The Giver Strength
Free Will, A Source of Strength: An Analysis of Choice in The Giver
Free will is crucial to an individual’s life, a source of strength for all humans. Lois Lowry’s The Giver (1993) is about sacrifice, rules and order, the consequences of peace, and ultimately, the significance of free will. Jonas, the protagonist, lives in an intended “Utopian society”. It is a society without passion nor apathy, independence nor enslavement, created in attempt to produce an orderly community where pain is nonexistent. Yet such society has a flaw—the lack of human rights. Free will is a vital element of an individual’s personal, professional, and political life. The supposed ideal life of Jonas’s community in The Giver fails to promote free will, contradicting …show more content…
There is no government in The Giver, but The Committee of Elders has absolute sovereignty over the Community. Article 21 of the UDHR acknowledges the freedom of one’s political potential: “Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures” (UDHR Article 21). The fact that voting and elections are not even mentioned in The Giver is solely problematic, yet the Committee’s adjudications are indeed irrelevant to the will of the people. “It was a secret selection, made by the leaders of the community, the Committee of Elders” (15). Endowed with influence, they even hold the ability to invade privacy; “He glanced quickly at the wall speaker, terrified that the Committee might be listening as they could at any time” (105). This causes citizens to live in fear: if free will were to be promoted politically, the chances of tyranny would be reduced …show more content…
Its lack of free will for the people fails to meet the expectations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Giver explores the notion of “ignorance is bliss”, yet where the absence of pain is promised, the threat of enslavement and lack of free will hovers menacingly. It is the consequence of peace and stability, a sacrifice made to generate an ideally stable society—a society that turns out to be dystopian. Free will is essential to an individual’s personal, professional, and political life, it is the most fundamental of all human rights. Free will enables people to discover their potential both politically and professionally. As a personal matter, free will enables the freedom of expression, promoting individuality. Individuality would then lead to diversity among people, and diversity is what gives humans strength to strive and excel the way they have. Free will and individualism is what defines mankind—a necessity for
Free will is crucial to an individual’s life, a source of strength for all humans. Lois Lowry’s The Giver (1993) is about sacrifice, rules and order, the consequences of peace, and ultimately, the significance of free will. Jonas, the protagonist, lives in an intended “Utopian society”. It is a society without passion nor apathy, independence nor enslavement, created in attempt to produce an orderly community where pain is nonexistent. Yet such society has a flaw—the lack of human rights. Free will is a vital element of an individual’s personal, professional, and political life. The supposed ideal life of Jonas’s community in The Giver fails to promote free will, contradicting …show more content…
There is no government in The Giver, but The Committee of Elders has absolute sovereignty over the Community. Article 21 of the UDHR acknowledges the freedom of one’s political potential: “Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures” (UDHR Article 21). The fact that voting and elections are not even mentioned in The Giver is solely problematic, yet the Committee’s adjudications are indeed irrelevant to the will of the people. “It was a secret selection, made by the leaders of the community, the Committee of Elders” (15). Endowed with influence, they even hold the ability to invade privacy; “He glanced quickly at the wall speaker, terrified that the Committee might be listening as they could at any time” (105). This causes citizens to live in fear: if free will were to be promoted politically, the chances of tyranny would be reduced …show more content…
Its lack of free will for the people fails to meet the expectations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Giver explores the notion of “ignorance is bliss”, yet where the absence of pain is promised, the threat of enslavement and lack of free will hovers menacingly. It is the consequence of peace and stability, a sacrifice made to generate an ideally stable society—a society that turns out to be dystopian. Free will is essential to an individual’s personal, professional, and political life, it is the most fundamental of all human rights. Free will enables people to discover their potential both politically and professionally. As a personal matter, free will enables the freedom of expression, promoting individuality. Individuality would then lead to diversity among people, and diversity is what gives humans strength to strive and excel the way they have. Free will and individualism is what defines mankind—a necessity for