John Boyne is an outstanding writer.

The other book I have read written by him, namely A History of Loneliness, was an adult novel, brimming with an adult voice.

This current book, however, showcases his versatility as a writer as it is a YA novella, flawlessly written in the voice of a child.

It presents a heart-wrenching story about childhood innocence and naïveté, set against the backdrop of the horror, violence, and complicity of the adult world in Nazi Germany during World War II.

The book was assigned as reading for my granddaughter in her class. She is fifteen years old.

It is a relatively easy read for adults, until one reaches the end of the story.

The emotional impact of the ending could prove to be quite challenging for a compassionate teenager.

I can well understand how she might struggle to finish it.

Overall, John Boyne's writing in this YA novella is both engaging and thought-provoking, making it a worthy read despite the potentially difficult emotions it may evoke.

I feel extremely emotionally manipulated, and I utterly despise that.

I was aware that the ending of this book was going to be sorrowful. It wasn't what I had anticipated; in fact, it was likely the furthest from my expectations. And indeed, it is sad, but I feel as if I have no alternative but to be sad. This book wasn't truly about the Holocaust; it wasn't really about the relationship between a German boy and a Jewish boy during the Holocaust. Instead, it was a book that was constructed up to that penultimate chapter with the sole intention of making readers sad, angry, and upset. Honestly, I believe there is no other way to interpret this book except that it was written solely for the purpose of distressing the reader and invoking some intense negative reaction. This book merely desired a response. I do feel sad at the moment, yes, but that's because I truly have no other choice; I was emotionally manipulated into feeling this way. A little innocent boy meets another little innocent boy, and a horrible thing occurs, and therefore I must feel upset, no questions asked, no room for other emotions, feelings, or opinions. So, yes, this book was sad and made me sad, but that's all it accomplished. And this emotional manipulation actually makes me rather angry because I was anticipating something truly remarkable and, I don't know, profound from this book? I almost feel betrayed. I wanted something great, and instead, I received a book that leaves no room for any personal interpretation or real personal meaning.

I don't wish to sound insensitive (I don't think I do, but I'm just going to state this anyway): obviously, the Holocaust was absolutely horrifying, and what happened at the end of this book was terrible, but... this book just didn't seem like the appropriate way to write about this topic. And I know there really is no right way, but something about it just didn't sit right with me.

It was an interesting perspective on the Holocaust, though, through the eyes of someone so innocent. However, I can't believe that with a father like the one Bruno had, after living within 50 feet of Auschwitz for a year, Bruno still knew absolutely nothing about what was happening. That is really not realistic. If his father was in charge of Auschwitz, you can bet his son would know why there were people there, generally what was going on. Bruno would have the mindset that he was superior to Schmuel and everyone else in the camp. He might have been young, but children are extremely impressionable, and he would have believed anything his father told him.

The point of view of this story was very interesting and different, I'll give it that. And I liked the writing style: it was very simple yet had a certain charm. I wish the relationship between the boys had been written a little differently somehow; I don't know how. Again, something about this book just feels a little off to me. I don't hate the book. But I don't love it either.

This book is truly adored.

I have this strange feeling of uncertainty. I think? Maybe I'm a bit scared that I might not like it.

But I'm still hoping for the best.

You can read this and all of my reviews at Lit·Wit·Wine·Dine.

Since I am the last of the 4.357 gagillion readers out there to read The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, I won't rehash what can be read in the blurb. Instead, I'm going to limit my review to the few points I found to be most important.

This is a YA novel, and the easy, simple way in which it is written really punctuates one of the main themes: the innocence and naiveté of children. At times, I felt Bruno was a bit of a spoiled turd. But then I felt guilty for feeling that way. I'm not sure I need to feel guilty though. After all, don't most nine-year-olds behave like turds every now and then? It didn't make me like him any less.

I also appreciated the way the relationship between his parents was portrayed. Most of it went over Bruno's head, which, once again, illustrated his naiveté and the often false sense of security children feel within their family. There is so much to be said about Bruno's looking out his window and imagining a life for the people he saw, which was so far off from their experience. This would be a great discussion point for a book club.

Bruno's friendship with Shmuel created an anxiety that made turning the pages both compelling and daunting. And that ending! Wow, I really didn't see that coming until the very last minute. I can't really discuss it without spoilers, but I can think of several themes folded in. And those last sentences? Scary and timely! It could definitely inspire a very lively book club discussion/debate.

Although I found the book to be very sad and very touching, it didn't make me cry the way I had anticipated. Perhaps because I was expecting it to be sad. I had been warned on multiple occasions to read with a box of tissue at my side. I'm certainly glad I read this book and continue to be a huge fan of Boyne's work.

I hardly know where to begin bashing this book.

Let's start with the young characters. We have a 9-year-old boy and his 12-year-old sister who read at levels much lower than their ages, which seems rather odd.

Then there's the issue of imperial measurements being used despite the German setting. It just doesn't fit.

The German boy, raised in Berlin, has some really strange misunderstandings. He thinks that Der Führer is "The Fury" and Auschwitz is "Out-With," even after being corrected and seeing it written down.

There are also numerous English-language idioms and mishearings, despite being told that he only speaks German. And the fact that he believes "Heil Hitler!" is a fancy word for hello because he understands neither "Heil" nor "Hitler" is just absurd.

Maybe these are seen as fussy issues, but they add up. Instead, let's look at the plot holes. Bruno, whose father is a high-ranking official in "The Fury"'s regime,居然不知道什么是犹太人，也不知道自己住在集中营隔壁。

He doesn't realize that the people in "striped pajamas" are being killed when soldiers stand close and there are sounds like gunshots.

There's a section of the fence that is unpatrolled and can be lifted high enough to pass food and a small boy through, yet nobody tries to escape through it.

And Shmuel, a frail 9-year-old boy, somehow survives over a year in a Nazi camp.

The author's refusal to use the word "Auschwitz" in an attempt to make the book about any camp and add universality to Bruno's experience also feels wrong.

In an interview at the end of the audio version, the author addressed criticisms, but his responses were not satisfactory. He seemed to think that people who criticized Bruno's innocence were trivializing the message of the book, but in fact, it's his treatment of the Holocaust that is superficial, misleading, and even offensive.

As an audio recording, it's just okay. The narrator did his best, but the added music was inconsistent.

Two other notes: usually, you can't be negative about a Holocaust-themed book without being an asshole, but this book's fictionalizing makes it far enough removed from Auschwitz that it's okay to be critical.

And this book doesn't land on my "run away! Save yourself!" shelf because it's not comically bad. It's just plain offensive and shallow.

There is nothing worthy of learning from this book. It has numerous aspects that are dislikable. From certain viewpoints, it can even be considered detestable.

Firstly, there is the authorial conceit of writing the work from a child's perspective. The worst instance of this is seen in the euphemisms used for the Fuhrer ('the Fury') and for Auschwitz ('Out With'), which become increasingly irritating as the story progresses. Bruno's 'difficulty' with these words is supposed to charm us, and allegedly gives the reader 'in the know' a soft, patronizing glow, presumably to create a certain kind of sympathy for Bruno. It's interesting to note that Bruno had no trouble with the Boy in the Striped Pyjamas' name of Schmuel. The same cuteness is present in the description of the prison garb as 'striped pyjamas', although that is less irritating. It's really stretching the imagination to assume that Bruno is as naïve as depicted. At age 8/9, he would have been in school and subject to the indoctrination of the Hitler Youth, and would surely have been fully aware of Hitler and how to pronounce Fuhrer!

Indeed, it is this apparent ignorance of even the most basic aspects of Hitler's Germany and its attitude towards Jews, which would have been brainwashed into the minds of German Youth, that is hardest to come to terms with. The author's 'childlike' writing allows him to draw several obscuring veils over the whole issue. Even at the end, as Bruno and Schmuel go hand in hand into the 'darkness' and 'disappear', there is really nothing to indicate what happened to them. A child reading this, without any knowledge of the horrors of Auschwitz, could be forgiven for believing simply that they 'disappeared' into some mysterious unknown. Thus, despite its cutesy language, the book is clearly intended for adults who presumably do know what happened to them, and that fact alone makes the writing condescending and patronizing, to say the least.

Since the reader is presumed to know these things, they will also know that the situation described in the book could never have happened. There is sufficient doubt as to whether any 8/9-year-old child would have survived past the first few hours at Auschwitz, except perhaps as 'medical experiment' subjects. It's hard to believe that Schmuel could have consistently met Bruno for a whole year without being discovered and dealt with. And in any case, would he really have had access to a depot where other 'striped pyjamas' of Bruno's size were stored? And, by the way, isn't it convenient that Schmuel speaks German? If he had been from another country and spoken a different language, who knows how the story might have gone?

These are just some of the many irritations in the book. The author has tried to justify it by arguing that the story is a fable and that these things don't matter. But if it's a fable, then fables usually teach a moral. What is the moral in this story? Don't trust the friendship of Jews? Innocence and ignorance offer no protection from awful things happening to you? The fact that people are saddened or even shocked by the ending is even more repellent. The sadness seems to be reserved for poor, innocent, ignorant Bruno, who goes to his death still innocent and still ignorant. Because of the 'hiding' of the reality of the Auschwitz atrocities, the whole situation regarding Schmuel and the other victims seems to disappear, just as Schmuel and Bruno do. Sad, isn't it?

I can't help but feel deep repulsion towards this 'fable'. That such a deeply offensive approach is somehow easily disregarded because of a twee authorial trick of using sweet, sugary language, and helps make it such a popular, 'safe' book, makes me despair at the dulling of any critical faculties or acumen on the part of the public who love it. The book is inane, poorly written, historically inaccurate, lacking in any sense of moral teaching, and hardly inspiring. It is banal.

In the face of the non-trivial challenges, I read a children's literature book that deals with the Holocaust during the "Great Storm" war.

In a parallel world - before October 7th - I would have written how this novel is excellent; in its narrative, construction, and language. And it is indeed so.

But I find myself with each line of the book asking: how can the story of the Palestinian tragedy be twisted, ground, and dissolved as a ready-made solution in the framework of a children's story?

That can be done, and there are those who are good at telling children, no doubt. The children who study their history. These do not include Palestinian children.

We Palestinians are keen on telling, but it is not twisted or dissolved; it is told from the experienced memory and the lived reality.

The tragedy can be recounted to the children of the world with gentle, cautious tools, and with calculated steps, words, and hints.

For all the children of the world, except Palestinian children.

The story says in its last line: "And it is absolutely impossible for events of this kind to recur. Not in our era, nor in our days."

I read the line, and I wrote it, and the bombers buzzed in my ears.

The hateful voice that denies that events of this kind do not recur.

The barbed wire fences, similar to those in "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas" with its powerful message, still exist. There is a slim chance that they will completely disappear. But whatever your reaction to this book may be, I hope that the cries of Bruno and Shmuel will continue to echo in your heart and mind, just as they always do in mine. Their lost cries must continue until they reach our ears. Their untold stories must continue until they are passed from mouth to mouth, for they represent those who are no longer alive to tell their own tales.

"The Boy in the Striped Pajamas" is a book that, once you get your hands on it, you will not put it down until you finish it. Just as the author wrote it with such speed. After its publication, the book was placed in the category of children's and young adult books and also won awards in this category. However, due to its universal and humanistic themes, it quickly became a beloved romance among adults and a film was also made based on it and shown on the cinema screen.

The book depicts the world of children who have no concept of walls, wires, and fences. Children who are placed in a cruel world where they must either be in a disturbing position or be victims. There is no other way, there is no middle ground between the two, only a thin fence separates the two. The author, by choosing two children as the hero and the complementary character of the book, has shown a special wisdom and in this way has easily been able to present the human and moral values through a dialogue between the two children without any pretense, prejudice, and judgment - a dialogue free from any ism -

Bruno is so far away from the mischievous environment of the concentration camp and his time that he does not understand the horrible events happening around him at all. In the story, the innocence of Bruno and Shmuel is in contrast to the brutality of the Nazi soldiers - the main mischief of the time - and it is this innocence that, while reading the dialogues, immediately affects the reader.

John Boyne, while writing this work, had the Auschwitz concentration camp in mind, but he refrains from naming the concentration camp. Because the fence and the concentration camp did not and do not exist only in Auschwitz and Nazi Germany, but belong to all the dark eras and periods of human history. "Like the barbed wire fences like here, they exist all over the world. I hope you will never encounter such barbed wire fences"

In 2008, a film was made based on this work, directed by Mark Herman.

4/5 stars

I truly knew the end of this story, yet it still had an incredibly powerful impact on me.

Especially that final line:

"Of course all this happened a very long time ago and nothing like this could ever happen again. Not in this day and age."

This line really struck a chord because, in the present day, 12 years after the publication of this book, the idea of another holocaust targeting a minority group doesn't seem so far-fetched considering the current state of the world.

The events and circumstances described in the book, although set in the past, have an eerie resemblance to some of the issues and conflicts we are facing today.

It serves as a reminder that history can repeat itself if we are not vigilant and take steps to prevent such atrocities from occurring again.

The book forces us to confront the harsh reality that discrimination and prejudice still exist, and we must do everything in our power to combat them.

Overall, this book is a thought-provoking and powerful read that leaves a lasting impression.

A heart-wrenching story about the Holocaust is told from the perspective of a naive nine-year-old Bruno. His father is the Commandant. Bruno befriends a Jewish boy who lives on the other side of the fence. This innocent friendship blossoms in the most unexpected way. Bruno, completely unaware of the horror and injustice that surrounds him, plays and chats with his new friend. However, as the story progresses, the true nature of the situation begins to unfold. The ending of this book is truly unforgettable. It is a powerful reminder of the atrocities that took place during the Holocaust and the impact it had on countless lives. It makes us question how such evil could exist and forces us to reflect on the importance of tolerance and understanding.

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is an outstanding and deeply moving historical novel that has left an indelible mark on my heart. The author, John Boyne, has masterfully painted a vivid picture of the setting, making me feel as if I was right there, experiencing the events along with the characters. The story unfolds in a way that constantly tugs at your emotions, drawing you deeper and deeper into the lives of the protagonists.

What makes this book truly remarkable is the fact that it is told from the perspective of a nine-year-old German boy. This unique viewpoint allows us to see the world through the eyes of innocence, untainted by the hatred and prejudice that surrounds him. The friendship that develops between the two boys, one on each side of the fence, is both heartwarming and heart-wrenching. It serves as a powerful reminder that hate and prejudice are not innate qualities, but rather learned behaviors that are influenced by the world around us.

The ending of the book is truly unexpected and packs a powerful punch. It leaves you with a sense of shock and sadness, but also a newfound appreciation for the power of friendship and the importance of standing up against injustice. I cannot recommend this historical fiction highly enough. It is a must-read for anyone who wants to understand the human condition and the impact of war and prejudice on innocent lives.

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

Lincoln's doctor's dog. This is an old reference in the publishing industry, suggesting that writing about Lincoln, dogs, or doctors is a surefire way to make a book a bestseller. This led one author to title his book about publishing in the 1930s "Lincoln’s Doctor’s Dog." However, perhaps Lincoln, doctors, and dogs have fallen out of favor; instead, children, the Holocaust, and friendship are currently in vogue. So, the guaranteed formula for creating a bestseller is to write a story about children's friendship during the Holocaust, even if the author knows nothing about it.

"The Boy in Striped Pyjamas" is the so-called heart-warming (but really emotionally manipulative) story of the doomed friendship between two pre-teen boys, born on the same day (one a Jew and the other the son of a Nazi), and its inevitable tragic conclusion. Yes, that's right: get your handkerchiefs ready, folks.

When I review a book, I consider both the medium and the content. Sometimes, you'll find a great story that is poorly written; at other times, an average story will be made more palatable through excellent prose. Sometimes you have both, and the book becomes truly enjoyable. And when the medium and the content are so perfectly intertwined that they are inseparable, you have a truly great book.

Very rarely, you have the misfortune to come across a really abominable story that is also terribly written – and that's what happened to me with this book. The only good thing I can say about it is that it's a very quick read.

Now for the analysis.

The Background

This book is historical fiction (yes, I know the author claims it's a fable set during the Holocaust, but unfortunately, the Holocaust is history), yet it completely ignores historical accuracy. As far as I know, Auschwitz had no children; they were sent directly to the gas chambers upon arrival. But here we have a camp that is literally teeming with kids, almost like a kindergarten.

We also have a German child, Bruno, who, despite being the son of a high-ranking Nazi officer close to Hitler, doesn't know about Aryans, Jews, or the concentration camps. Granted, he may not be aware of the atrocities happening in those places, but in the real world, he would have been indoctrinated with the fairy tales of Aryan supremacy and the "Jewish problem." In the book, Bruno remains blissfully ignorant of all this until the end. He almost seems mentally challenged.

My knowledge of Auschwitz comes only from reading history books, but as far as I know, the camps were guarded by electrified fences and patrolled heavily around the clock. It wouldn't have been easy for someone to just lift up the barbed wire and crawl in. And how was Schmuel (the Jewish boy) able to constantly avoid the guards and come to the same spot at the fence where it was loose at the bottom? (Yes, it's a fable, I know: maybe the demands of the plot also had something to do with this historical manipulation?)

Characterisation

Bruno is easily one of the most annoying protagonists ever created. Naiveté I can understand, but outright stupidity is harder to fathom. The boy simply refuses to see what's happening right in front of his eyes. Even if he hasn't been indoctrinated (which is impossible, as I mentioned earlier, in Nazi Germany), he would have picked up a lot more. Children do.

Most of the other characters are cardboard cutouts, including Schmuel, the Jewish kid, who is just there as a prop to support the plot and move it along. They are all one-dimensional, except for the servant Maria and the Jewish doctor-turned-waiter Pavel. But they only serve to fill the space around Bruno.

The Writing

I could have forgiven Mr. Boyne for all these historical blunders and failures in characterisation if he had written good prose. But that's the worst part of the book – the prose is childish.

First, the repetition. Bruno's mouth forms an "O" and his hands stretch out at his sides every time he's surprised, which is quite often. Eventually, I started picturing him as a cartoon stick figure I used to draw as a kid. We're told that his sister Gretel is a Hopeless Case every time she's mentioned. The same with Father's office being Out Of Bounds At All Times And No Exceptions… I could go on and on.

As a teenager, I used to watch Hollywood war movies where all Germans spoke English. While I could understand that this was a gimmick to avoid subtitles, sometimes they spoke English with a German accent, maybe to highlight their "German-ness," which I found ridiculous. I had the same feeling about the puns Boyne used in this novel ("Fury" for Fuhrer and "Out-with" for Auschwitz). I don't even know if they would work in German.

However, the biggest problem was the child's POV. It's just idiotic… an adult talking baby talk and trying to imitate a child. Every now and then, the adult pops out from behind the façade ("we are all in the same boat, and it's leaking"). It's just tiresome.

The narrative was also problematic. Half the time, I wasn't sure if the author was writing an adult's novel with a child's viewpoint or a mature novel for children – it fails on both counts. As I said before, the child's POV doesn't work, and even with all the toned-down violence, it's not a suitable novel for children.

And plot holes… don't even get me started! From the loose fence under which one can crawl through, the story jumps from hole to hole until it drops into the biggest hole of them all, the tragic finale. By that time, Boyne is pushing all the emotional buttons, trying to bring on the tears in full force… but the real tragedy here is the death of literature.

I understand that this book is a bestseller, and I can see the reasons. I'm sorry to say that this seems to me like the shrewd marketing of human tragedy… and it was successful in this case.