*** Official THE READER Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Michael Elliott]

I went away for the weekend and was surprised that you waited so long to reply. To be honest, I expected to read your reply when I got home but it wasn't here so I figured the debate had been dropped. I'm not sure why you waited so long to post that.

 

[SteveSs]

I have not seen this yet, but just finished the book. I am extremely anxious to see the film for a couple of reasons: (1) Kate seemed like the absolute best choice to play the part of Hanna, to the point where I'm actually picturing her as I read; and (2) I felt there was an abiguity in the book, where I felt that I did not know the true nature of Hanna's participation in the events of the night of the bombing. It seemed like she might have been accepting blame for others, and had no way to defend herself. My hope is that the film clears this up for me. No one here has yet to question her involvement, so it looks like I'll find that the allegations are treated as fact.

 

[Michael Elliott]

Major spoilers but since she couldn't read she did pretty much take the blame for the others. They received 4-year sentences while Kate's character got life in prison. Had she admitted to not knowing how to read then she would have been cleared in the court and gotten a lighter sentence.

But it all goes back to when she asked what she was suppose to have done.

 

[FamousWriter1]

I watched The Reader for the first time yesterday and was incredibly moved by the film. It raised so many questions in my mind. What was Hanna's history? Why was she illiterate and how did she end up being a guard? Why was the shame of illiteracy worse than admitting to not unlocking the door to the church? When she was in the court and said quite clearly that she had to do her job it made me think of the famous Milgram study where people just followed orders. Some people have a very concrete view of their work and maybe for her own self preservation she had placed all emotional repsonsiblity into the hands of her superiors. I do not condone her actions in anyway, I'm just trying to look at the psychology of the situation.

 

The fact that she was drawn to younger people (Michael and in the courtroom they mentioned how she was drawn to the younger prisoners) and that she was unable to read or write suggests that she had missed out on a childhood. Her emotional detachment also suggests a lack of nurturing and attachment difficulties.

 

As for Michael, did he remain distant his whole life simply because he had no closure to the situation? Had he himself ended the relationship would he have moved on and lived his life as a more emotionally open and content man? Why did he walk away from the prison during the trial? I can understand that he felt she should be punished but why did he let her take the blame for writing the report when he knew she couldn't write? I thought it was so sad all those years later when he visited her in the prison just before her death. She still held something over him and made him smile. Was it love or guilt that brought him to the prison and make arrangements for her release?

 

Fantastic film.