Although both modern day “Gaza” and the movie “The Giver” are known as dystopian societies, “The Giver” has safer living conditions, is more organized, and less violent making it a society more people enjoy living in.
The dystopian society “The Giver,” has living conditions that are safer for the people than the dystopia Gaza. The people in Gaza are living in a dirty, dangerous, and a detrimental area. To demonstrate their living conditions, “Imagine bringing up children with no access to water, a leaking sewage system, and electricity for barely half the day. Or relying on UNRWA for food parcels to keep your family alive” (Abdullah 3). The people here are constantly starving and suffering due to retaining an insufficient amount of money. Additionally,
…show more content…
The unsanitary and harmful state negatively affect the way people in Gaza live each day. With meager resources of food and poor health conditions, surviving is a challenge in the impoverished society. Furthermore, life in “The Giver” involves safe living conditions that meet the needs of its people. Jonas, a twelve year old boy who grew up in this society had the privilege to receive memory from past events that few people there have witnessed. For instance, “I had learned that knowing what something is, is not the same as knowing how something feels” (Koenigsberg). A portion of the memories Jonas received had to do with poverty and illness. Since “The Giver’s” society has felicitous healthcare, sanitation, and a proper amount of food and drinks, the people living there have never experienced events similar to those. The safe living
The Giver was an example of a dystopian society. In this community citizen doesn`t had any freedom. It had a lots of information about why it was dystopian, but today I will talk about few thing. First reason was the natural world was banished and distrusted. Second was information, independent thought, and freedom were restricted. The last was they had fear of the out side world.
“I knew that there had been times in the past-terrible times-when people had destroyed others in haste, in fear, and had brought about their own destruction” (48). In the old days, when people in Jonas’s community valued individual needs, there were lots of terrible happenings: violence; and then the society ended up with general welfare and safety. It is difficult for us to think of a world without color, freedom, music and love, but in The Giver, the society denounces these things in order to make room for peace and safety. In The Giver, by having a society based on general welfare they gave safety to their people. No violence, no criminal activities, nor homicides.
Finally, when he knew that he could bear it no longer and would welcome death itself, he opened his eyes and was once again on the bed,” (Lowry 120). Jonas has lived his life in a Community that does not learn about the past memories. Due to this ignorance that the Community instilled in him, it is harder for him to deal with the memory of war. Moreover, the Community uses ignorance as a temporary solution so that the residents feel a false sense of happiness. Jonas can only now see that this is a temporary fix by experiencing the memories through his training.
Jonas decides to leave and change the lives of his people so that they can experience the truth. “The Giver rubbed Jonas’s hunched shoulders… We’ll make a plan” (155). Their plan involves leaving sameness and heading to Elsewhere, where Jonas knows the memories can be released to the people. He has a connection with Gabe, a special child who has experienced the memories, unlike the rest of the community. Jonas has a strong love for Gabe, and he longs to give him a better life. “We’re almost there, Gabriel” (178). Even with a sprained ankle, Jonas keeps pushing forward because he wants everyone to experience what The Giver has given him. He wants them to have a life where the truth is exposed. His determination allows him to make a change for a greater future in his community. This proves that Jonas has the strength to change his community for the
In these two societies, they both are similar by having a strict government that does not let anyone leave the community but however, in The Giver no body...
Set in a community with no climate, emotions, choices, or memories Lois Lowry tells the tale of Jonas in The Giver. Jonas is selected to be the receiver of memory, which means the memories of generations past, before the community was created, will all be transferred to him to hold. As Jonas receives memories his concept of the world around him drastically changes. Jonas starts out as twelve-year-old boy with perceptions different from those around him, he then begins to see the community for what it really is, and he makes a plan to change it.
The Giver presents a community that appears to be perfect on the surface. Jonas's community is free of warfare, pain, sorrow and other bitterness we suffer in our society. The world seems to be secure and undergoes little conflict. Such a community seems flawless and is the idealistic society that we longed to live in. However, through Jonas's training, the imperfections of the Utopian community are revealed.
Lowry writes The Giver in the dystopian genre to convey a worst-case scenario as to how modern society functions. A dystopia is an “illusion of a perfect society” under some form of control which makes criticism about a “societal norm” (Wright). Characteristics of a dystopian include restricted freedoms, society is under constant surveillance, and the citizens live in a dehumanized state and conform to uniform expectations (Wright). In The Giver, the community functions as a dystopian because everyone in the community conforms to the same rules and expectations. One would think that a community living with set rules and expectations would be better off, but in reality, it only limits what life has to offer. Instead, the community in the novel is a dystopian disguised as a utopian, and this is proven to the audience by the protagonist, Jonas. Jonas is just a norma...
The short story Harrison Bergeron helps support the idea that all Utopias are going to fail. In Harrison Bergeron characters like him find flaws in their “perfect” community and do something about it. In the Giver, Jonas is the character that rebels against the community because he is able to see past the lies set up by the elders and see the bad parts of it. Another reason it failed was because of the pain from the handicaps. Jonas’s community doesn’t experience any pain,except for Jonas and the Giver, Jonas makes a stand by escaping and leaving the memories of pain for the rest of the community.
Even though both the society in The Giver by Lois Lowry and modern society are both unique in their own ways, our society is a better society to live in. Our society gives us more freedom to choose for our own benefits and
Jonas’ community chooses Sameness rather than valuing individual expression. Although the possibility of individual choice sometimes involves risk, it also exposes Jonas to a wide range of joyful experiences from which his community has been shut away. Sameness may not be the best thing in the community because Jonas expresses how much he feels like Sameness is not right and wants there to be more individuality. Giver leads him to understand both the advantages and the disadvantages of personal choice, and in the end, he considers the risks worth the benefits. “Memories are forever.”
Jonas hates how his society decides to keep memories a secret from everyone. Jonas says: “The worst part of holding the memories is not the pain. It’s the loneliness of it. Memories need to be shared” (Lowry 154). Jonas feels that memories, whether it be good or bad, should be shared with everyone. Furthermore, memories allow the community to gain wisdom from remembering experiences of the past. As for The Giver, The Giver disagrees with how the community runs things. He believes that memories should be experienced by everyone as well, because life is meaningless without memories. The Giver says: “There are so many things I could tell them; things I wish they would change. But they don’t want change. Life here is so orderly, so predictable–so painless. It’s what they’ve chosen [...] It’s just that… without memories, it’s all meaningless. They gave that burden to me” (Lowry 103). The Giver is burdened with the responsibility to not share memories even though that is what he feels the community deserves. In addition, he believes the community lives a very monotonous life where nothing ever changes. Everything is meaningless without memories because the community does not know what it is like to be human without feelings. Overall, Jonas and The Giver’s outlooks on their “utopian” society change as they realize that without
The movie The Hunger Games (based on the novel by Suzanne Collins) and The Giver, a novel by Lois Lowry, both display governments that enforce strict rules in order to limit the freedom of their citizens. Both of these novels are centered on dystopian societies in which the government removes the freedom of choice and individuality in order to establish oppressive control over its citizens. Katniss and Jonas are the exception when it comes to the citizens of both “communities” and how they are overly controlled while being unaware of their loss of freedom. Both characters selflessly put themselves in danger in order to save their younger siblings, or adopted sibling in Jonas’s case, from the oppressive government. Katniss takes the place of her younger sister in the fight to the death, while Jonas takes responsibility of a young child by removing him from the corrupt and enclosed community in which they live. Both Katniss and Jonas challenge the oppressive rules in their communities by being brave and selfless.
The story in The Giver by Lois Lowry takes place in a community that is not normal. People cannot see color, it is an offense for somebody to touch others, and the community assigns people jobs and children. This unnamed community shown through Jonas’ eye, the main character in this novel, is a perfect society. There is no war, crime, and hunger. Most readers might take it for granted that the community in The Giver differs from the real society. However, there are several affinities between the society in present day and that in this fiction: estrangement of elderly people, suffering of surrogate mothers, and wanting of euthanasia.
Louis Lowry’s The Giver uses a dystopian society as a metaphor to show how one lives without pain and lacks knowledge of other places in order to give the reader a warring that society will never be perfect. “The Giver offers experiences that enhance readers levels of inquiry and reflection.” (Friedman & Cataldo pp102-112) At First glance the novel's setting seems to be a utopia, where all possible steps are taken to eliminate pain and anguish. Often the difference between a Utopia and a Dystopia is the author’s point of view. The difference between dystopia society and a utopian society is that a “dystopia is a world that should be perfect but ends up being horrible. Imagine dystopia as a world where the government gives everything to everyone for free. You would think it would be perfect, but imagine if that government oppressed everyone. Essentially a Dystopia is a utopia that has been corrupted.” (Levitas p1) A dystopian society is “Any society considered to be a undesirable, for any number of reasons. The term was coined as a converse to a Utopia, and is most used to refer to a fictional (often near-future) society where social trends are taken to a nightmarish extreme. Dystopias are frequently frequently written as warnings, or satires, showing current trends extrapolated to a nightmarish conclusion. A dystopia is all too closely connected to current day society.” As defined in The Giver (Telgan pp162-182). This is why I believe that Lowery is giving the reader a warring about how our world is changing. We have the power to stop it before it happens if we listen to warring signs and act accordingly. If we don’t listen to those signs our society will become a nightmarish environment, to live in. “ The Giver demonstrates how conflict can force us to examine our most important beliefs about what is right and true. Conflicts can change our worldly view of thing.” (Freidmane & Catadlo pp102-112)