| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration will allow you to join in the discussion which is amazingly free of personal rancor and trolls! We are currently looking for posters from both the left and the right who have a demonstrated capacity to discuss fervently without letting personalities get in the way. Is that you? We need more staff. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Giving Tree | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Oct 14 2006, 02:38 PM (486 Views) | |
| Post #1 Oct 14 2006, 02:38 PM |
|
| Years ago, when I was young and smart, I read The Giving Tree. I thought the book, the boy and the tree were stupid. Then, a number of years later, I read it to my kids and thought the boy and the tree were stupid but I saw the book in a different light. Then, a few years back, I read the book to my class and I saw the tree in a different light but the boy was still stupid. Well, Tuesday, I read that book to my granddaughter and, guess what, now old myself, I know I'm stupid. |
Civil Servant
  ![]](http://z2.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
 
|
 |
| Post #2 Oct 14 2006, 04:17 PM | Son N Law |
|
Good ol' Shel. The world is undeniably a lesser place without hm. One of my all-time favorites, even to this day. By the way, you should seek out the new 40th Anniversary Edition of the book. It comes with a CD of Shel reading the entire story. If you've never heard him read his own work, you're missing out on one of life's greatest joys. |
Fool, apparently
|
|
|
|
| Post #3 Oct 14 2006, 06:49 PM | Tikvah |
| The question is does the tree love boy, and vice verse? |
Newbie
|
|
|
|
| Post #4 Oct 27 2006, 04:22 AM |
|
In my opinion, no. Neither of them love each other, and they'd do well to see psychologists. They're both just dependant on the other to fulfill their compulsion. The boy is a compulsive taker, and the tree is a compulsive giver. They love each other no more than a compulsive gambler loves gambling. The boy's attachment isn't to the tree, but rather to taking, and it's not a loving attachment; it's a compulsive and addictive attachment. Similarly, the tree's attachment isn't to the boy, but to giving, and it's not a loving attachment; it's a compulsive and addictive attachment All in all, the key way to see that they do not love each other is to realize a loving relationship is mutual. In a loving relationship, each person would give and take at an effectively equal amount. And, in a loving relationship the people would have ended up happy and blissful, rather than as two pathetic stumps who have let their compulsions destroy them. If you ever see a rundown crackhead in the street, you'll find the crackhead creepily similar to the boy and the tree at the end of the book. Another creepy analogy is the cliché relationship between a physically abusive boyfriend and an attached girlfriend. If you're familiar with this, the abused female falls more and more in "love" with her abusive boyfriend as the relationship progresses. Of course, as we know from reading this post of mine, that's not really love. |
Civilian
|
|
|
|
| Post #5 Nov 2 2006, 11:48 AM |
|
|
Just some thoughts. Does a mother nurse a child only in expectation of return? If the tree hadn't given its leaves, they would eventually have fallen; its branches, not given, would have broken; its stump, not given, would have rotted. The boy comes back when the tree has nothing material left to give. |
Civil Servant
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
 Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. |
|
| « Previous Topic · Book Reviews · Next Topic » |
3:06 PM Feb 6