The boy in the striped pyjamas - is it just me or

[Themumsnot]

is it a pile of sentimental tosh masquerading as a meaningful exploration of the issue of German responsibility for the concentration camps while actually completely trivialising the issue?
I've just had to read it for book group and I have to say I have rarely felt so repulsed by a book.

Not trivialising - it is aimed at children so has to be simplified.

I think the ending is a bit manipulative, but makes a point.

Interesting! I've not read it, but the facts were so horrific I can't see why any manipulation is necessary.

Is it for children though? On my copy it says it is a book about children but not for children (or something similar).

I think it's for older children/young adult/adult readers. It's recommended for children of KS3 age i.e. 11 plus.

I'm not sure I'd say that it necessarily trivialised anything rather that it was over-simplified and a bit contrived.

I enjoyed his 'Mutiny On The Bounty' one much more, though if you've read any history of the mutiny, the book is clearly pretty much lifted from a couple of specific books, I thought. Still interesting though.

I had heard a lot about the book and asked about it at my local library to which the lady pointed out the youth section. This was 2 years ago I was mortified :o

After reading it though I just could not understand the hype about it, it was definately simplified but the story itself was not actually that good IMO.

I then watched the movie which was even worse!

Random House, the publisher, says:

If you do start to read this book, you will go on a journey with a nine-year-old boy called Bruno. (Though this isn't a book for nine-year-olds.)

Surprised a year 5 child is given it to read tbh. But then I suppose I should read it first really.

It's definitely a kid lit book - speaking as a school librarian. Personally, I think a better book, again for children, is Morris Gleitzman's "Once". Although I wouldn't give that to a Year 5 as it's very affecting. The main character is a child, but his innocence is better drawn than in BITSP.

One thing in that book which really annoyed me was the boy constantly referring to "The Fuehrer" as "The Fury" as he is supposed to have misheard the name - but surely the boy is supposed to be German! So, he would know a word that means "Leader", surely?

AnnyR - are Judith Kerr's trilogy stocked in school libraries?

My 10 year old DD has read Anne Frank's Diary (the long version) and all three of the Judith Kerr books, but I would hesitate to give her this book not because of the subject matter but because I think it is emotionally dishonest and very manipulative. The character of Bruno is an utter construct - there never was a child of nine that oblivious to the goings on around him - and as Anny R points out the "Fury" conceit doesn't work at all nor does the "Out-With" thing.
I was under the impression that it was meant to be a cross-over book rather than a children's book, but whichever it is, I think it is pernicious.

Katharine - I have When Hitler Stole Pink Rabbit in my library, but rarely find students borrowing it, although I do suggest it to them. Not sure about other school libraries.

Just came on to say the 'Out-with' thing but you've beaten me to it!

I also think it's vile. There's been a thread about it here before where some of these ideas were discussed. You're not on your own in thinking this.

I think you've missed the point OP. The book is certainly geared towards younger readers, but more importantly it's meant to be seen through the eyes of a cosseted young German boy. Today I think it's hard to believe that he had no idea what was going on, but back then I imagine it wasn't too hard to shield children from it.

I totally get the point of what the author THINKS he is doing, but it is rubbish. There is no way that a boy in that situation would be so blinkered, so sheltered from reality. The whole book is based on a false premise.

I agree about the Fury and the Out-with, but I think we have no way of knowing what a boy of that age would know about, especially if they have been deliberately sheltered from reality. Maybe it's an implausible premise but I don't think it's vile. It's one way of exploring the subject.

I agree OP.
I HATE this book. Unless you have a lot of prior knowledge of what went on then it's utterly meaningless.
and it's just tripe tbh. It would never have happened.. the idea that someone could just slip under some fencing into a concentration camp is fucking moronic.

it made me really angry.

one virtue of the book - being able to predict an entire plot line from start to finish from the title, picture and blurb is a skill that can be further developed with this book

LOL Mercibucket - that is so true.

Am pretty well informed about the Holocaust (and WWI and WWII in general).Haven't read book in question but have seen film. Sorry - too tired to look up references to substantiate what I am saying but actually quite a few adults were blind to the reality so it is entirely believable that children were. I find the premise quite believable.

There was a thought provoking article in History Today about this a few months ago - many Germans believed the official line(or chose to believe the story through abject fear) that Jews were being resettled in Poland. Memorably, one Jewish escapee from an extermination camp made it to the US and spoke to jewish Americans and despite his first hand accounts about what was going on they didn't believe him - it simply wouldn't compute.

Secrecy and fear were rife in Hitler's Germany. Many things were simply not discussed, Shit - the Munich White Rose students were guillotined simply for leafleting!

Some people knew, many didn't, others suspected but chose not to 'go there' for fear of their lives.

Apparently people could smuggle themselves into and out of concentration camps thisisyesterday - this is the only example I have ever heard of though - The man who smuggled himself into Auschwitz

I suppose it might have been possible for a child not to have known much. Children weren't conscripted into the Hitler Youth until the age of ten.

Although, on the strength of this thread it's obviously a book to read within a subject, and a lot of further context and information is needed.

I wonder if young people reading this book also feel like Themumsno that the book is implausible. That is really a dangerous message to send to children in an official capacity i.e. as a school book about the Shoah.

Well the little boy in that 'Life Is Beautiful' film was blinkered/sheltered from reality and he was in one of those camps. Obviously far fetched - but a good story and great little film.
Striped Pyjamas is also a story. And one for young people/children.

It's hard to explain why I feel so strongly about it. It is not just because of the many factual inaccuracies, or even because I believe it is implausible that the son of the Auschwitz commandant could be so ignorant about what was happening around him that he didn't even know who Hitler was. It is because I think the book is fundamentally emotionally dishonest in every aspect - in how the characters relate to each other, in what they feel, think and do - and that all that dishonesty creates a version of reality that is so distorted that presenting it to children as somehow being a plausible representation of how things might have happened is simply wrong.