The Giving Tree

[prog]

Via jadelennox, I learn that The Giving Tree, one of my beloved books from childhood, has a great deal of controversy around it and is actually reviled by some children's literature scholars, herself included.

I find the controversy both surprising and interesting, but I think this is the first time I've seen a book I hold so dear (there are very few) get attacked like this. I put up a little defense for it in that thread, but seeing all the other commenters pour righteous scorn on it makes me feel queasy, as if all these people were rushing in to talk about how my Aunt Jan was actually a pirate who molested them as children or something. Bad news.

Comments

[kahuna-burger.livejournal.com]

Well there is a certain... user feel to the boy when you read it as an adult. At first he loves the tree as herself, but as the story progresses its all about what she can do for him. Never what he can do for her, which at first is only give her love, but later there isn't even any real show of gratitude. The happy ending is that she has one more thing to give to him, and that makes her feel good, not that he ever returns anything.

Not to say that I don't still have a soft spot for the book, but its a soft spot that wars with my intellect. Like listening to Angel in the Centerfold and having my enjopyment of the song occasionally intruded on by thinking about the lyrics.

[jtroutman.livejournal.com]

I have this book, and I have read it to my kids on several occasions. The Boy and the Tree do seem to have a rather one-sided relationship (all giving by the Tree). There are many interesting takes on this story, as you have pointed out.

I do note when I have read it to my kids, I have asked them what they think and if the boy should have done anything different. My older son has said that the boy should have been more polite and done more for the tree.

I think the discussion of the various implications of the story are at least as interesting as the story itself.

[spatch]

The smartest person out of all those smarty textbrick-writin' people was the person who asked his six-year-old son what he thought of the book.

Spare me the arguments on gender roles and self-entitlement with "the king of the forest" and all that. The tree loves the boy and wants to make the boy happy, and the boy knows the tree loves him and will support him all she can.

Maybe there's a hint of codependency in there, but honestly, you can claim that on any relationship built on giving.

[rserocki.livejournal.com]

I don't think I ever read the whole book (I know it's not long) and I saw just part of the cartoon version, but I remember thinking it was sad to me.

[chocorisu.livejournal.com]

I haven't read the book in full but I get the gist of it. I'm quite astounded by the degree with which people dislike it, and other children's books. This is the worst book anyone could give a child kind of opinions.

It seems to me that it's far better to expose a child to a wide range of opinions and stories, than attempt to program them with one set of morals. Real life is not that simple and it's better they're prepared to deal with the fact that most people have really peculiar moral values.

Honestly, it's like every book has to be the absolute truth and nothing but. I can't imagine where THAT idea comes from, oh wait, yes I can.

[jadelennox]

For the record, there are books I love which I find very problematic -- Horse and His Boy, Little Princess. I'm good at loving them and compartmentalizing the troubling until later, though.

[radtea.livejournal.com]

Dreadful book. My kids (and I) love Silverstein's poetry, and I bought that book for them way back when. We read it once, and then again a few days later to confirm that it really was as dreadful as it seemed on first reading. The kids were ambivalent about it--did't hate it, but certainly didn't have any special affection for it. I put it quietly away.

The tree gives everything. The boy/man/old-man takes everything. The end.

Yuck.

I never got the tree as feminine, so that part simply sailed by, but really, people who focus on the nominal gender roles as more important than the moral situation are missing the point. Plenty of men have willingly sacrificed everything, knowing that their only monument will be a far away tomb that respresents the remains that were never recovered from the mud.

But the unquestioning sacrifice and acceptance of that sacrifice int the book struck me as morally doubtful then and even moreso now. You don't have to mix the argument up with irrelevant issues of gender stereotyping to see that.

[popecrunch.livejournal.com]

I try to be a good UU and give equal time and consideration to all ideas and opinions but this controversy is giving my baloney meter stretch marks. If you squint just right you can use it as a metaphor for the message that sometimes unconditional love isn't very rewarding, and that being an unpleasant fact doesn't make it LESS of a fact or even a meaningless one. Is it a book that should be given to a kid in your care without any discussion or screening by the parent/guardian/captor? No. But then again, such things do not exist. Just because it's made of paper and not television doesn't mean it's any better of a mindless timefiller or babysitter. TALK TO YOUR CHILDREN PEOPLE IT IS NOT THAT HARD