In class we touched on the notion there being something called a "pure" which is what most seem to think of when they think of gifts. It is a kind of benevolent gift which needs no reciprocation and how this is in contrast to what an actual gift is. An actual gift needing something in return even if that something is just a thank you. I was wondering if anyone had ever read "The Giving Tree" by Shel Silverstein as a child or an adult and what we could take the message of that book to be. Is it the case that the tree is acting in a manner in which it is exemplifying the ideal form of gifting giving and portraying it to be the way it should or criticizing this ideal?
The story is really easy to find online, in case you have not read it. I also found this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TZCP6OqRlE
It is the youtube link of an animation of the book being read by Shel Silerstein, although I must admit that the sound is not that great, so if you do not know the book already it might be a bit a hard.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good find. For a story with a happy ending to each chapter, it's very sad. It's a little hard to say what the message is.
ReplyDeleteIt appears as though the tree is giving gifts to the boy without ever receiving some form of reciprocation. It might be argued that these selfless arboreal donations are examples of a pure gift; a gift that was given without requiring reciprocation.
ReplyDeleteI would argue, however, that the tree appears to desire some form of reciprocation though. Although it never requires it, and it continues to give the boy gifts regardless, the tree desired, and expected, that the boy would play with her as he once did when he was young, or at least spend time with her. I think that this is an important distinction to make; that although the tree gives these gifts without any "strings-attached," it still expected some form of reciprocity.
I am not certain that tree expects anything back from the boy. It does not seem that the tree is giving in or to receive, it simply wants to offer what it can to the boy in order for the boy to feel happiness. I guess it could be argued that since the tree is feeling happiness through this action it is somehow receiving something. Although, I do not think that there is an expectation of it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Bretticus that, although the tree never asks anything in return, it hopes for and needs reciprocation, as otherwise the gift dissipates rather than continuing to give. As I think about the story, I more and more see it as a tragedy (and perhaps an environmental parable), notwithstanding the moments of happiness the tree feels when the boy accepts its gifts. The arboreal impulse to generosity may be virtually unlimited, so the requirement for return is not merely personal, but rather structural -- the gift dies instead of generating new life if the recipient merely takes. That's hau it works.
ReplyDeleteThe audience is unaware as to whether the gift has dissipated, merely due to the tree not getting anything in return. I could very well be the case that the boy has gone on to give to others. Also considering that the tree continues to give, without getting something in return, could show that it has not needed reciprocation from the boy to continue giving.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me like the tree finds reciprocation in the form of the boy's love for it and gratitude for the gifts. Once the boy starts being less grateful for the gifts of the tree and wants more than what the tree can give him, that reciprocation fades and the tree is sad, having gotten no reciprocation. At this point, the gifts seem more like mere commodities.
ReplyDeleteThe tree finally says to the boy that she can no longer give him any gifts for she no longer has anything to give. She tells him this, yet he still requires a gift from her, "just a quiet place to rest" and without a moment's hesitation - it seems - the tree willingly offers her stump as a seat for the boy. In the end, it still matters to the tree that the boy requests a gift from her. His mere presence is the reciprocation, I think. And her willingness to continue giving, even with what little she possesses, is evident of the power of social bonding - even when it is bonding between man and nature.
ReplyDelete