Tuesday, March 22, 2011

.....and the men in the Nazi uniform

Book review of The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas by John Boyne

'The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas’ is a wonderfully told story. In the foreground runs a thread of an enduring friendship between two innocent boys, one, a son of a Nazi commandant and other a Jewish prisoner. In the background is the context of the Nazi holocaust. It is the intersection of these two that makes this story both captivating yet devastating. In that it has a strange parallel in Khaled Hosseini's 'Kite Runner'.

Bruno, the son of the Nazi Commandant is innocent enough to be oblivious of the greater designs that his people have for the people on the other side of the fence - all of whom strangely wear striped pyjamas . There is a subtle originality to this nine year old that sometimes would seem a perfect recipe for dissent against the overwhelming Nazi setup, but for his innocence. Or is it because of it?

He uncharacteristically disapproves the actions of his father’s soldiers and his father’s too. And asks questions as simple but as unconventional as – ‘Why should one be rude to some people?’ or ‘Is it fair to starve some people on the other side of the fence?’ This unconventionalism, in an age when the best of the intellect leaned towards Nazism, is attributed to the nine year old’s innocence, his inherent love and his unadulterated sympathy for other human beings. Through this, Boyne probably suggests that pure sympathy not yet bridled by the simplistic reasoning of political ideologies or stereotypes had the prudence to question the terrible acts. He portrays as coming from the boy’s innocence what couldn’t come from the intellect of some of the best of the minds of the time. So is this ‘pure sympathy’ the antidote to 'simplistic reasoning' then? Here is where I somewhat disagree with the theme of the story.  Is sympathy too not a product of our empirics? Is sympathy too not based on, rather than cogged or limited by our biases and even our prejudices? Is ‘Pure sympathy’ not as elusive a notion as ‘Pure reason’ itself?

The story is as much about the men in the Nazi uniform as it is about the ‘boy in the striped pyjamas’. It is important to understand that the Germans who were influenced by the Nazis were not people with horns. They were probably as charismatic, courageous and disciplined as anybody else in their daily lives. Demonization of their daily lives, as is done many times, leads to both obfuscation and wrong understanding of the potential at havoc that simplistic ideas can bring. It underestimates the ability of such political ideologies to capture the minds of good people which in my view is more dangerous than the political ideologies that only attract just the rogues. The challenge should be to understand how even good people went on to become one of the greatest barbarians of all times. That way this story has very few generalizations on this count, although many have pointed that such a story is quite unrealistic on many other counts.

The story, however tragic, ends with two lines filled with optimism: “This had happened a long time ago and nothing like it can ever happen again. Not in this day and age”. I share Boyne’s hope but am not as confident enough to share his optimism. The certitude that human mind has evolved enough not to be acted upon by such wild ideas again, is a bit hard to digest.

1 comment:

  1. Nice review, I saw the movie & liked it, its good that the childhood innocence does not understand the political things, so that atleast as children we can live a carefree life & make friends with whom we like to spend time...

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for your comment.
Abusive or anonymous posts are most likely to be ignored.