Book Review: "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas" by John Boyne

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas by John Boyne
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Amazon Book Description

Berlin 1942

When Bruno returns home from school one day, he discovers that his belongings are being packed in crates. His father has received a promotion and the family must move from their home to a new house far far away, where there is no one to play with and nothing to do. A tall fence running alongside stretches as far as the eye can see and cuts him off from the strange people he can see in the distance.

But Bruno longs to be an explorer and decides that there must be more to this desolate new place than meets the eye. While exploring his new environment, he meets another boy whose life and circumstances are very different to his own, and their meeting results in a friendship that has devastating consequences.


Where to start...I pondered whether or not to write a review on this novel as this appears to be one of those books that incites intense feelings across the spectrum. While I encourage conversation about a book and applaud the author who can inspire such a range of emotion,any mean-spirited and/or foul-mouthed comments on a book or someone who takes the time to share what a book meant to them is not something I tolerate or participate in. I hope that those who take the time and have an interest in my thoughts on the book will respect my personal point of view.

This is a short historical fiction book, marketed to the young adult genre and is the basis for one of the finest screenplays and film adaptations I have experienced. Without getting into the massive amount of criticism I have read about this book on many different sites, I wish to expound upon my interpretation of this novel of historical fiction. If you are looking for a synopsis of the book, there isn't much I would add to the publisher's submission. The story is one that is full of spoilers and to know more about the book before you start can really diminish the overall experience.

I read this book in one afternoon and it has taken me some time to decide what I personally took away from the book. In my opinion, the author purposely leaves a lot open for interpretation and I really had to think about how to assess the book as a separate work and not hold it up to the screen adaption. To me, the author took the basis of the Holocaust and used it as a backdrop to tell the story of two young boys from different worlds. These two worlds, represented in the book as the Jews and the Nazis, are separated by prejudice, hate, and fear and this is symbolized through the barbed wire fence that surrounded the concentration camp of Auschwitz. Two boys meet under the most unusual of circumstances and they work to build a friendship despite the barriers that the fence provides. The author never refers to the concentration camp as "Auschwitz" but as "out-with". I personally found this to be the work of a clever choice of terminology that allows the segregation of those deemed "less desirable" to be universal and not just to one specific camp or historical period in time. Throughout much of history, up to the present day, society has had its cliques and privileged classes that often send the message that if you don't "fit in", then "out with you" and anyone like you. When I looked at the terminology in that way I didn't feel the author did anything to diminish the intelligence of the main characters. If I review things objectively, there were plenty of people, Germans and of other nationalities, that knew nothing of Auschwitz. It certainly wasn't publicized that this was a death camp and at the same time there were many people who knew of Auschwitz and many of the other concentration camps but refused to acknowledge that something so atrocious was happening. To assume that Bruno, one of the two main characters, should have known the name of the camp, what it meant to be Jewish, or what was happening to those inside the camp is simply not a given.

The other area of creative freedom that has garnered much criticism is the author's use of the term "The Fury" instead of "The Fuhrer". Again, I allowed the author the creative license to make this story more universal than just that of one period in time. Ruthless dictators throughout history have lead through fear and intimidation and their wrath has certainly been doled out with fury. When I gave myself permission to step back and not take the author so literally, I really got so much more out of it. It allowed me to accept that Bruno wasn't ignorant or outlandishly oblivious to the association of "The Fuhrer" with Adolf Hitler. The important lesson to be remembered is that the actions that were carried out on behalf of a ruthless dictator had implications for everyone. The six million Jews and the millions of other human beings on the side of the Allied and Axis forces that perished during the war were victims of his fury.

If you don't want to read the book based on this or other reviews that you have read, at least give the movie a chance. It is one of those instances where the stunning work that the director did with excellent casting, cinematography and score all come together for an emotional movie watching experience.