciate the characters, with the exception of Schmuel, whose experiences deeply touched me. Bruno's nature is rather insufferable; he is a naïve child who solely focuses on playing and complains due to the lack of friends. I understand that Bruno may not fully grasp what is transpiring, especially if no one has adequately explained it to him. However, at the age of nine, I believe a child is old enough to comprehend those strange occurrences when he witnesses people dressed identically, skinny and pale.

The writing style is smooth and uncomplicated. Nevertheless, I did not appreciate the author's tendency to repeat the same sentences several times, as if we had not understood. On the other hand, I did value the fact that he used the terms "furrier" for fuhrer and "Nodding" for Auschwitz, which would enable a child reading the book to understand and not become lost in difficult-to-comprehend terminology. The conclusion is harsh, albeit highly predictable.

In summary, it is a book suitable for both young and older adults, yet it did not manage to capture my attention.

I'm sorry Mr Boyne. You have indeed penned some truly amazing, life-altering, and beautiful books. I am a devoted fan, with several of your works firmly placed in my favorites list. However, this particular one was truly horrible!

I can think of no less than 35 different words to describe it, and they all amount to ridiculous. I can somewhat understand what you were attempting to achieve, and I do applaud your effort. But unfortunately, it missed the mark by a wide margin.

This overly simplistic portrayal of the Holocaust felt both inappropriate and extremely disrespectful. To take one of the worst events in recent history and reduce it to a childish tale made me feel unclean.

The entire story is rife with plot holes and childish gimmicks. The main character was not only extremely rude and ignorant but also completely unrelatable. How can the 8-year-old son of the commandant of Auschwitz not know who Hitler is, struggle to pronounce words he would have heard almost daily (such as Auschwitz and führer), and have no concept of what a Jew is? On the other hand, how could an 8-year-old be in an extermination camp known for killing millions of people for over a year and not understand what it means when people go "missing"? These children were able to come and go as they pleased, one being a prisoner and the other lacking all parental supervision, and have a daily meeting at an unguarded, unelectrified, and unsecured section of the fence, all of this occurring at the aforementioned death camp renowned for its high security and murderous guards. The whole thing just reeked of wrongness from the very beginning.

If you are going to write historical fiction, please make it at least somewhat believable and accurate.

Sorry for the negative review Mr Boyne. I truly am a huge fan.

The Boy in Striped Pajamas by John Boyne. This is my second time reading it. It's one of the few books where I actually preferred the movie. I'm reading it again in anticipation of the author's sequel, All the Broken Places.

The book offers an interesting perspective on World War II and Auschwitz through the eyes of a child. The father is a Commandant for Hitler and moves his family to Auschwitz. It's rather odd that he never told them what was on the other side of the fence. Nor did he warn them to stay away. Bruno, the main character, is completely oblivious to the horrors that surround him. His innocent curiosity leads him to make a friend on the other side of the fence, a boy in striped pajamas.

As I continue reading, I'm looking forward to learning more about Bruno's story. How will his friendship with the boy in striped pajamas develop? What will happen when he finally discovers the truth about Auschwitz? These questions keep me engaged and eager to turn the pages. I'm hoping that the sequel will provide some answers and continue to explore the themes of innocence, friendship, and the horrors of war.

No sé si debería hacer una reseña de este libro porque el editor específicamente decidió no hacerlo para no revelar nada sobre la historia. Supongo que podría tratar de revelar lo menos posible, tratando de imitar un poco el estilo del autor.

Bruno es un niño de 9 años cuya vida está a punto de cambiar. Él siempre ha vivido en una hermosa casa de 5 plantas en Berlín con Padre, Madre y su hermana. Pero debido a una orden del “Furias”, la familia debe dejar la hermosa casa, despedirse de sus amigos y abuelos, y ir a vivir en una horrenda casa de dos plantas, muy lejos de Berlín.

Aunque Bruno ha dicho muchas veces que no le gusta la idea de mudarse, sus padres no le hacen caso. Cuando llega a la nueva casa, ve una cerca muy, muy larga que parece interminable. Al otro lado de la cerca, hay muchas personas que se visten de pijamas de rayas, con gorras a juego y que siempre andan descalzos. También hay muchos niños que parecen estar jugando con los soldados. Bruno se pregunta por qué ellos pueden jugar y estar juntos, mientras que él no tiene a nadie para jugar.

Un día, Bruno decide explorar la cerca y encuentra a un niño llamado Shmuel. Aunque no debería hablar con extraños, Bruno decide hacerlo. Los dos niños entablan amistad rápidamente y quedan en visitarse todos los días.

Lo bueno: El estilo de narración es maravilloso. Tomando a un niño como narrador, nos hace ver el mundo a través de sus ojos, donde su inocencia es como una burbuja que lo separa de la realidad.

Lo malo: La narración es muy subjetiva. Como Bruno es un niño, no se explican muchas cosas. Si no se tienen conocimientos de la segunda guerra mundial, quizás no se entienda la historia.

En resumen, El niño con el pijama de rayas es una historia bonita, inocente y triste. Hay momentos en los que se desea entrar en el libro y ayudar a los personajes. Y el final, aunque se pueda esperar, sigue siendo conmovedor. Personalmente, no creo que este libro sea para niños. Lo recomendaría a mayores de 13 años.

Bruno has no inkling that his father is the Commandant of a concentration camp.

He simply believes that he resides in a place where people don strange striped pajamas.

Eager for attention, Bruno befriends Shmuel, a boy of his own age, yet someone he struggles to understand. Bruno's innocence and his friendship with Shmuel will ultimately lead to disastrous consequences for his life and that of his family.

Full Disclosure: I watched the movie prior to reading the book. And the movie was deeply moving. So, I thought, the book must be exceptionally better, as is often the case. Right?

We are well aware of what we are confronting here. It is cruelty. Prejudice. The Holocaust. An abhorrent and unimaginable period in history.

What befell both Shmuel and Bruno was truly devastating. The movie depicted Bruno following Shmuel, and we instinctively knew what was about to occur. Fade to black.

In the book...(I won't reveal any spoilers). I felt a sense of emptiness upon finishing it.

I don't think sharing the last paragraph of the book will give anything away, so let me present it to you...

"And that's the end of the story about Bruno and his family. Of course all this happened a long time ago and nothing like that could ever happen again. Not in this day and age."

I wonder. 2.5 stars.

4.5 stars!

An extremely powerful little story that has the ability to touch the hearts of its readers.

This short narrative packs a punch with its engaging plot and well-developed characters.

Despite its brevity, it manages to convey a profound message that lingers in the mind long after the last word is read.

The author's skillful use of language and vivid descriptions bring the story to life, making it easy for the reader to immerse themselves in the fictional world.

Whether you're looking for a quick read that will leave you feeling inspired or a thought-provoking piece of literature, this little story is sure to deliver.

It's a testament to the power of good storytelling and a must-read for anyone who appreciates quality fiction.

Overall, it's an outstanding piece of work that earns its 4.5-star rating and then some.

Highly recommended!

I've had this book on my To-Read list for a long time, as I truly relish reading books of this genre. I haven't watched the movie, and I really had no inkling of what to anticipate from this one. That being said, I wish I could have cherished it more than I actually did.

The story is recounted in the 3rd person limited perspective, that of a 9-year-old boy named Bruno. Bruno, our protagonist, is unexpectedly relocated from his spacious 5-floor (including the basement and the small room with the high window at the top) home in Berlin to Out-With. Here, the house has only 3 floors (counting the basement), and he's bored, friendless, with nowhere to explore and nothing to do except gaze at the people behind the fence wearing striped pajamas.

Bruno is completely unaware of who the people behind the fence are, why they are there, or anything really. And it simply wasn't credible to me that he could be so obliviously naïve. This is one of the major flaws I had with this book and a significant reason why I found it so disappointing in the end.

I have several reasons for not believing in Bruno's "innocence". Firstly, Bruno was born in Berlin in 1934, well within the Nazi party's regime. I find it hard to believe that Bruno could have lived 9 years in this environment of anti-Semitism and never even heard of a Jew before. He attended public school and associated with other boys of his age and older. Bruno's own father is in the Nazi military, had "The Fury" over for dinner, and received personal orders from "The Fury". I don't believe that the term "Jew" was never once uttered in Bruno's presence, whether at school, on the street (which is so crowded that one could be pushed around), or in his own household.

People who hate, especially in an environment where that hatred is not only tolerated but encouraged and regarded as "right", usually express their hatred loudly. It's not something we're born with; it's something we must be taught. That's how racism functions. So it doesn't make sense to me that someone like Bruno's father, who clearly believes that Jews are inferior, that Germans have been wronged by the Jews, that Jews should be punished, and that those who disagree are at best cowards and at worst traitors, would fail to distinguish between "us" and "them" for his son.

And Bruno is not stupid, although he is rather self-centered and views everything around him in terms of his own life experiences. But he notices things, even if he doesn't understand them or their significance. And we see throughout the story that when he's curious enough about something, he'll seek information about it, even if he doesn't always learn the correct information, since usually his equally self-centered and ignorant sister is providing the answers. But still, it just doesn't work for me that he should be depicted as such an innocent blank slate.

I grew up in an area where racism was prevalent, but fortunately, my mom taught me differently from an early age, around the time I could talk. Young children imitate, and at some point, every child will have heard something they shouldn't have and repeated it. It's inevitable. Young children also ask countless embarrassing questions. "Mommy, why is that lady's skin so dark?" "Mommy, why is that man so fat?" "Mommy, why does that man get a yellow star? I want a star!" Just ask Louis CK about the Why Game. I don't have kids, but even I know that it never ends. Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Over and over again...

Any of these situations would have been the perfect opportunity for Nazi Dad to say, "Well, little Bruno, that man gets a star because he's a Jew, and we're rounding him, his family, and everyone like him up so that we can cleanse the earth of their filth." But he didn't, apparently, which begs the question: Why not? The Nazis were in power, and they even had programs specifically designed for indoctrinating kids. But little Bruno was kept ignorant of the attitudes of the period. Because if he hadn't been, then this story wouldn't be possible: Bruno wouldn't have been that innocent, naïve, oblivious blank slate he had to be. And that's a huge plot hole for me and a big disappointment.

Moving on to the writing itself, I must say that, once again, it was somewhat of a letdown. Well, the writing wasn't abysmal, but some of the techniques employed within it were extremely irritating. Like this line: "The rope was easy enough to find as there were bales of it in the basement of the house and it didn't take long to do something extremely dangerous and find a sharp knife and cut as many lengths of it as he thought he might need."

Firstly, why does the narrator feel the need to specify that knives are dangerous? Because Bruno is 9? Secondly, not only is it a run-on sentence, but what exactly is "extremely dangerous"? Finding the sharp knife or using it? Thirdly, why even mention the tool used at all? Why not just say, "The rope was easy enough to find as there were bales of it in the basement of the house and it didn't take long to cut as many lengths of it as he thought he might need." It feels very much as if the narrator was talking down to the reader and perhaps trying to protect them. I'm not a big fan of that. Let readers think for themselves.

Another two examples of this protection thing:
1) The narrator has a bad habit of censoring the terms the Nazis used to describe Jews. " 'Hey, you!' he shouted, then adding a word that Bruno did not understand. 'Come over here, you--' He said the word again, and something about the harsh sound of it made Bruno look away and feel ashamed to be part of this at all."

Bruno may not know the term, but why censor it? Let's look at Harry Potter for a moment. When Hermione is first called a Mudblood by Draco Malfoy, it's not censored, despite Harry not knowing the term. Instead, he deduces from the context that it's derogatory and ugly, and we, as the reader, do the same. That's the proper way to communicate with readers and trust them to understand and be shocked by the term and its intention.

2) The narrator cuts away from anything resembling violent action. In a scene where a Jewish waiter spills wine on a Nazi soldier, we're given this: "What happened then was both unexpected and extremely unpleasant. [Nazi] grew very angry with [Jew] and no one [...] stepped in to stop him doing what he did next, even though none of them could watch."

I censored the names, but regarding the action in that scene, that's all there is. Of course, we can imagine what happened. Of course, we know how brutal Nazis, and people in general, can be. But then at the end of the story, we're left with these lines: "Of course all this happened a long time ago and nothing like that could ever happen again.
Not in this day and age."

Nice. Some reverse psychology there. Tell us nothing like that could happen now because we're all so tolerant and peaceful. The aim is that we start wondering whether it could happen or even whether it could be happening now. Subtle. Except again it fails because we learn nothing at all from this book. What's the point? "Pay attention"? To what? If Boyne isn't even willing to name the behavior we're supposed to think is so bad, isn't willing to show people how needlessly cruel, brutal, and inhumanly awful people have been to others, what the hell is preventing us from being that way now? We wouldn't recognize it if we saw it. We don't learn anything by promoting ignorance and whitewashing the past.

Bruno may not have understood what was happening around him, but a skilled writer takes that character's lack of understanding and reveals the truth to the reader. Boyne attempted this and succeeded to a small extent in that the reader understood more of what the Jews were enduring than Bruno did. But too much was avoided under the guise of protecting the reader, and overall, it failed. Bruno never learned anything. He never developed as a character. He was as self-centered at the end as he was at the beginning. Disappointing.

This book could have been incredibly powerful by presenting the true horror of Auschwitz through the eyes of a child. But it didn't. It evaded everything that would have mattered. And that's the most significant disappointment of all.

This is a small yet engrossing fable that delves into the profound themes of the death of the body and the destruction of the soul. In the characteristic style of fables, its connection to reality is somewhat tenuous. The hero here functions more as a protagonist who propels the action forward, rather than a fully-realized character. Seen from this perspective, it is truly a brilliant and unputdownable book. However, when regarded as fiction, it does have its flaws. Interestingly, these very flaws are what give it the essence of a fable.

Reading through other people's reviews, it becomes evident that the book polarizes readers, with some giving it a single star while others awarding it four or five. The subject matter is undoubtedly one that elicits intense emotions in many and also a longing for accuracy. But it's important to remember that this is a novel and doesn't have to adhere to the same standards as history.

It is definitely a worthy read for anyone who has even a modicum of prior knowledge about the Holocaust. It offers a unique perspective and invites readers to reflect on the complex and harrowing events of that era.

I didn't have a deep love for this work initially.

However, I truly did appreciate one aspect. It had an extremely powerful message that really hit home.

Moreover, the ending was completely unexpected, which added an element of surprise.

My feelings towards it were significantly altered when the author described the story as a fable.

In that context, the abstractness of the narrative made a great deal more sense.

It became clear that the author was using the fable format to convey deeper meanings and lessons.

Overall, despite my initial reservations, it was definitely an unforgettable read.

The combination of the powerful message, the unexpected ending, and the unique fable-like quality made it a work that will stay with me for a long time.

It serves as a reminder that sometimes, even works that don't immediately appeal to us can have great value and impact if we look beyond the surface.

I was asked for my comments on this book.

It's a tender book - a fast read. Written as a 'fable', which is a way to talk about the Holocaust with children.

Actually, I think the movie is better. It's rare that a movie is better than a book, but sometimes it happens.

However, there is a MUCH better *book*, and it's a TRUE STORY. That book is "Night" by Elie Wiesal. In "Night", Wiesal vividly describes his experiences during the Holocaust. The book is not only a powerful account of the atrocities committed during that time but also a profound exploration of the human spirit in the face of extreme adversity. It makes the reader truly understand the horror and the impact of the Holocaust. While the other book may have its merits as a fable for children, "Night" is a masterpiece that should be read by everyone to gain a deeper understanding of this dark chapter in history.