The Bookworms had an excellent discussion about the issues raised in the book, so a provoking read if not an entirely satisfying one.
The writing was unadorned and matter-of-fact and there was little insight into the private lives of the two main characters. They were defined mainly by actions rather than words. The relationship seemed fairly cold and unemotional - certainly on Hanna's side
The core relationship between Michael and Hanna raised many questions:
Where did our sympathies lie between the two?
Was Michael exploited for Hanna's gratification, suffering because of it for the rest of his life? Did Michael feel too ashamed of her to seek her out, or re-connect with her later?
Two of us were not convinced by the central device of illiteracy and it also seemed unlikely that the affair between M & H would progress so far with out being detected.
Lots of moral an philosophical issues were raised.
How far was Hanna culpable in her role as concentration camp guard? Was she fully aware and complicit in the deaths of the inmates? How far was she guilty of the deaths in the church?
Should Michael have told the judge of Hanna's illiteracy and thereby overrule her own choice?
The question put by Hanna to the judge, "What would you have done?" is also put to the reader.
How complicit are we in the evils of the world if we do not seek to redress them by our actions?.
Thoughts since the group.
Did Hanna accept the blame for the deaths in the church not because of fear of the exposure of her illiteracy or because by sacrificing her freedom she can make an act of atonement?
It has been suggested that Hanna's illiteracy which shut her off from full knowledge of the horrors of the camps is a metaphor for the "blind eyes" of many of the German population.
The writing was unadorned and matter-of-fact and there was little insight into the private lives of the two main characters. They were defined mainly by actions rather than words. The relationship seemed fairly cold and unemotional - certainly on Hanna's side
The core relationship between Michael and Hanna raised many questions:
Where did our sympathies lie between the two?
Was Michael exploited for Hanna's gratification, suffering because of it for the rest of his life? Did Michael feel too ashamed of her to seek her out, or re-connect with her later?
Two of us were not convinced by the central device of illiteracy and it also seemed unlikely that the affair between M & H would progress so far with out being detected.
Lots of moral an philosophical issues were raised.
How far was Hanna culpable in her role as concentration camp guard? Was she fully aware and complicit in the deaths of the inmates? How far was she guilty of the deaths in the church?
Should Michael have told the judge of Hanna's illiteracy and thereby overrule her own choice?
The question put by Hanna to the judge, "What would you have done?" is also put to the reader.
How complicit are we in the evils of the world if we do not seek to redress them by our actions?.
Thoughts since the group.
Did Hanna accept the blame for the deaths in the church not because of fear of the exposure of her illiteracy or because by sacrificing her freedom she can make an act of atonement?
It has been suggested that Hanna's illiteracy which shut her off from full knowledge of the horrors of the camps is a metaphor for the "blind eyes" of many of the German population.