The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

I am a 13 year old boy who has watched the film, then read the book and then watch it again. I feel REALLY REALLY depressed and sad, I am so tearful!... Can someone give me a message on how to stop my REALLY BAD deppression or any help to karsing500@hotmail.co.uk. Thank you. I am strong-willed but I really cried at the end...

I watched the movie and recall a that the boys were 8 years old. They do show Bruno throwing something at the fence and it sparks. I took away from this film the cruelty and torture the Jewish people endured because I am previously informed about the Holocaust. I feel that anyone who reads this book or watches this movie will be compelled to research the horrors of the Holocaust in detail because there are many things left up to the imagination but always a looming sense of incredible horrors. The innocence of these two boys is a genius way to capture how children are more intelligent than adults about intolerance to racial hatred. I loved this film because it opens the door to a younger generation on the horrors of hatred and how if allowed that hatred can take you to this unthinkable place in history, and although the events are completely fictional (which is made perfectly clear) they get to the heart of the cruelty, hatred, injustice, denial, and helplessness of all involved. I don't think story's intention is to be a factual recount of history but to put a disgusting taste in the mouths of our younger generation to factual intolerance at it's horrendous level. These things are occurring in other countries to this very day and people are still turning a blind eye out of fear for their own lives or absolute evil hatred at it's highest form.

For those of you who read the book and are criticizing it for the historical inaccuracies....... this book is not telling you a story about two boys, one of which is in a Nazi death camp. It is not telling a story at all, it is a fable, it is teaching you a lesson. Two boys, they were born on the same day of the same year, both nine years old, both completely innocent, one boy (shmuel) just happened to be born into a jewish family, and the other (bruno) happened to be born into a upper class, german family. The book is trying to tell you, in my eyes, that two people can be sooooo similar and sooooooo innocent, but be separated from another, just because of who their parents, or grandparents, or great grandparents are. I dont know if you people get it... it does sound a bit confusing

i have never ever cried about something in a book. ever. except this one. ;( ;(

have u ever noticed that when bruno says 'out with' he really means 'autchwitz' and when he says 'the fury' he really means 'the furher' which was german for hitler.... clever huh?! this is because he is nine and pronouncae/hears things wrong....

This novel was meant to show how it took an innocent young boy days to realize the message of equality compared to how some believers in the Holocaust today still can't. It is cruel and sickening to see how there are thousands of people today who don't even know what the Holocaust is.

I agree with some of the sentiment of the author of this article - except that it is the responsibility of those charged with introducing the subject into the school curriculum to inform the readers that this story alone will not suffice to tell the horror of the Holocaust. Please permit me, as a Jew, to comment objectively on the subject. Whilst I have a great deal of sympathy with the views of the author of the article, assisted (wisely) by the advice of a Holocaust survivor surely it is important that children have some access to the events of the Nazi Era, at this particularly impressionable age, that will give them an initial insight into those horrors. You cannot expect, or indeed demand, that 9 year old schoolchildren could begin to understand the sheer inhumanity of the Holocaust. Surely anything that allows people to explore this subject from the eyes of someone of their own age will present them with an insight to man's inhumanity to man in a gentler fashion than it seems you would otherwise propose. As these children grow older then they are entitled to a much more complex (and accurate) account of the atrocities and the plethora of material and evidence that tells a fuller, accurate truth of the Holocaust is readily available to clarify the subject matter. So, in conclusion, it is far better to start young people on the road to being compassionate, understanding humans than to ignore the subject matter altogether or to give a far more accurate appraisal to such young impressionable minds. Bruno certainly showed adequate distaste for the machinery of Nazi Germany to redress the balance in that direction.

Out of all the book was trying to get across, you only take the negative out of it? This book wasn't meant to make anyone feel as though john was making characters put a blind eye to things, this stuff is reality and this book was a way to get people who may not be the most interested in world history and german history interested! Don't only take the negative away from this book because, along with the situation it is depicting, it has changed lives. This book has gotten people interested and brought a lot of attention to a very grim subject. This also isn't a non fiction book, its a fable, a story. Certain things need to get altered, why they need to be altered all depends on the person. I am a 16 year old girl and before i watched the movie and read the book, i didnt care about history in the slightest. After watching/ reading the boy in the striped pajamas i actually fell in love with german history and am always willing to learn more about the sour topic of world war two. I would just like to say that the way you guys disected this book was quite disgusting and uneeded. This got a message across that others couldnt get across, you should be appreciating it rather than tearing it down. It has brought a light on a subject that a lot wouldnt be interested in.

Anyone who does not find this topic compelling enough to explore further without ill informed drivel like this film affecting them, is either an infant or a sickeningly selfish human being.

The title gives the impression that the "uniform" of prisoners of the German concentration camps were mere pajamas. No to. They were the striped uniform that made undetected escape more impossible. Romanticizing the uniform of millions who died because of their belief in G-d is downright sacriligious!

Really? Do you actually believe for one second that people would think the uniforms were pyjamas?! It was not meant to romanticise the uniform, but to show it through the eyes of a nine-year-old. No adult, teenager or many children would assume that, because of the title the boy is actually in striped pyjamas. Anybody would have picked it up after reading a at most half the book.

I never understood how Shmuel was able to sit at the fence for hours everyday without being punished. Or how about when he managed to get hold of a spare uniform and the casually walk around the huts without being told to get back to work. The movie doesn't show any of the tort

I don't agree with this article at all. The movie was meant to get people thinking about the perspective of the Holocaust from a young child's mindset- Is it completely realistic that he didn't know the "farm" was a concentration camp? Not really, but it COULD have happened. This film is realistic from a variety of aspects; a wife who doesn't "fully" understand her husband's disgusting duty as a soldier is quite similar to a wife who doesn't have full understanding of what her husband does in the FBI- a daughter who has a crush on a nazi soldier , thus deciding to get fully involved in loving Nazi's is completely realistic of a German girl of that time, regardless of if its fiction or not fiction the film is depicting how HUMANS function in a war-like environment. These people were in no way right for how they acted, but the film depicts the "realistic" horrors of a war and how it effects everyone differently. This film showed the terrible propaganda and lies the Germans told to keep people from knowing the horrors going on behind the fence as well as how even two eight year old children become the victims to the disgusting realities of war. There's a big picture here: war is wrong, innocent people die, and this is a story of how and why it happens.

The author of the article makes clear the frightening truth that in not many years only the Holocaust Museums and the literature about the Holocaust will bear witness to those horrific times. Those of us who are the few survivors must not allow sentimental fables to be left for future generations as the means to learn of the Holocaust.

I never enjoyed history in school. I day dreamed in history class and many other subjects too. Some children live in their own world. In my adult years I embraced history more, and while many have more than valid concerns about the poor portrayal of what life was really like for those that were in Auschwitz., it makes the viewer think. The Boy in the stripped pajamas is a story first and foremost, not an achive piece. I know the movie is not 'real', it should provoke thought and reaction, which it has done. I watched the movie yesterday and I am mournful for those 6 million murdered people. I have had several conversations today with my lived ones about that awful time. May the world never forget.

This book and movie is so not about friendship or childhood. It's about how awful and misunderstanding the Holocaust really was. Bruno didn't know what was going on and neither did his mom really not until she really smelled the human flesh buring. I just don't understand how people can sit here and say that these are messages. Messages of what? Of what could be coming? No this is a message of how the rest of the world even family members were not told or involved. True it was the soldiers secret. But a family should know what another family member is doing no matter what. Bruno did not have any idea and neither did Shmuley. It's a story of how Bruno finds out what awful and tragic things the jews went through. But one thing I will point out is that whoever wrote the book and directed the movie left out a lot of the people who were actually involved in the real event. It's not something you can really say what it is. And it's confusing and unrelateable because that's really how it was. The Jewish and other groups were not told what was going on and the director and writer obviously did not go into detail with the reality of the tragidy. It really is sad how people can say that they understand what people went through when they really don't. You have to really think when you watch or read the movie to really summarize how people felt in this time. True you will still never understand but if you just take a step back and say wow you will find out that this movie and book is not what it really is. It's a book and movie on facts and fiction. Not on friendship or childhood.

came to this book fully prepared to love it. Although the publisher insists that all reviewers not reveal its story, the back cover promises "As memorable an introduction to the subject as The Diary of Anne Frank." And indeed the writing is gripping. The style, sharing with Anne Frank the distinctive voice of youth, is extremely effective. One can readily understand why the book has had such a strong impact on countless readers, become required reading in high school Holocaust courses round the country, and is about to be released as a major motion picture.

Im sorry but I just saw the movie today and im confused about the message of it. Most movies have an obvious message but this one-I just can't get it. I was wondering if anyone knew.

Lest I share the end of the story as the author has respectfully requested no one do, the ending of the story presents a good wake up for those who would now live in denial and/or twist the situation as he starts to live the cruelty as well. I wish I could say more but go to Netflix and watch the movie to the end and you'll see what I am saying.

the book is a very interesting book as it looks at things from a different side - the german's. The book looks at childhood from a romantic perspective which is a hegemonic discourse especially in the uk. To present this discourse john boyne wants to show bruno's innocence and so makes him oblivious to what is happening. in reality he would have known because children as young as 6 and 7 at most schools were being taught about the 'evilness of jews' and 'how to spot jews' - so surely bruno, the son of a nazi commander would have been subject to the teachings or atleast would have known what was going on. furthermore human flesh burning is a strong smell that surely bruno - living next door would have noticed. Another thing that puzzled me was that if the gate had a gap at the bottom why didnt anyone try to escape? the gate in reality must have been electrified so that they didn't escape - but it wasnt in the book. the message i think john boyne wanted to get accross was innocence in the time of ignorance. however this book which has been quite popular has inaccuracies which jewish people may find upsetting and if john boyne wanted to write such a sensitive book i think he should have spent more time on it and did his research properly - a good book nevertheless

You are so obviously aren't getting the point of all these mispronounced words guys. they are....double meanings, designed to do all those things you spoke of. Take "Fury"-Boyne has purposely written it so that, although we know he's deliberatly mispronouncing Fuhrer, it's giving us the impression of anger to large to handle, Hitler's anger. And Out-With? Maybe, oh, I don't know, out-with the jews? see? double meanings. and Bruno is just a little boy. He doesn't know these things because his parents just aren't telling him....maybe his mother wants it kept from him? This story isn't about logic, it's about friendship, childhood innocence, courage and love. if you frustrated with the book, please keep in mind how horrifying the subject is. it's told from a child's point of view. if you told an 8 year old that these people are being killed for good, they just wont understand.

It doesnt matter if he mispronounced the words. No 9 year old in all of germany would not know the Fuhrer. Maybe it has "cute" double meanings. But they are all fake, and any child would know that. Im sorry, but you cannot hide the holocaust from a child. For him not to know what a jew is? Please. In school they taught them to spit on jews. the 9 year olds were encouraged to hate jews, and they knew what was going on. maybe they were too young to understand it to the level of having an opinion on it, or a reason, but they understood it to the level that jews are horrible and were doing all we can to get rid of those filthy creatures! The subject is horrifying. Which is why this book never should have been written. especially from a childs point of view

I'm sure that Native Americans are upset when they watch Dances With Wolves. POW's had a real problem with Bridge on the River Kwai. I think it's called fiction or drama for a reason.

I haven't read the book; but I have seen the movie. You're right about the inaccurateness of the story. The one thing I did like the movie, was the bravery of Bruno to step out and make friends with the old man, and the boy in the striped pajamas; especially given what Bruno's father was like.

James,James,why so nasty? If you can't show some respect,you're sailing dangerously close to the ideology that helped the Nazis to power. We're here to discuss the book,not my punctuation-which is a whole lot better than your attitude

i like this book and i just started 2 days ago im already on chapter 7

I can believe the whole thing was written in two days,it is so badly thought out. Why,for heaven's sake,would a German child hear 'fury' when 'fuhrer' was said? 'Fury' would mean nothing to this child:likewise 'out-with'-no logic there. I'm dismayed this book sold millions because such sales imply millions of lazy thinkers. But perhaps it's better that lazy thinkers have some idea of the Holocaust,however specious and sentimental?

"Why,for heaven's sake,would a German child hear 'fury' when 'fuhrer' was said? 'Fury' would mean nothing to this child:likewise 'out-with'-no logic there." Not only am I appalled by your atrocious punctuation, but I find it extremely necessary to point out that Auschwitz could easily be mispronounced as 'Out-with' by a nine year old boy. Lazy thinkers... At least I got a laugh out of your comment.

Maybe Auschwitz is difficult to pronounce for English children, but not for German children, any 9-year-old who is able to speak would have no difficulty at all to pronounce Auschwitz or Führer. On the other hand many German kids would have difficulties pronouncing 'Out-with' since there's no th sound in the German language. I agree with Jo, those two puns were extremely annoying.

I'm 13 and I realize that most of the stuff in this book is fake. It's so obvious! No nine year old could be that oblivious!

Never in the story did the author claim to be writing a work of nonfiction. The story is supposed to get across the horror of the concentration camps from a German's point of view..which is accomplishes perfectly. As for a young kid not being oblivious.. next time you smell something terrible, stop and think for a moment. Certainly..you're not oblivious..so you'll know right away that the smell MUST BE bodies burning. What kind of twisted person could come to that conclusion right away, at any age? The Nazis, during that time, did not make what they were doing obvious. If they had, a lot less murdering would have taken place because someone would have put a stop to it.

Isn't writing a book about such a horrifying subject hard enough?! Do you know how incredibly difficult it is to write such a book without hurting the feelings of millions of people who can still remember this terrible period. And what about insulting people who have participated in this worldwar, in any way. Jhon Boyne has produced a beautiful book, written from an eight-year old's point of view. He was never asked to write a non-fiction history book including all facts from this time. He just wrote a novel which turned out to become extremely popular. As Mari says (who I absolutely agree with), The author never claimed to be writing a work of nonfiction. If you are worried about children who will get a completely wrong vieuw of this time, I can reassure you; I am 13 myself and that's why we get history lessons on school! Our teachers (whith the help of non-fiction historybooks, not John's book!!) have told us the facts about this dramatic period in history and I know all about the differences between the book and the actual reality. And if this problem is more between the book and you, Jo, Just dont read it! And BTW, stop calling us, entusiastic readers, Lazy thinkers!! Expecially when you are actually one yourself!

I no what u r saying I think that too I am also 13 but all our teachers can say is that it is true so we our forced....well I guess we have to beleive what they tell us I no u dont think its true too but u gotta think that the world has changed from then to now n it still is so most 9 year olds could n can do things they cant do now...like do u no what im sayin....just no that we don if it is true or if it isnt because we werent around about 70 years ago lik u no

Everyone is saying that Boyne was unrealistic. Okay, I get it, the Holocaust was a lot more greusome that what Boyne showed, but this is the absolute perfect book to get kids eased into the topic of WW2. Even though the book was mainly focused on the boy's friendship, the facts were true and still horrifying, even if only part of the truth was showed. Forgive me, I am only 12, so it might just be my view of things talking. I had to read it for school, and everyone was saying "oh it's sooooo sad" or "i hate the ending" or "this book is messed up". Well hey guys, that's the way things went. Things were cruel and unfair. I would reccomend this book to anyone who is interested in WW2. It really isn't a bad piece of literature.

So true! Can't agree more...

I recently read the story "the boy in the stripped pajamas" for a book report at school, and as i do agree with what you say about how unrealistic it is and how much John Boyne does hide how gruesome the holocaust really was but i believe you fail to see that basically the point of this story was not how devastating the holocaust was, but how alike Bruno and Shmuel were yet they lived there lives so differently based on a judgement. They were almost the exact same except Bruno lived most of his years in a huge house while Shmuel was trapped in Auschwitz simply because Shmuel was Jewish. I believe that the main reason of this story was to show how the Jews that were trapped at the camps were people too just like the Germans. Also their children were like the Jewish children. Do you see my point? It's as if John Boyne was comparing Shmuel (representation of all Jewish children) and Bruno (Representation of all German children) and they were practically the exact same and it was stupid for the Jewish people to be considered anything less than the Germans because when it comes down to it, they're all human. Also, I believe that Bruno did not quite understand the fact that he was supposed to hate the Jewish people because it was to represent that he couldn't see the difference between Shmuel as a human and himself as a human. So why should anybody else? If Bruno were to know Shmuel was Jewish (aka "different" from himself) he would have a biased view on Shmuel which would completely change the point of the story. In the end, as it's true that the author was unrealistic, i believe that it wasn't really a story on what happened during the holocaust, but a story on how the German's were so quick to judge ALL the Jews when they hardly knew any of them personally as the human beings they really are. Im sorry if anything i say is "incorrect" about the holocaust. I'm just a 14 year old who got a completely different out-take on "the boy in the striped pajamas" Thank you.

I sincerely disagree with your article. This book is made for people of all ages, and if they were to actually describe the brutality of the Holocaust, then it would drive people away from it. True, the book "Night", was much more realistic, but this book was only supposed to convey the Holocaust through the views of a young german boy, who at this age, has lived in Berlin his whole life, where the jews and "The Final Solution", were almost never even mentioned. Another thing is the fact that you belittled the meaning of the mispronounced words ("Fury", and "Out-With") to a trifle as though he just made random, idiotic things up. Bruno is simply mispronouncing the real words, but the author is clearly asking the reader to consider a double meaning to these words. That's what you fail to realize, you don't get or understand the sincere meaning of the book, which is why you have no right to criticize it.

How tru what you write. We need more books addressing the truth. I hope it never makes the movies.

I have seen this movie and I know it is 99% fiction but there is a shread of truth here that no one is looking at and that is.......You Will Reap What You Sow and Those Who Live By The Sword Shell Die By It....And this movie unwillingly points this out to a German officer

We should never assume that something isn't strong enough. All the documentation of the hate that the Nazis did has to be re documented in every way possible. The hate currently being spewed in the United States is at times a very disheartening. The hate and comments is reminiscent of the late 30's and early 40's of the last century. Pray that history doesn't repeat itself by the radicals of the right (just as in Germany) in the United States.

I did not like 'the boy in the striped pajamas' and this article sums up why. The Holocaust really could not be chronicled in such a puny chronicle, I think this book completely glossed over what the Holocaust actually was. I read Wiesel's 'Night' before reading this book and was really, really disappointed by this book. It reads like something from an Aldous Huxley nightmare.

this was a movie designed to be both educational and entertaining for 'all' ages. If they had not glossed over the Holocaust it would have had to be rated higher, hterfore preventing the watching of the movie from little kids.

this is a really sad book after i wached the movie in skool i cried and couldnt watch because of those horrible scenes. but i need help in my skool work about the relationship between maria and bruno.....

hey my name is rebecca and the realationship between mmaria and bruno is she is a very close friend and she is like family and cant understand why brunos dad can be so nice to her but so mean to these people

the movie was horrible i mean like who leaves people thinking about what happen next's. and how the kids die holding hands sweet but still my kid in 6 grade read this book . and i saw the movie and i really didnt like the eneding

In many ways the point of the film has been missed.In this story,and in some ways it is a parable,we have a German middle class family who,had it not been for the evil of Hitlerism,would be living a happy and respectable life.The German officer is I believe not literally meant to be the historical figure of the commandant of Auschwitz.They are two people who in reality are deeply ashamed of what they are doing;the woman more so because her belief in her husband as a man of honour is totally shattered when she faces up to what the Nazi rhetoric actually means in terms of human suffering.The man has managed to convince himself superficiallly that what he is doing ,although indeed intrinsically wicked,is somehow necessary.Their shared, deeply hidden revulsion of themselves and what has become of them and their country is reflected in their strenuous efforts to keep the little boy ignorant of this nightmare world they have created and preserve his innocence at all costs.The little German boy is innocent,the little Jewish boy is innocent.They both look at the world through innocent eyes,quickly responding to any thing that can be related to normal child-hood.Their freindship is innocent and pure,and total.THe German boy's race means nothing to the Jewish boy and the Jewish boy's race means nothing to the German boy.They have a bond,indeed a love through shared innocence.They even die together.The message I received was that the trusting naevity of these two boys and their unquestioning love and friendship one for the other is a beautiful thing that the adult world could observe and gain beneficial lessons from. Love and innocence overcomes all barriers.The sheer horror and evil of a state saying one boy should live,another die,on a whim based on perverted science,the misery and lasting grief such actions bring to innocents was rammed home with terrible clarity to the German parents by the death,at Nazi hands,of their little boy.Then he was as one with the Jewish victims.

i saw the movie and was moved by how the indifference of the nazi commandant's family to the multitude of families being destroyed, yet I still remember the horrified reaction of Bruno's mother when it was her son that was given his own striped pajamas. The lack of empathy one person can have for another is shocking, and only when their own security or well being is affected do they seem to try to "be the change [they] want to see in the world."

i'd just like to say that this book gave me a really bad case of the sads.

thats very very sad

I am horrified if this book is really required reading for students. I am 67, have read the book and understand it is fiction with plenty of untruths but students may not understand this, especially if they are completely ignorant about the holocaust anyway.

Hmm. It's vaguely interesting that none of the comments I've just read ON your article agree with it. I, however, agree with every word. I felt exactly like your Auschwitz friend when I read the book; indeed I could not complete it because of the position it was forcing me into. I just thought I'd say. I've written elsewhere about this but am discouraged by the fact that the sentimentality here is obscuring rather more important truths and this dumb idea that Germans knew nothing is plain detestable. Every day, every week, for YEARS they absorbed a loathing of Jews so tremendous that they genuinely believed the world be a more beautiful place if the race was expunged, and far from being horrified and shocked by the death camps they adored and revelled in them - to deny all this now just makes me - slightly surprised. Why bother denying it? It would be a breath of fresh air to hear, for once, just how much the Germans hated the Jews, and how much they delighted in their deaths, and how sorry they are now it's all over. What I DO know is that if you pretend that you're doing a world a service by wiping out parasites, and that you are holy and rats are muck, you do get a sense in which you are divine and the hated race is refuse, so you continue to believe you are doing the right thing and are entirely innocent (what this book is doing). Then, when someone says: 'oh, you know all those rats you killed? They were human beings,' what you say is, 'oh were they? I didn't know.' Well of course you didn't know! You were being a good German and ridding the world of pestilence, how terribly well-meaning of you. And the Jews enjoyed it too, because they thought they were less than human as well, they loved having their skin turned into lampshades and their hair used to stuff sofas with. They, as we, thought it an entirely good thing. This is PRECISELY what the book says, and what everyone who is responding to your article in different shades of disagreement is ALSO saying.

Jessica--You are undoubtedly correct in saying that a majorityof Germans,probably a sizable majority,did not like Jewry.Not all of course would have wanted the race exterminated.There was also a German anti Nazi resistance that ,at terrible risk,tried to oppose the Nazi regime.It was largely ineffective because the system was geared up through a social net work to expose those who opposed the Nazis.Some did indeed help Jews whenever possible but I think it is true to say that thinking Germans quite quickly realized the criminal nature of the government and literally decided to keep quiet and stay out of trouble.Cowardice yes but can we honestly say we might not do similar in such circumstances?.We can not know until we are in that situation.Many Christians suffered and died by opposing ;the head of the protestant church was imprisoned through out the war because he refused to contaminate the church with the Nazi concept of religion.Yes ,a lot probably most, knew what was happening and didn't care.But a minority were just plain frightened.

The story does not alter the truth at all. It is simply through the point of view of a young boy, who FACTUALLY does not know what is going on. It is completely normal that someone of his age would not readily come to this conclusion: The air wreaks of a horrible smell, it must be bodies. The story may be fictional, but NOTHING in the story misleads the reader. Every event, no matter how unlikely, was very possible and nowhere did the story make the concentration camps look more attractive than they actually were. The mass killings were not lightened, and they were not discredited. They simply weren't obvious to the protagonist. Though you may have talked to Holocaust survivors, you don't have your facts straight. There were children in the concentration camps, and they were kept for the same reason children were hired in factories during the Industrial Revolution. Their small hands and bodies could come in handy for certain jobs. Overall, the story was extremely moving, and it made me pity those who were murdered, as well as become disgusted with those who did nothing to help. Isn't that what a story on a terrible time in history is supposed to do? I couldn't disagree more with your opinion on the story.

I agree with Mari. Even though it is a work of fiction, I came away with a heighten sense of what the halocaust was and how it affected so many innocent lives.I didn't take it to be negative about the halocaust at all. I found the main point to be that G-d payed the commandant of that camp back with a high price for his lies and deception and murder. What higher price could be paid than losing his own child in the very way he took innocent lives?

I am deeply disturbed by the above criticism of this story. I think that even if it isn't completely accurate in every way, it is poignant and deeply moving. I have only seen the movie and I am sure there is much more detail in the book, so that inaccuracies may be more glaring. But many Germans turned a blind eye from the truth, even if they knew it on a deeper level, and I am sure that would include children, especially inquisitive children like Bruno. The whole event was incomprehensible, probably for many children. And for children, fantasy is a common escape. They see things the way they want to under horrible circumstances. I don't necessarily see the boy Schmuey as wandering around a camp. He was clearly hiding. There were children clever enough to hide for weeks in barracks they didn't belong in. I just think the story, or at least the movie, and the focus on the boys' relationship, what they learn from one another, and what happens to them certainly puts forth the essence of the holocaust.

I found your article whilst searching for teaching resources. I teach boys with emotional and behavioural problems. I am not a Jew but I have an 'outsider's' understanding of the holocaust and, to some extent, I understand your friend's horror at what must seem like a severe minimising of the horror. However, can I just add this. I am an English teacher. When I teach this book, we analyse feelings, not history. The boys I teach are 'tough', they are from gangs. They NEED to know what persecution 'feels' like, and not in a historical way. I was upset when I read your friend was in tears. PLease, if you can, tell him this. We are not allowed to show the real horror to children. They will learn it when they are older. However, books like this can still touch them and make them think. The holocaust is not made into a 'fairy tale'. I have them researching images and historical fact too, to a 'safe' extent. We may have to 'gift-wrap' this horrific experience of history but when you see one of these gang-members wipe away a tear, or make an excuse to leave the room, it feels good to know we have started a process of instilling a humanity that is fast-leaving our youth of today. I hope this doesn't offend. Thank you

You stated that their were no children in Auschwitz???? How is it I have read accounts numerous accounts of smaller children there??And pictures??Could you please tell me what you meant by this.I have been reading about the holocaust and WW2 for years and have read many accounts??so I do not understand what you mean about no children aged 9 being there??Have I missed something???

I was born in a DP camp after the war. Both my parents were survivors. Most Germans knew that the Jews had been taken away somewhere, and may have heard of the shootings and camps, but very few knew the horrors of what was going. Even Allied bombers flying overhead did not know what was going on. Even other Jews refused to believe the eyewitness accounts of the few escapees! So to try to blame all Germans is totally ridiculous and unfair. Only 40% of Germans voted for the Nazi party in 1932. As for the movie, it was heartbreaking, but not impossible to believe. Hardly.

I did not read the book, but only saw the movie, and the ending is simply such, there are no words for it. I am the child of Holocaust, myself born in a DP camp in Bavaria after WWII, and I would recommend everyone see the movie. I cannot speak for the book.

Your absolutely right. Seems like Hollywoods version of the Holocaust. I lost my grandfather to a camp. Germans knew what was going on. Either to scared or just didnt care

Although I haven't read the book I have just seen the movie and was left feeling distraught and grieving for 2 innocent boys , but for all those who were persecuted so monstrously during the Holocaust. Despite being a work of fiction it still has the power to create strong feelings about these atrocities.

I just watched the film of this book and found it a terrible distorted mess. I couldn't believe that a high ranking Nazi wouldn't have completely indoctrinated his wife and children. I found the lie that they were ignorant of what was happening disturbing, as much as the other novel turned into an award winning film, "The Reader" which sought to absolve germans of resonsiblity for the holocaust by making an ignorant illiterate, Sudatan German a Camp guard. these books do as much damage to the historical record of the Holocaust as denyers do. Humans are capable of great evil as well as great good, denying that helps no one, and a sin of omission is just as great a sin as one of action. As an author to write about the Holocaust is an awesome responsiblity and not one to be taken lightly, certainly not one to write in 2 days with no real and substantive research. Shame!

I believe this review misses the point of the book/movie. This story is not intended as a factual account. The real point, as I see it, is to show us, from the point of view of an innocent child, how preposterous the justifications were of the way they treated the jewish people during WWII. Bruno is completely confused by the vast difference between what he is being told and what he is seeing and experiencing himself. He beautifully illustrates how if you scratch the surface of hate and bigotry, the arguments used to support this don't make sense at all. He can see that his jewish friend is not evil, he can see that the camp is not paradise and he cannot get his innocent mind around the incongruousness between what his father and his teacher are telling him and what he can see to be true. In my mind, this story has a very important message which is that in order to avoid a similar horror in the future, we must always question what we are being told and attempt to apply our own logic and experience rather than blindly following what someone else tells us is true. If we do this, hopefully we can avoid being brainwashed into blindly following someone into a situation where we end up doing things that are completely abhorrent to our fellow human beings. The end of the story illustrates how any one of us, no matter who we are, in the blink of an eye, can end up as one of the persecuted which is something we should think about when we persecute others. While it may not be historically accurate, the themes and messages of the story are ones which I believe are as relevant today as in any other period in history. We must understand that it is our responsibility to one another to never again allow ignorance, prejudice or blind faith to lead us to a situation where we treat other human beings in such a horrible fashion.

I disagree with your comments concerning what an 8 not 9 year old knows or believes. I remember clearly the innocence my mother forced on to me to protect me from secrets and truths that would become apparent to me as an adult. In a childs eyes, innocence and belief lies in their parents. the child is learning the truth, he smells the death but he came from a city life where he would never have smelled a burned body decomposing. I have german friends who were children at that time and it took many years in their small towns to understand fully the hush of parents talk. They heard the word jew and thought they looked different and were able to be easily seen. I think you are putting adults views onto a childs eye and accusing children of what adults were able to force children to believe.

And one last thing. This book is just another example of the side of effects of "Nazi Tourette's" in our culture. People appropriate holocaust narratives for their own current political agendas and in doing so, diminish the sense of atrocity each time they do it. They convince themselves that they are taking a stance and condemning the holocaust when they do this appropriating, but condemning the holocaust from the safety of two generations removed and you're preaching the choir isn't really a great moral accomplishment, especially when you're just doing it to score political points or sell a few books. It's gross when Glenn Beck does it. It's just as gross when John Boyne does it.

This book was so bad, it made me really angry when I read it. First of all, there are already books in existence that seek to explain the holocaust to children and they are better done than this one. I can even recall reading a children's book years before this book came out about a little German girl who was sneaking food to a child in a camp, so this isn't an original plot. Bruno is a stupid character, the puns are stupid, and the plot (where someone is able to just crawl under a fence into a death camp but the prisoners are too stupid to crawl out) is ridiculous. However, it isn't just the historical fabrication that I object to. I understand that the author was trying to do something different with this book, but I think he failed in a big way. Even being a liberal and knowing that I probably agree with a lot of his politics, the agenda of this book really gets up my nose. The implication of this novel is that bad things happen just because people don't know they're happening, which is frankly, a load of over-simplified BS. This novel is like Boyne's own self-righteous belief that knowing about current events is the same thing as preventing atrocities. Writing this was a form of slacktivism. He thinks he's changing the world by barfing out a badly-written book like this, but he's really just taking his liberalness and beating those who simply don't know what's going on in the world over the head with it. Those who simply don't know what's going on now (as during the holocaust) are in the minority, probably poor and uneducated (and this book is probably over their heads). It's the people who know/knew and do/did nothing that are the problem. And one has to wonder if writing a book counts as "doing something." It doesn't in my book anyway.

thankyou, theres is so many things on the internet about how great and noble this book is, but i belive it is nothing comapared to what really happened. It doesnt exaplian what actaully happebned and really, we humans only call it sad because they died in the end, it happened to so many other jewish people, its unrealistic and i know alot of people that think the book is based on a true story, its false information and i dont know why it got the awards it did.

I can understand what you mean about the historical innaccuries of the novel but the novel isnt meant to be a historical recount of what Aushwitz was like. As you clearly pointed out as well the novel is a fable it is not intended for students to be learning about as an accurate historical representation of the Holocaust. That's not the novels fault and you shouldn't ridicule it for that. The novels historical accuracy shouldnt be ridiculed as John Boyne wrote the book in two days so he was obviously focussed on a story rather than historical facts. Please try to remember the themes in the book are far more important than how the book portrays the Holocaust.

Many teachers use it as content and proclaim it as true. They also say that it shows that Germans were as much victims as Jews. It should be banned from all public schools.

I had planned to watch the dvd of this film to learn, but this review has thankfully alerted me that I should better spend my efforts on other sources like Schindler's List

This article is also well-meaning but also inaccurate. There were Jewish children at Auschwitz. My mother-in-law was taken there for several months near the end of the war. She was eight-years-old. Apparently, by that time, they had shut down the gas chambers. She, of course, had a horrific experience, but she was there as a small child--and survived.

And she remembers working in Auschwitz - she remembers helping to push those large wheelbarrows filled with bodies !! And she remembers doing some work with bricks.

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is a questionable book because it makes art out of evil. BUT the ending is powerful - how Bruno's father's ambition destroyed not only six million strangers, but also his own family. If one can read between the lines, here is a warning about the danger of fanaticism which can apply to all groups everywhere. The question is, should the Holocaust, which was specifically the Nazis against the Jews, be made into a paradigm which shows the dangers of fanaticism for all people?

I saw the movie after being told about the amazing "true story" of the Holocaust. People had told me that the ending was shocking and horrifying and really made you think. When I watched the film, I could instantly recognize that it was fiction. The setting was only vaguely reminiscent of concentration camps I have visited. The whole movie was nothing but a story, and one too loosely based on reality to be useful or respectful. I appreciate this article particularly for pointing out why fiction of this nature is dangerous and irresponsible.

This story, or fable, as has been alluded to, contains, like most literature of sismic social gravity, a message of poignancy and humanity which arguably transcends arguments of mere veracity concerning whether a fence was breachable or nay, because of now to attested electrification. Perhaps the Rabbi may have been precocious and worldly wise, as I as a child with Irish republican leanings at a similar age. To assume that a child should understand the magnitude and horror of such an industrialised slaughter, unprecedented in human history as it was, is without doubt to expect too much of youth. Complicity as was undoubted among many who looked the other way,- two and a half million Germans died in opposition to Hitler and the Nazis between 1933 and 1945...I ask the Rabbi as a humanist to be wary of the perpetual blame game. As an Irish Republican Socialist I damn the economic and military holocaust Ireland has suffered over many centuries. I would have willingly joined the British army however to fight the worser evil of Nazism. Dont get lost in tribalism I implore you. Save one save the world. kill one kill the world...Literature can convey truth in unexpected ways as my coming play The Prisoner, attempts to convey...To semi plagarise a quote from Jurrasic Park,-Love finds a way...best wishes ,Fra

not that bad?,im in school now, i live in england, (birmingham), im in second lesson on a computer. you are a little sicco!! i am studying the boy in the striped pajamas!!, and i for 1 disaprove of your comment. i have read about 80 previews, read the ENTIRE book twice and, i have also watched the film afew times. i may only be in year 8, but im smart enough to know that it was hell. so before you go saying your oppinion, think before you type, because my great great grandad died in the holocaust. and i find this an offence.

I am 29 years old. I live in Holland and have had tons of history lessons on the Holocaust. I have visited camp Westerbork (deportation camp) and my Grandfather was a part of the Dutch resistance. I would say I have a fair amount of knowledge about what happened during WWII. Today, May 4th, the day where the Dutch keep 2 minutes silence in memory of those who have fallen during the war, I have just finished watching the movie ' The boy in the striped pajamas'. I have to say, it is one of the most impressive movies I have ever seen and reading this review on the book of which the movie is based upon I am overcome with utter surprise and disbelieve. The only explanation I can give is that the person who wrote this review has completely misinterpreted the meaning of the author. Pointing out or suggesting that it is impossible to live next to a concentration camp without knowing what was going on, or that it was impossible to meet each day with a captive in an unseen corner or even that there were no young captives in these camps is pointless! You fail to understand that this is a story one sees through the eyes of an eight year old child. Maybe one needs to have a reasonable amount of knowledge on the Holocaust to understand the intention of this story but even so, alongside the childish nativity of the boy the movie portraits the underlying dark truth brilliantly. True, I can not yet speak for the book for I have only seen the movie. However the movie is based upon the book and therefore can only conclude the view of the author is the same as portrayed by the director.

I agree with the argument that this book does in fact certainly mar certain facts regarding concentration camps and what was experienced due to them. However , I think that it is a text that should be read after one has been provided with accurate information and has learnt of real experiences that survivors of such a tragedy endured. Also , While again I acknowledge that it is not an accurate portrayal of experiences, I believe that it would also be useful as an introductory text for much younger children to be able to understand the concept of that the Jewish community was persecuted , followed by a more in depth and accurate teaching of the tragedy.

The fence was, in fact, electrical, and they showed that it was early in the movie

Why did he write the story.

i love the book that John Boyne wrote xall the boy in the striped pajamas!!!!!!lol we are reading it in my eighth grade class so far it's a really good book!!!!!!!!! i hope he comes out with a boy in the striped pajamas 2 thats what im hopping for lol go figure it is me duhhhhhh...

I think you are right on in your commentary on the book. People forget how easily young people are convinced that fiction is in fact truth! High school students reading this would definitely get the wrong idea. Thank you for sharing.

its just a story

If we're going to tell stories to our children, they may as well be accurate, not this. There a plenty of Holocaust stories which are more accurate , age-appropriate for children and present a less confusing message than this one.

mate its fiction, a story dont be criticising, genius perspective writing having all types of different techniques and only trying to get across a point to readers. it wasnt written to be "put down" but really grasp hold of the true horror of this event again im 13

Whoever wrote about the book i believe is just a bit criticising to the meaning of the book and its aspects to a book thats a fictional text. whether we chose to believe the events happening in the book is a different matter. John Boyne is extremely smart in which he conveys the book and the events and its not fair to go on and on about how this and that wasn't supposed to happen and little boys not capable to work would be gassed. think about this, YOU TELL ME, how the book could be written in any other form or way to the subject at matter of the main characters in the book. there 9 years old or as so in the movie 8 but one of the points the author is getting across is the tragic ignorance of the two and having to go back into the eyes of a child to see what things would be like. for example he thought the concentration camp was a farm at the beginning and after, your point if they were a bit more older and mature then the book wouldn't convey the true horror of them being so naive and clueless. now don't get me wrong you did an excellent report on it and i commend you for that but how else would the book be like if they were old enough to work? again its a fictional text. the book wouldn't be the same... in my perspective others may think differently about it thanks and i'm 13 years old so if there are any other points i could add to make a convincing argument could someone please point them out to me.

I have not read the book, but I saw the movie, and it had glaring errors: the year was 1937, and yet, there was no gassing till the early 40's.

I thought that the book was wonderful. It gave small amounts of information, however indirect, about the holocaust and concentration camps. It was not supposed to be a detailed report about the horrors of the war. You may not remember when you were eight or nine, but I am only 13 and I do remember. If people dont tell you things, you can be happily clueless and have no idea what is going on. And just by the way, Bruno's friends name was Shmuel, not Smuley.

The story is not meant as a detailed description of the horrors of the Nazi death camps. The TV series of the eighties, “War and Remembrance”, showed these in a more gruesome way. For me Bruno’s actions were motivated by his need for a friend, with the loss of his Berlin friends, a loss that is experienced similarly by many children who are moved to new schools .in strange neighbourhoods. His father, as camp commandant, probably came to the realisation of the consequences of his Nazi sympathies in the last chapter of the book when trying to understand what had happened to his son. While not said in as many works, it was hinted that he was led away after he possibly could have expressed his doubts about the policies of the evil Nazi regime.

When in my twenties I read the book "The Hiding Place" a non-fiction written by Corrie Ten Boom, a Righteous Gentile woman from Holland, who helped Jews and was sent along with her family to a concentration camp. Her book was written as if a Jew had written it, for she had experienced the same fate as a Jew, in detail of true accounts of what the concentration camp was really like, no sugarcoating it. Many adults have read "The boy in the stripe pajamas" even though in the children section, to get a perspective of what non Jews went through. Just like I read Corrie Ten Boom's book. There is two sides to the story. There comes a time when you need to read what non Jews went through also during that time period. As I finished the book The Hiding Place, I cheered that Corrie Ten Boom survived. I related to her, even though she wasn't a Jew, and I wasn't even alive during the Holocaust. I didn't fall in love with the character Bruno, like the author had intended his audience to do, so when he died in the end, it didn't have an emotional impact on me, like was intended. My focus went to Shmuel, having a friend to help him through his hour of death. He wasn't alone totally, since his father was not to be found. Bruno, who felt so bad that he was only thinking of himself and lied, gave an sincere apology to Shmuel, and wanted to make it up to him to help find Shmuel's father, took the place of his father's comfort. My opinion, this movie is geared for adults. They have the background of previous Holocaust studies, to decipher between fact and fiction, that a young Jewish reader would not have. If the non Jews find it to be a good read for their children, than it's their business, for to them it can be. I think for a Jewish child it may leave distortion of the Holocaust, leaving only the impression from a German boys side of the story, lacking the horrendous acts of cruelty that took place. First impressions can be lasting. It wouldn't be an accurate one.

Could a 8 yr old boy not know what was going on in the world? Yes, when I was 8 I didn't know the Vietnam War was going on, and that thousands of soldiers were dying because of it, and I also didn't know what my Dad did on his job. When I was around 10 yrs old my mother gave me the book "The Diary of Anne Frank" to read and I could relate to Anne Frank. If I was 10 now, I wouldn't be able to relate to the key character of the story, a German boy named Bruno, and telling a story through his eyes, living in a Nazi home and close by a concentration camp. I just wouldn't of been able to relate to him, non Jew, the main character of the book, like I did with Anne Frank. The focus is the main character, it's similar to Anne Frank's Diary, except this is a German boys Diary, and the book is titled fiction. Because a Jewish Child, wouldn't be able to relate to the main character of the book, would the book be readable to a Jewish Child? From my own viewpoint, I wouldn't find it interesting as a Child, because I wouldn't be able to relate. I wasn't a bookworm as a child, so it really took an interesting book I could relate to, to sit down and read a book. My opinion, this book would not be of interest in a Jewish Day School. To teach children, that their were children that was oblivious to what was going on and they were not taking part in the agenda of the Nazis, that can be a moral fact. Bruno who can represent many 8 yr old German children, who did not look at Jews as enemies but friends, and those German children grew up not like the society at large that they lived in, can also be a fact to be told. Not all German parents of children were Nazi Jew haters. Many German parents gave through words and deed, helping the Jewish people. You take a non Jew child, they could relate to this book, and speak to them, they didn't have anything to do with the holocaust. Bruno and Shmuel would of grown up as friends, if they would of lived and the story continued.

I have seen some movies about the Holocost. One that I am glad to have viewed was the Materpiece Theater, God On Trial. It gave real insight as to how it must have been.I am always glad when I hear the phrase, "Never Again."

When will we learn to lived for the living and not the dead

This article is an ironic misunderstanding of the book and the film. They are not purporting to be a full history of the Holocaust but are an introduction to children of the nature of the Holocaust. The book is subtly, very cleverly written, designed to put you into the head of a nine-year-old boy who is not very interested in politica and who has been shielded by his parents from the unpleasentnesses of life in Nazi Germany. The book makes no claims to be historical. indeed it is designed to be fable-like and unreal in its narration, and it leaves things to the imagination. The scene where the jewish doctor is beaten to death is left to the head of the reader. Knowing how my own little boy thinks, and how children get things wrong, the tension in this book between the errors of the boy's understanding and the errors of the adults attitudes is striking. I find Rabbi Blech's assertions disturbing. after all we know that a Britiah POW got into Auschwitz, so why not a boy? http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=315156 In any case this is not supposed to be a factual film - and indeed not all films about the Holocaust are factual. It is a kick-start to investigating reality. I think it does its job very well. Here is one review: http://h.whyville.net/smmk/whytimes/article?id=9868 and another http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1876709/the_boy_in_the_striped_pajamas_an_aristotelian_pg5.html?cat=40 Listening to the Book club BBC programme brings out some more reasoned understanding of this book. http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/wbc/wbc_20100306-2006a.mp3 I don't really think that Rabbi Blech has understood this book on more than a surface level. His article is knee-jerk rather than considered, and he needs to review the book and the reality of people's reactions to it. This book is a superb introduction to the topic. It leads to Anne Frank's diary (which I found very hard to read at the age of 9) and provokes more reading.

I think it is you miss guiding others about the movie.I for one did not walk away feeling as though there was a simple "I didn't know " excuse for the the German soldiers or any one else.I felt disgust watching Bruno's father ,who was proid to know what was happening and watched as he dodged questions his little 8 yr old son had about smells and pajamas and everything else Bruno was curious about.The old person that shared any information w/ Bruno was his 12yr old sister. I thought it was a tragic movie that was definately not trying to portray the "i didn't know" factor ,but rather showing how everyone did know and also knew that it was wrong which is why they didn't d tell the 8 yr old son what was happening ultimately causing the death they're son.

Hi I watched this film last night and while some points I a agree with such as not a true account/fairytale etc. The fence was actually shown to be electric in one scene of the film when Bruno throws a stone against it and it bounces back. Also I can only imagine the terror that every jew went through in this very dark and brutal period. But you have to remember that this book is told from a 9 year old boys point of view and not as an adult. And in order to educate the younger generation this story has to be told in this way to ensure that this Genocide of the Jewish people is never forgotten. I believe that the Jewish people are the most treasured race of people and should be and always be proud of what they have achieved. PS I am a Catholic from Ireland.

I read this book in english and i watched the film, i had really strong feelings towards the book, and film, i felt like i wanted to cyr, everyone was ashamed of bruno and shmuels friendship, and this should not matter, i believe the moral of the fiilm and book is no matter what colkour race or beliefes youmay have, everyone should be treated the same.

Hey PCA!

I feel the need to disagree with your statement that there were no nine-year-old boys at Auschwitz; the Nazis gassed everyone not old enough to work. That is not true. Statistics show that this is not always the case: “According to a compilation by the Labor Assignment Office, 619 boys ranging in age from one month to fourteen years were living in Birkenau on August 30, 1944” (Langbein 239). Hermann Langbein describes two accounts of small children who lived in Auschwitz: “A little girl with long blonde pigtails [who] kept running around” and “a lovely three-year-old Gypsy boy who seemed to be made of chocolate” (239). What's more, there have been survivor accounts written by children who lived in Auschwitz. Anita Lobel, author of No Pretty Pictures: A Child of War, says, “During the years of flight I had heard the fearful word Konzentrationslager so many times. But I had never had a picture in my head of what a concentration camp might really be like. All I knew now was that what we had dreaded the most had finally happened. I was ten years old. My brother was eight. We were Jews. The Nazis had found us out and caught us at last” (Lobel 87). Anita and her younger brother, almost the same age as Shmuel is, had been protected by their Christian nanny for five years but were eventually caught and sent to Auschwitz. They were miraculously spared the fate of the chimneys and were eventually saved by the Swedish Red Cross. It is true that over a million children were brutally murdered in the Holocaust and that young children in the camps were rare; however, there were exceptions, and these exceptions are proof that an eight-year-old boy such as Shmuel could, and did, exist. Please do your research before making blatant assumptions about the Holocaust. Yes, this is a fictional novel. No, that does not make it any less real, nor any less powerful.

i liked the movi but the end was very sad

I doubt any who defends this literary piece has ever had a personal encounter with a Holocaust survivor. I met one whose parents were both immediately gassed upon arrival at Auschwitz, he witnessed the SS throw a baby into the air and use it for target practice, witnessed 1500 children burned alive- thrown into the fire like wood as he describes, among the other horrors. How hopeful he was that one of his seven bed mates would be dead in the morning so they could search his body for food. He saw people commit suicide by running into the electric fences, smelt their burning bodies, and contemplated doing it himself. Women tattooed with the words "Hitler's whores" across their faces and continually raped until killed. Yes, these are the disgusting realities of camps but if we let the facts become replaced by images of two happy boys meeting at a fence then we are spitting in the faces of these survivors. I have heard many speak and they are terrified of people forgetting the truth because that is exactly how history repeats, when people forget. If you want to argue that this novel is still important then please ask one Holocaust survivor what they think about representations like this. If anyone can find just 1 person who was actually there say that this will produce a positive effect on Holocaust memory then I will be surprised. If the author intended it as a general look at innocence then he should have used a different setting, place, and time- you do not use and distort other people's nightmares for profit.

The work was not meant to be an accurate representation of history, it was meant to teach a lesson; one that centers on the ability of humans to feel compassion for each other even in the darkest of times. Anyone who has heard of the atrocities of the holocaust knows that there are not enough words to describe the horrors that Jewish people during that time experienced. The innocence of Bruno only adds to the horror of the things happening in the concentration camps. If the father did know what was going on in the camp (which he most definately did, being a nazi soldier & being right next to a camp), Bruno cannot be condemned for his innocence. As for the fact that Shmuel could not possibly have had the time to stay at the fence and that he was too young to still be in a camp, the story is about the innocence of children, not the historical inaccuracies. LIfe is Beautiful is told from a similar perspective, a son and father are in a concentration camp & the father explains what is happening in terms of a game, to protect him. The child goes through the war in the camp innocently, not being able to believe that humans could possibly treat each other that way seriously. The case is the same with Bruno. He can simply not believe that things were as bad as they were, and as the story was told through his eyes, this perception of events is heartbreaking; as this perception leads to his death. The way the story is told makes the holocaust stabs the heart, but maybe there is a glimmer of hope for humanity if people can come together in such bad times. The story is ultimately being told as a child saw it, and a child cannot see the terrible reality.

The film, which I have watched online, leaves me shaking with both sorrow (from obvious causes) and rage. The film, with its many inaccuracies and sugar-coating concentraction camp life (the ability of Shmuel and Bruno to meet over and over, the fact that Schmuel was allowed to simply sit by the wheelbarrow and not work life a slave) is dangerous in that, by indoctrinating the unititiated with a Holocaust fantasy, the door is opened for the worst of these to mistakenly believe the Holocaust itself is a fantasy. There's no need to make Holocaust films for children; a thorough education in Judaism provides this, and it's a mature and sensitive subject. We don't need this very "Grimm" fairy tale!

I am a school teacher and not Jewish myself. Still, I want to incorporate knowledge of the Holocaust into my lesson plans because I think it is important. I began reading the book with the idea that I might teach it to my class. Upon closer inspection, however, I will not be doing so. I like the book as a piece of literature and appreciate the moral tale it tries to tell. Nonetheless, my students would likely walk away with some gross misconceptions that I just can't countenance. Particularly for elementary students, I feel that there are better choices. Jerry Spinelli's Milkweed, for example, does a better job of realism though we don't know if the protagonist is actually Jewish or not. As I read, I ask questions like, "Why hasn't anyone shot Shmuel for approaching the fence, are there no guards at fantasy Auschwitz?" and "How did he manage to survie the inital selection at age 9?" Students might not ask those questions, however. They have a tendency not to look critically at the things placed in front of them even when you try to foster that skill. Thanks for the thought-provoking article!

First, as a fable one cannot judge for any type of accuracy because as others have pointed it out, it is a moral tale, and what greater moral than the effects of propaganda. It is a really simplistic movie in that the filmmaker/author are clearly trying to show how as humans we stick to ridiculous claims and frames of reference, no matter how destructive they are. The film is also about realization. The Mother is fooled into thinking that nothing horrible is going on at the work camp, but finally gets it. The daughter is the foil, buying into anything, the Father is the committed soldier, knowing full well what happens, and the boy is the ignorant and inquisitive one, not ready to buy into any one point just yet. I think the end clearly communicates the horror as well as the ultimate tragedy that amid our personalities and worldviews we all breathe, bleed, and die in the same way. We clearly should learn that this applies today with our world. Doing what's right has nothing to do with being conservative or liberal.

I agree that 'The Boy in the Striped Pajamas' does not bring out the full detail of the holocaust but as it is in the view point of an German 8-9 year old, the character would not have seen the horrors. It cannot be put into this film. i believe that this is something like a 'starter' film which gives a hint to whether or not you can watch other films that are more disastrous. On another note, the "good people" that just watched are not watching because they want to. Rather they fear for their lives too if they were to try stop the events that occurred before their eyes. If someone was committing a horrendous crime before you and many others were watching, laughing, and they had the power to end your life or the life of a beloved one if you stepped out of line, would you have the courage to speak?

As the child of a Holocaust survivor, I agree that the movie distorts reality and I know it is impossible for anyone living near the camps not to have known the truth. Most survivors had nightmares for years (my Mom died still having them). There have been studies down that children in the inner city are impacted by the violence and deaths around them even if they didn't witness it directly. On the other hand, it is one of the few movies that my Granddaughter has watched several times and is still impacted by the boy's death each time. Maybe the key is that we need to discuss the reality while allowing the movie to teach a valuable lesson.

it is a very sad story and if anyone has a similar story to this please let me know.

Teenreads.com: On the title page, THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PAJAMAS is described as a fable. Why a fable? John Boyne: Considering the serious subject matter of this novel and the fact that I would be taking certain aspects of concentration camp history and changing them slightly in order to serve the story, I felt it was important not to pretend that a story like this was fully based in reality (which was also the reason why I chose never to use the word ‘Auschwitz’ in the novel). My understanding of the term ‘fable’ is a piece of fiction that contains a moral. I hope that the moral at the center of THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PAJAMAS is self-evident to readers. SO THERE! :)

First of all, this is not a documentary or a memoir/biography/personal account. Second, it is fiction. Third, it says it's a fable on the second page! [Fable:a short story conveying a moral.] So if you took offense to it not being historically accurate, that's your fault for not knowing what you are actually reading. Also, that means you missed the entire point of the story. It is a story about friendship. It is a story about morals and irony. It also touches on how children were brain washed (Bruno's sister), and emphasizes Bruno thinking for himself and empathizing for others- even though you say that's untrue. I am pretty sure the author isn't pro-German or anti-Jew. He simply wrote a FABLE that took place in Nazi Germany. I do not believe he glamorized the Jews' situations either. Another thing, this is in the children's section of a bookstore. It can be used as an introduction source or aid to the Holocaust education. Any teacher or parent using this as an only source is just irresponsible. So, maybe you are the one that should "get educated." I have recommendation for you, "Ann Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl." It's completely TRUE, I do believe.

I just saw the movie and can't agree more with all of your comments. I am a married African American mother of two boys 11 and 13. I will be sure they watch the movie but more over explain to them the symbols within and the overlying message of never let history repeat itself to no group, race, etc. It is sad how our history is so violent, the strong against the weak. It saddens me how we as humans can so quickly jump on the bandwagon to hurt others. While the fiction of this story is not factually based, I think it opens a window to teach about the Holocaust and other atrocities that have been done to people in the past and how we must stand up for what is right. I also hope conversations about education and reaching beyond what your parents teach you to become a well-rounded adult. Sometimes as parents I think we want our kids to vote as we do, be the same religion, like the same music but that's where the character Lil Bruno - even at 9, was trying to search for his own truth. While it's hard, I will encourage my sons to do the same, by reading, asking questions and being aware of the world and not just my small perspective.

So I had to watch this movie in my portuguese class,and honestly i didnt like it because the end its just so sad.Those 2 boys wanted to be friends and they are both so cute,and the way the died,i almost cryed in the end,its so so sad,nazis are so dam horrible and i know its just a movie but its also reality,in those camps must have been worse. :(

No words can tell...

I really think that ur film is still quite upseting but really good for 12 years old and more 2 watch

My mother & uncle were in a "work" camp that bears resemblance to the camp in the story. It was not Aushwitz - it was called Hasek. Comparing terrible with terrible gets us nowhere. My uncle was made to dig his own grave and was murdered. My mother made it through, obviously - as I would not be writing this. There were thousands of camps - many without "electrified" fences. My mother who is the sole remaining person in her Jewish - Polish family, remembers some "friendly" non-soldier Germans, who would sometimes leave food for her. She also tells of having a gun at her head, when the diamond drill on her machine was damaged. There were youngsters - read Schindler's List. There were people who did nothing. Who would do nothing today. Of course it is all fairy tale. But possibly we learn something from books & movies like this. I think the images in the movie are meaningful in their simplistic progression. This is The Holocaust as entertainment, but as a lesson at the same time. The message - it can happen to anyone. Anyone. And if we learn to love one another, rather than otherwise, maybe we can all prevent such terrible events. Maybe not. That is what is so sad. Maybe not.

I think that the argument you are making about indifference was the exact point of the book/movie. I think that the ending, which was a small tragedy among many tragedies of the holocaust, was making the exact point you are commenting on. The death of bruno in what he thought was shelter from the rainstorm was a direct consequence of his ignorance and indifference. I understand that you are saying that it is impossible that he wouldn't have known, but he was only a child raised by parents who kept him ignorant and especially a mother who wasn't strong enough to speak up against the cruelty. The book was extremely figurative and aimed to express that ignorance and indifference and "standing by" lead to unimaginable consequences for humanity. In this case, Bruno was a symbol of humanity. There were various times in the story when he struggled with accepting the truth because of lies he was told by his family. But deep down you could tell that he knew something was wrong. When humanity ignores its instincts and its recognition of evil for the sake of being safe and confortable, that is when the worst happens.

It's warped! It was on the vatican Top 10 movie list. There is a difference between views depending what side you are on. The people that come from the german boy side; liked the movie. The ones that come from the boy behind the fence; DON"T!

Sad movie

i have watched the film. i am a very small percent jewish and a smaller percent german. as the "Jewish mother" asked, how could anyone forgive the germans and germany? well . . . could the same question be posed to the victims of 9/11? how could anyone forgive the people and muslims involved in that? i am a victim of that event [my mother worked on the 97th floor of the south building] and i had an extremely hard time even thinking of forgiving the man who's taking the blame for it. but you have to, for if we don't, it will leave us torn, wretched and suffering. i know. i have suffered a large deal of mental trauma and at times, i didn't ahev a mind to speak of. i was like one of those suffering in the concentration camps - just a machine that could be tossed around. i guess what i am trying to say is, we should forgive because it's what's best for us. as much as it may hurt and bother us to do that, what has occurred has occurred and there's nothing we can do about it now. the generation who inflicted this evil upon our anscestors is long gone or nearly deceased. why hold a grudge that isn't ours to bear?

I saw only the tail end of the movie and have borrowed the book from the library for my child and I to read; however, I shall return the book unread by us both. The author is not even Jewish. He profited monetarily. He nor anyone in his family could empathize let alone sympathize with anyone who perished or survived the horrible Nazis. Just an aside, even now, I cannot understand how any Jew can buy a German made or designed product such as Mercedes Benz and BMW's. It is utterly absurd to think that those whose ancestors butchered, burned, gassed and tortured babies, children and adults are fine. How could anyone forgive Germany and the Germans?

I will admit that I have not read the book and I have not seen the movie. AllI have to say, however, is that my friend's daughter - a 4th grader - saw the movie. It was her first real exposure to anything about the Holocaust. (Her father is Jewish, her mother is not.) She did not take away any exoneration of the Nazis. Instead, she realized that even though "only" her father was Jewish, she too would have landed in a concentration camp. She was frightened. She didn't think that it looked as though Shmuely was playing or had any kind of real freedom. She didn't want to EVER be where he had been. She knew what being there meant - to the children - yes, I understand that there weren't children there, but seeing a child there made it clear to my friend's daughter that it wasn't only Jewish adults who were targetted. She was even more aware of her legacy, and I think that this was a wonderful, albeit scary for her, way to see what being Jewish, even if only biologically, can mean to us.

As an English and Social Studies teacher as well as a library student, I read The Boy in Striped Pajamas with all of those aspects of myself in mind. What a great book!! Though we know that the boy's relationship could not hve happened in a sense we wish it could have. To look at the world through innocent eyes, to accept one another without prejudice, this is one of the lessons the book has to offer. When in the end both boys go to their death we feel the Nazi commandant has been dealt a well deserved blow, we cry for the boys, and we cry for humanity. In talking with students I ask them how they feel about the story's end. Inevitably, they are conflicted - it serves the commandant right to lose his son, but Bruno like Shmuel doesn't deserve to die. Some of them consider is karma, others wish that we could all be more like children and accept eachother without prejudice. The story skews history but makes us stop and think. Bravo to John Boyne.

The boys in the movie were 8 years old and I think it's very likely that an 8 year could be completely clueless in that situation. I never felt that the movie tried to encourage sympathy for the Nazis. I felt they were just trying to juxtapose the innocence of these two boys against the brutality of the Nazi regime. The ending tore my heart out for both boys.

Of course, two young boys could be oblivious! What's wrong with some of you people? The story features a friendship that grew BECAUSE the boys were innocent. They had a forbidden friendship, and that aspect of the story would not have been possible without the innocence. How many of you have a young son? Okay..how many of you have a young son who reads the paper, and would assume that bodies were being burned if he noticed an unpleasant smell outside? What was happening with Jews was far from clear to everyone outside the camps. The story does not make me feel sympathetic for the Nazis. If anything, it makes me disgusted with people who let so many people get murdered. If you are under the impression that the Boy in the Striped Pajamas lessened the severity of the Holocaust, you are either completely wrong or you read a different copy of the book than I did.

"Anonymous" insists that this story "could have happened" despite the fact that ALL the babies and children were killed the day they arrived and ALL the fences were electrified, so that the Jewish child for the German child to be friends with was nonexistent and the crawling under the fence was impossible. How dare the writer lie about what could and could not happen at Auschwitz? Killing children ten and under was not a walk in the park, but claiming that the children were alive and free to make friends by the electrified fence is a BIG LIE. I knew a German who spent his childhood without enough food, but he always had more food than any concentration camp inmate and most importantly he was not murdered and his mother was alive and free, not imprisoned as a slave laborer and worked to death. And he said to me, "It was hard for us TOO." Yes, hard for him compared to Americans, but to compare his situation with that of people being brutally murdered, or tortured, or used for medical experiements, or systematically starved so they would succumb to cholerus and typhoid, is grotesque. And THAT is what this book does. I am guessing that it offers a grotesque claim that the poor little German boy crawled under the fence into the camp and got killed--an impossible scenario, designed to elicit pathos for the German murderers and indifferrence or hostility to the murdered Jews.

John Boyne (Author) Transworld 61-63 Uxbridge Road London W5 5SA England Publisher is David Fickling, Imprint of Random House, childrens Illustration number in U.S. 1-213-985-1881 John Boyne lives in the Republic of Ireland, but this is how to contact him by mail. or E-Mail www.johnboyne.com

Anyone know the contact information?

I almost bought this movie last night. After reading this article, I'm glad I didn't. John Boyne, he is an Irish author that attended Trinity University. I looked up "The boy in the striped pajamas" and it said a novel about germans and the Holocaust. So that's it, it is not a Jewish perspective. This is what the Rabbi is trying to say. The Shoah Foundation has kept the true accounts alive and will continue to let their voices be heard. These are used in schools and museums. These are live recordings from the Holocaust survivors. Children can handle the truth. Best to go straight to the source from those who actually lived through this instead of a fiction story.

I felt an instant 'hate' just after one sentence! The book should be taken off the shelf. In my view, it's as bad as 'Holocaust deniers'. I'm extremely angry. Don't think for one moment that a nine year old isn't capable of knowing there is something 'evil' going on. I must truly be different from most, for as a young child of four years of age even I knew the difference between 'good and evil' and certainly in some aspects of life I too have been naive, but not when it came down to 'cruelty' or 'hate'. When concerning something so horrific, brutal, and pure evil, there is no such thing as 'innocence' fables or stories. They had better be factual. I'm still shaking from anger.

The innocence and citizenship was taken from everybody. If you think that Hitler was easy on children, your wrong. He put extreme pressures on kids. Dealing wit disease, people dying, and many unbearanle sites that you're not suppose to see when you're a child. This book does not make anything look like a walk in the park. It shows only the day where they don't do as much killing. It isn't meant to be graphic or anything extreme. The author only went to a certain extent for a reason. This is an issue where you can't fully understand it unless you were actually there. I'm going to tell while I was in class learning about the Holocaust, I was horrified! And that was my very firsst time ever learning about the Holocaust. It was so brutal and cruel. I was afraid to learn about anything else that happened during the Holocaust. This book shows what could have happened. If you think you know everything about the Holocaust, let me tell you there's more out there than what you think and what people portray.

I think that although you are probably right about the general pervasion of knowledge about these horrors even among children. I think you underestimate the perhaps the possibility that innocence might not have been taken from every child, because a child is just that more innocent than an adult. Children are not equipped like with adult comprehension, even given adult information.

I thought this was a great movie. After watching it I had some factual questions. I do realize that having an 8-year old jew in a nazi camp might be inaccurate because I read in many of the killing camps the children and the disabled were killed off first. but Schmuley wasn't allowed to walk around the camp freely, he said this in the movie, many times he had to run off because someone blew a whistle. Also I thought that the fence was portrayed to be electrified. The fence was never touched and an electrifying sound was played when the chocolate bar hit the fence.

It is not something to distort period. No matter the audience, the author should have taken it around A LOT before its printing. Edit, next edition the author could fix this. Let see if he does.

While I was constantly bothered by the firm knowledge that no Jewish children lived more than a few hours after arrival at a death camp, I don't see the point in holding novelists to historical accuracy that they do not themselves claim. Novelists write, most of them, to make money, I think most readers know that.

wow this is so innacurate. Heartbreaking, yes but innacurate. After studying this era of Germany in history at school with a very, very honest teacher and visiting the Auschwitz camp/museum, this book/film really does make the Holocaust look like a walk in the park compared to reality.

and i didnt ever know it was in Auschwitz

Many films and books are inaccurate but seeing past the inaccuracies of the Boy in the striped pyjamas it highlighted the subject matter with thought provoking imagination. It expressed through the innocence of a child how abnormal thewhole concept of aushwitz was. As an adult I cannot comprehend how any human being could behave in such a horrific manner......its a pity we lose our childhood innocence. The importance of this story is shedding the knowledge you have of Auschwitz and seeing it through the eyes of a child.

A difficult question. I think I have to prefer that this book, with all its shortcomingt, gets into the hands of young people. Hopefully, they will ask questions of their grandparents and learn the real truth. Better they should hear this than the growing numberrs who deny the Holocaust. Let us who are older, teach the young ones lest any of us should ever forget.

I had the chance to watch the video a few weeks ago. I was appalled at the ignorance of it all. Even if the film is not geared to adults, the naivite was ridiculous. The article points out exactly what I noticed as I watched the fillm. I cannot believe some of the posts that were written by adults who seem to have an unrealistic, childish view of what happened during the Holocaust.I mean Shmulley himself (whom you rightfully point out could not have even existed past the selection) wonders where his father went and they set off to look for him! How ignorant! What a farce! I can't imagine how any aduld could come up with this. And BTW, to the previous poster who said it's difficult to write a realistice screenplay, there have been plenty of screenplays about the Holocaust. THey may not have come close to the real horror, but at leat they stayed close to the facts!

I Have Mannaged To Fall In Love With This Book, and from a teenagers point of view it is amasing. i thnk that John Boyne mannaged to hit the nail on the head with this novel, i have picked it for an english essay and now that i have read it i am glad that i have to wirte about it.

45 year old english woman, forever horrified at the atrocities of the concentration camps read much literiture. My daughter asked me to watch the DVD having been shown at school, it made them weep, I have explained this is nowhere near a true picture and when she is older I have many books for her to read. We must NEVER forget. I remember watching the Holocaust in the late 70's early 80's with my parents it should be shown again.

I totally agree with the article, but we don't have to forget that this is a novel, a novel told by a boy, a boy who emanates innocense and ignorance since he has lived in an artificial atmosphere... I really have been touched, and I have to recognize that if it has not been for this book I would never have been so interested with the holocaust matter... Of course, the novel is fiction, but I think that if it results in a thinking about the topic by the reader... Bufff!!! It is a lot of a good job by the author. Don't you think so?

In spite of some facts were not exactly as it happened, I believe this movie is capable to touch hearts never touched before with real arguments about the Holocaust. I study the Holocaust in Campinas - SP - Brasil, for 5 years, by myself, and try to teach, deliver lectures in schools, and I can see the difficulties talking about it, unfortunately. I myself wrote a screenplay, called THE DAVID STAR, which a movie maker saw and appreciated, but told me there is no money to produce the movie, one could read "there is no interest in producing it", because they don´t know enough about the Holocaust- if they knew, they´d certainly be more willing to produce it. I´ve paid much attention to this article, and while I was reading it I was at same time making comparison with my screenplay and thinking if I had made the same "mistakes", and reached the conclusion that it is quite possible. Writing a screenplay about the Holocaust is a very hard task. One has to synthetize all that horror in such a way that touches people from the first minute, have to condense everything in a simple one and a half hour story, without failing to tell the true. It is not that easy. I think the movie about the boy did reach what it was proposed to reach, i.e., it makes people think with more respect about the Holocaust. Yes, kids were indoctrinated in nazi schools, and the author paid attention to that, introducing a nazi private teacher for both kids of the nazi officer, and showing how one (the girl) has chosen to believe all that foolish theory, while the other (the boy) chose to thik by himself. It is not a movie to be so hardly criticized, I understand. But anyhow, Rabbi Blech´s article has opened very good points to be discussed with people when I teach about the Holocaust.

To S.L: On the point of a romantic setting for friendship in the Holocaust, that is bad why? In a setting such as the Holocaust, it is even more powerful to see the son of a SS man and a Jewish inmate form a friendship. It reminds us that despite the Nazis, not all Germans were like that and some were quite capable of being friends with Jewish people. Also, the fact that Holocaust deniers will be willing to use a children's book makes their denial even more laughable that they have to resort to a fictional story for their stupidity.

This book/movie did may not have been exactly (or even anywhere near what happened) but it did make me want to find out MORE...I felt saddened, empathic, and angry all at the same time. Though I have seen or read other stories of the Holocaust and this one does seem to be somewhat far fetched....let it be what it is...students can not learn about the Holocaust by simply this book/movie alone but it will touch their hearts and make them think. The fence was electric too by the way.

The second-last paragraph of this review should have been the first. The fact that an Auschwitz survivor feels so passionately against this tale surely must mean something. But, the author of this review seems to confuse fiction with documentary. "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas" never meant to be an accurate document of the Holocaust, it's a work of fiction inspired by actual events. It was interesting listening to the outraged, disbelieving comments of some of the women behind me during the film whenever one of the repugnant Nazis appeared on screen. Everybody loves to hate a good villain, and who is more villanous than a staunch Nazi in uniform, circa 1940? But this kind of group-hatred just reminds me of the kind perpetrated against the Jews during WWII. A stupid kind of group-mentality hatred. It's easy to hate Nazis now, just like it must have been easy for some to hate Jews. The thing about writers like the author of this book is they can transcend the stupidity of the group mentality and think outside of themselves, draw parrallels where others don't see them. They can put some of the pieces of the puzzle together, when most people don't even realise there is a puzzle. If the horror of the final scenes of this book/film can make thousands of people feel sick for knowing that this book is based on truth, isn't that worth the inaccuracies that make this book so palatable, so readable, compared with a nonfiction book or a documentary.

this book is ravishly entertaining. i think young intelectual minds will benefit the glory hole out of this text. i hope my contribution is taken seriously.

Oh, and to @Chaya (11) " Those who are offended, close the book, walk out of the movie. Works such as these are not evidence for Holocaust denial." True, cause there is no such evidence at all. But they are one source and one empowerment for Holocaust denial - thats the worst they can be.

@Laura (61) "I do feel that some credit needs to be given to the true lesson of this novel. Friendship!! This story, my students will tell you, is not about the Holocaust." That is exactly the point. The bad point. The Holocaust is used as a romantic setting for a story about friendship at all cost. What credit needs that to be given?

I understand fully what is being said here about the book. I agree that much of the fictional aspect of the book distorts how things would really have happened during this time. I do feel that some credit needs to be given to the true lesson of this novel. Friendship!! This story, my students will tell you, is not about the Holocaust. It is about friendship and how the fences put up to keep people apart can be torn down. The fable qualities of the novel help students see a light into the Holocaust yes, but in the end the two boys holding hands is the true meaning. Also while it may be the only text teachers use I think any teacher who does not give some type of schema to there students before reading the book would be highly misguided in their teaching of such a unit.

I do think the novel was suppose to be aimed at children and naturally in the process, the author had to tone a lot of the horror down to make it more suitable but nonetheless terrifying.

The movie was quite powerful in its impact although I recognize that it was very inaccurate. I also agree with the writer who says that there are so many true and terrible stories the movie makers could have shown. I can see why she says the movie should not have been made. To show such un-truths as they did in the movie seems to trivialize the real horrors that Jews endured during the Holocaust. I'm sure most survivors of the Holocaust would probably agree that there has never been a movie to accurately show what their lives were really like during that terrible period. We've seen glimpses in Schildler's List and LIfe Is Beautiful but I've read enough biographical recollections of the Holocaust to state that no movie has even come close. Would any producer ever be courageous enough to show the reality as it really was? By the way, to correct something Rabbi Blech wrote, I seem to remember Bruno throwing a metal object at the fence and we hear the electricity running thrrough it - so it was show to be electrified.

I have just watched the movie and with all do respect it seems like your criticism is a little out of proportion. I haven't read the book so maybe it was worse than the movie however, the movie is a fictitious film not meant to cover every aspect of what happened. It is meant to evoke an emotional response. I felt anger, sadness, pain while watching this movie. I had no impression that the movie made it as if everyone was ignorant, in fact, I thought it was obvious that some were somewhat naive, some were staunch supporters, others knew and said or did nothing, all of which happen to be true. I also highly doubt that this will be the "only" Holocaust material that a person ever comes into contact with their entire lives and yet, even if it were the only information I had ever had about the Holocaust I would still have a horrible feeling about it. I think anyone who would walk away thinking that HaShoa wasn't all that bad probably wouldn't be likely to think differently hearing other things more horrible things either. Obviously nothing sticks in your mind like actual footage, however to walk away from this movie and say that HaShoa wasn't that bad would be like watching someone accidentally cut off a finger in a saw and saying, "aw, that's not that bad" but if he had seen him cut off his whole arm he would think, "now that's just awful." Though this film may only be watching the finger in the saw and not the whole arm, I think it still leaves you walking away with a bad taste in your mouth.

This novel totally distorts an event that mankind must never ever forget. To make a son of the camp commodant the tragedy of the story is obscene. The book and the movie does nothing to preserve the horror that occured in these camps. The truth should be preserved for all time in the hope that the world will not sit idle by and allow a fanatic and his followers to perpetrate such heinous act.

I thought the movie was fiction. However, I do not think it takes away from the impact of the Holocaust. I just read a book about Hitler youth and how they were brainwashed. I believe this picture demonstrates the loss of innocense that many German and Jewish children underwent. I thought it did well at juxtoposing a "what if this were your child" type scenario. We need to be ever vigilant that our youth is not "brainwashed" by the schools or government again. We need to be careful that we don't turn our children over to others to teach them right from wrong, but we ourselves should be present in the moral education of our children. The most important thing we can teach them is to think for themselves and not always to just follow the majority down a blind path.

Having taught Holocaust Studies in a private parochial school for the past 10 years and taking yearly trips to the Holocaust Memorial in DC with students lead me to see THE BOY IN STRIPED PAJAMAS by myself. I had the feeling that I needed to do this alone, and I was right. For some reason, I knew the conclusion all through the story. The only word I could use after viewing it was "raw." I hurt so much that I could not cry, react, or talk about it initially. It was good that I had chosen to go alone. I knew shortly into the plot line of the film that it could not have been a true story, two childeren could not have ever sat and played checkers through a death camp's fence. Never! But a recocurring thought constantly entered my mind while viewing the movie. Has the Gentile world ever really dealt with their part in one of the world's worst examples of man's inhumanity to man? As the Nazi commandant searches for his son at the end of the story, who has already been gassed, as the millions of innocent men, women and children of the Shoah had been, I wondered if even the realization of his own flesh and blood's demise would have been the catalyst for him to change his own personal anti-Semitism? In the world we live in today, with anti-Semitism on the rise, does the non Jewish world have any concept that at some point there will be some sort of recompense made for such deviant behavior? The Holocaust has never been properly addressed by the world that stood by and watched it occur. Could this movie, at its base, be a nudge to all of us of this generation, to relook at the horrific events and even possibly own up to the vast injustice done to the innocent. Of course, we were not there! But is there need for a collective sorrow by human beings today who have any empathy at all for such suffering... to at least address some sort of apology? No, we were not there, but as Gentiles, as possibly Christians, as member of the human race, could this movie be a reminder that forgiveness is required when human beings act so inhumanely to one another. I don't have the answers for our generation, but I believe we all must look at the issues of the Holocaust and ask,not only G-d to forivive us, but possibly to clearly let the 12 million Jews left in the world today know that we are sorry enough about our history to at least finally say, "Forgive us!" And then to live as though we have changed--so it never happens again! "Raw" is still the sense of my heart a week after seeing the film. The profundity of its message is one of the deepest sentiments that I have ever had and I have probably seen almost every documentary and simulated version of the Holocaust over the years. As I celebrate Thanksgiving with my Jewish/Christian family this year, I pray, we pray that somehow the world has changed since 1945. Somehow, we understand better that such behavior cannot ever be tolerated again for any persona in this world!

while I agree in relation to the lack of "accuracy" that the book has as well as many other movies and books on the Holocaust, I cannot help but wonder, if it indeed was so impossible for people in such dark times to see the hand of God in the midst of all that chaos? Love and friendship are certainly gifts of God and surely there were more than one 1940's german resident who simply did ot know or was unwilling to accept the capability of human to destroy his fellow humans. However, this is not something that has happened only to your community, the prosecution of the early Christians at the hands of ancient Jew communities is also part of the dark past of mankind. Naturally, it is not my place, position or intention to diminish the sad, cruel and chaotic events that did took place during the decade of the 1940's still, something haunts me, and I place this just as a question in the air... If all germans are guilty of doing something against or not doing anything to stop it, what are the jews that were warned in time but failed to spread the alarm or were too high on their egotistical ground to believe that such a dark cloud was coming guilty of? Should their names be written along side those of their executors? After all, there should be countless families that dissapeared because a friend or a neighbor, even though jew, simply did not care enough to issue the warning?

Today commemorates the seventieth year since Krystallnacht. It is also the day on which I saw The Boy in the Striped Pajamas and on which I read your review. There is no question that the events of the Holocaust do not lend themselves to retelling in cinema and books. The destruction of the European Jewish community was a monstrous demonstration of man's inhumanity to his fellow man. As Jews we see the events of the Holocaust through the eyes of survivors and if we listen well we place ourselves into the place of those survivors. German citizens did not stand in the place of those we are able to identify with. Many years ago there was a film entitled Shoah. It was 14 hours long and utilized no archival footage. The filmaker attempted to establish the truth of the Holocaust by interviewing many Germans and Poles to determine what they saw, heard and knew. The impact of the film was overpowering. The quality of denial beyond belief. Ultimately those interviewed spoke of green trucks going through their villages. They denied knowing that people were being transported in the trucks even though they could hear screams when the trucks went into the nearby camps and no screams when the trucks came out. They denied knowing there were crematoriums even while describing the black smoke and awful stench. As Jews we have listened to survivors, we have experienced the museums and memorials, we know people with numbers on their arms. They are us and we are them. We cannot deny nor would we, but we must recongnize that Germans and others were willing to accept lies and distortions, because they were unwilling to recognize the truth. When we left the theater today there was nothing anyone could say. The story is fiction. The ending improbable. At the same time it is only the innocence of Bruno that saves him from the disintegration his mother experiences when she allows herself to comprehend the truth and the cruelty he sees in his father and others. Victims and oppressors do not have the same point of view. Even in the face of denial by the oppressors it is imperative that the victims tell their stories over and over again. Once there are no more survivors it will rest upon those of us who have heard their stories to speak and to educate. Denial will be even easier when there are no survivors left.

I have only seen the trailor on t.v. and I have cried all morning. Don't you know God cries when we don't love each other?!!!!!!!!!!

We are Jewish and I have been very careful to introduce the subject of the Holocaust to our young children - aged 5.7 and 9. I do believe they have a duty to know what the Nazis and the German people did to us. Children do ask questions and we have to be honest with them. Here in England the Holocaust is widely documented and as children watch TV they also ask questions and demand direct answers. I gave my then 8 year old the book and she read it very quickly and came to her own conclusions. She explained to her brother (aged 6) that there was no way that Bruno did not know what was going on as he could see the other prisoners and that it was not a holiday camp! Rabbi Shlomo is underestimating children's ability to see beyond what was written. This is just an introduction - a gentle one, of man's capability to inflict pain an suffering on others. Children understand that . Why don't we?

yes rabbi. we will not forget the 6´m . but now we are losing 13´m in assimilattion and secularization. acording to adherents.com.

I just finish reading the book,I think that the father knew how his son dissapear.In a way in my view Bruno suffer the same fate of the Jews and the father knew. The book may not be very accurate but the movie maybe will open the eyes of some jews in the USA that are open the "door" at this moment for the possible destruction of the State of Israel in the near future

Although a fable, we can not allow the truth to be distorted even in the slightest. This bleak time in history, for the sake of all peoples, can not be forgotten.

I discovered some information: John Boyne is Irish "The Boy in Stripped Pajamas" was written in 2006 as a children's book. Sold aver 3 million copies and was subsquently made into a movie. What can one say? It's outrageous insensitivity. A book should be written about John Boyne and people like him who come up with these ideas. What is the motivation for writing such books?

"The Boy in Stripped Pajamas" reflects lack of judgement and normality not only by the author but the publishers! It could bear a sub-title "Tom Sawyer and Hunkleberry Finn meet in the Holocaust." or a more recent figure: "Harry Potter's adventure in the Holocaust." Perhaps these sub-titles "will be subsequent books." If John Boyne had suffered loss of family and friends in the Holocaust I doubt if he would have written this book which deserves to be banned here in Israel. April 21, marks Holocaust Rememberance Day and sirens are sounded throughout the country as we do every year. It's for six million who perished. But above this, it's for the numbers lost in the unborn generations following!!! Is Europe interested in remembering this day? Maybe these countries don't know and need to be told so they could observe as well. John Boyne should also be told about "our special day of rememberance" so he may participate.

Rabbi, you are correct. We should never forget the six million Jewish people that perished in the Holocaust, but we should also not forget the members of the nations that perished as well. The Holocaust was not only conducted against the Jewish people, but also against those that belonged to the nations. We should not forget the memory of the people that died in this horrible act of intolerance and destruction whether they are Jewish or of the nations. Shalom, Shlomo

I will always believe that every German, except new borns, knew exactly what was happening to the Jews. You could in no way miss seeing them rounded up, shipped out or in many instances killed on the spot. We must never allow the world to forget!

Great points

We live in a world that wants to make everyone good! Looking at the incredible ugliness of a world that stood by and allowed 6 million people to be gassed is simply too uncomfortable, so we write books and make movies that make it look not nearly as bad as it was. It would be impossible for anyone to ever think that people in Auschwitz were lounging around drinking at cafes and having a vacation, because people on vacation don't turn into skeletons. Vacation resorts aren't made of horse stables, and people aren't randomly beaten with truncheons while on vacation. The problem is that the more the world forgets what really happened, the closer we come to allowing it to happen again. The same people who are big fans of this book, for "it's innately human message" also invite Ahmadinijad into our universities and TV studios for "open dialogue and meaningful discussion." Calling a wolf a dog, and soon that dog will bite you!

Author: BOYNE Title: THE BOY IN STRIPED PAJAMAS Publisher: Fickling--released by Random House Date: 2006 Pages: Annotation: At a time when memories of the Holocaust (W.W. II in Europe) are fading and research has demonstrated that the subject is poorly taught, if at all, in England and the U.S., Boyne’s book comes as a slap in the face of history and the victims of those obscene events. It is styled as a “fable,” defined in a dictionary as “A narration intended to enforce a useful truth”. What is the truth that this hopes to convey: That a nine-year-old boy, Bruno, son of a high ranking S.S. officer, commandant of Auschwitz, would not know that the Fuhrer’s title is not “The Fury,” that Auschwitz is not “out-with,” that he is living in a house with a full view of the barbed wire (and electrified) fences surrounding the place, that the many people he sees in “striped pajamas” are not there on holiday? or are the terms he uses merely “cutisms” to show how innocent he is? After all, so many Germans and their allies also proclaimed their innocence. In his boredom and loneliness and his nostalgia for his home and friends in Berlin, Bruno hikes the area outside the fence at great length. He comes upon a thin striped pajama clad boy of his own age within the fence and they begin a relationship of sorts. The boy, Shmuel, a Polish Jewish prisoner--although we are not told that he is Jewish--interests Bruno who sometimes brings him food--if he remembers not to eat it. Eventually, Bruno, in striped pajamas supplied by Shmuel (and where did he acquire them? From a corpse?) slides under the fence and joins Shmuel but they both are sent to the “showers” and then, one must presume, the ovens. There are many questions that Boyne does not answer and which can be answered only by a knowledgeable person, of whom there seem fewer and fewer. (Is this a book about which we must say, “Read only with a knowledgeable adult “?) Item: Some of the questions about the morality of Auschwitz will have no answers 2-2-2-2-2-2 because such total evil provides none, but the book does not even try. Item: Children were among the first sent to death. Item: What person would be allowed to wander about and find an empty place away from the thousands of other prisoners? Item: If Bruno could crawl under the fence, wouldn’t others have attempted to escape, too? Item: Why are there no notes indicating what “out-with” and “the Fury” are? Item: What happens to Pavel, the kindly prisoner who works in the family’s kitchen? Item: Why was the smug and handsome Lieutenant sent away? Was he having an affair with Bruno’s mother? He is the only character who is so arrogant and cruel as to be off-putting. Were there no others as cruel as he in that hell? Item: Is Bruno’s father cruel or merely a preoccupied banal face of evil? Item: Why were all those people in striped pajamas there? What are striped pajamas? What do they indicate? (Prisoners wore these demeaning rags to further dehumanize them.) Item: How can we accept such trivialization of genocide? Item: Why is this called “A Fable”? If so, what is the “useful truth” to be learned? or is it a fantasy about which this reader cannot suspend disbelief because these unbelievable events did occur to millions of people? Item: For whom is the narration intended? Item, the last: Why is such a misleading and untruthful book being released fifty years after the liberation of the camps when memories are fading and knowledge of those times weakening into ignorance and denial? --Ruth I. Gordon, A.M., M.L.S., Ph.D. School librarian, retired

My husband was a survior. He survived the war by escaping with his family from Satmar when the Nazis was taking over the area.After being beaten by the soldier. His brother made arrangements to leave the town in the middle of the night. They saved a bus load of neigbors . One of the people saved was the Satmar Rabbi.

I regard my family as a holocaust family - my grandfather was gassed at Auschwitz and my grandmother was and my mother is a survivor. As we grew up, the holocaust was omnipresent and my own children (oldest 12, youngest 5) are well aware of what happened. Nontheless, this was the first cinematographic presentation, and for all its faults identified by R Blech and others he does not mention, they found it harrowing. Those faults will be long forgotten. They have many years in which to find out how bad it really was, this film contains a hint which they will take forward. Incidentally, what is clever about the film is teh fact thatthe film invites you to be sympathetic to the German boy (or as my son said "why did the German boy have to die?"). As soon as he said it he realised that there was something wrong with his moral compass, because of course what about the other (ie the real) victims. I absolutely agree with the others who believe that in spite of everything, the book and film are worthwhile.

I grew up in a modern Orthodox family in NYC during the 1950-1960's. My mother taught Hebrew school, my father was an administrator in a progressive Yeshiva that I attended. The Holocaust was never mentioned anywhere. Though later I realized that great aunts and uncles on both sides of my family had died in the Holocaust, we never talked about it. It was a dirty, unspoken secret. Are filmed first hand accounts of survivors part of every school child's history curriculum? If not, why not? If we as humans are to say,"Never again!" how can we turn a blind eye to Darfur? It is because we are not daily listening to survivors' first hand accounts.

This book was written by a non Jewish author for a predominantly non Jewish readership. The film of the book has been on general release here in the UK for several weeks now. Many people have absolutely no idea about concentration camps, and have never had cause to consider the atrocities the SS committed. They would never normally consider going to see a film about the Holocaust. While this story is obviously fiction and could not have happened for the reasons already stated, the film has had a huge impact, which can only be a good thing.

I read the book and did not think for one second that this was the story of Auschwitz or even a Holocaust book. I think the author was telling me a story about a german boy. True by the end of the book I had no interrest in this german boy, but my heart went out to "those in the striped pajames". I don't think my reaction was what the author intended of his book. I think that most Jewish people would feel like me. My biger problem with the book, is that a child reading it with no background would have absolutly no idea what was going on, and depending on who they asked for clarification would be the history lesson they received. So maybe if we give it to our children to read, it is a good starting point of discussion on the atrosities of Auschwitz.

Yes, I did read and wept too. I think the author hints to the punishing of that "father", who is also loosing a son in the most ironic way. I dont think it will hurt the memory of our 6 million jews. Hundreds of books were written with the truth, and nothing but the truth.This was written by a non-jew and this is a clear way to recognize the difference between a non-jew and a jew. A non-jew is not intitled to write about "personal" experiences in Auschwitz. There are lots of other subjects to write for them. But still, the book is worth reading

Not only were there no nine-year-olds in Auschwitz, nobody was allowed near the fence. If you got close to the fence, you were shot. The idea of these boys sitting for hours and hours playing checkers is absolutely absurd.

I have read the book,and a lot of time after I felt unjustice about it, something bothered me! I could not understand how the author can be so cruel to the 6 milion victims by writing such a book.

It is difficult to know what will keep the Holocaust alive truth or fiction. Let me put it this way, I am a Holocaust survivor, although I have survived that period NOT in a concentration camp and therefore have no right to really call myself thus. I think that NO book can really depict that period truthfully enough.The more we read about it the less we can comprehend how human beings could, not only commit these attrocities, but "patent" them for further use. Still, no one, no human being can really FEEL the cold, the anguish, the unimaginable cruelties their torturers will think of next, and that, day after day 24 hours a day !!! How can you feel it through descrptions? through stories and witnesses acounts??? NO one, unless he was there, I think. I might feel guilty that my lot was so much easier than theirs. Therefore, I feel, that any book written which can keep this period alive for the world to see, whether true or imaginary, is welcome, at least is does not "deny" the exsistence of these camps, which so many try to do. Anny Matar

One more attempt by the media to delegitimize everything Jewish. It's no surprise that this book is destined for the classroom - new studies have shown that the textbooks now used denigrate Jews, Judaism, and Israel ("The Trouble with Textbooks" by Gary Tobin.

I've not read the book, but I did see the movie.To me, it clearly assumed that the viewer knew what was going on. The issues it tries to deal with are the level of knowledge of the adults, and their participation, willing or otherwise. For instance, do the adults keep Bruno ignorant because they know what's happening is wrong and they don't want him to know they are participating? or are they merely trying to protect his sensitive soul? The movie also has some exchanges which show the difficulty of going "against the grain", or, in our times, "being politically incorrect". These perspectives may not be enough to save either book or film, but those unfamiliar with neither should not judge them on what they do not try to do.

I'm not surprised to see the latest assault against 6,000,000 victims of the Holocaust. I say assault, yes, bec to write fiction about something so REAL, after all 6 million people and how they were murdered is very real. and to sanitize the massacres and make it look as something oh well, fiction, where two kids can talk to each other thru a fence, is offensive to me on account of those victims.DOES THE AUTHOR KNOW THE WORD "RESPECT"? Who is going to believe a story where a child is starving and sick talking placidly to a child who's well fed and doesn't notice anything is amiss. Oh yes, of course, it just occurred to me, the kid was ROSEMARY'S BABY!!!!! THANK YOU, BUT NO THANK YOU. KEEP YOUR BOOK!!!!NO HARD EARNED JEWISH MONEY SHOULD PAY FOR SUCH A BOOK.

For the real story, please read: "Thou Shalt Not Forget", A Child's Memoir of the Holocaust. This a true account - very gruesome - they could never make it into a movie. The author is Israel Lapciuc. He tells the story of the holocaust as it has never been told - through the eyes of a 7 year old child. The narrative covers 4 years, from 1941 to 1945. Israel, who today is a highly successful businesman, has an uncanny memory. The sights, the smells, the sounds, the fears, they're all in his book. A must for anyone who wants to know how it really was. Published by KTAV Publishing House, Inc. Jersey City, NJ. Can be found on Amazon. May we never forget!!!

This is not Shoa denial, this is a plain concoction of political correctness, post modernism, I'm ok you're ok kind. If I was a good boy so maybe were some Germans. There was a TV movie done in the 1980s by Ed Asner about the friendship of 2 girls in Vienna before the war, one Jewish one not, something like this moronic book, but today young people are more indoctrinated, less critical, and not much able to discern between fantasy make belief and reality.

If they distort history, they can tell themselves they dont have to deal with its lessons, and are free to repeat them. (if only we would grapple with the facts)

I saw the riveting coming attractions for this movie which definitely will attract an empathic audience. The writer is absolutely correct that this movie is a fictional distortion of history. His commentary should be published in major media outlets (newspapers, drudgereport, youtube etc.) The American public has to be educated as to the realities of the Holocaust. Unfortunately, a picture is worth a thousand words. This picture needs to be exposed as a heart-wrenching fairy tale. I hope someone with the means and the ability will take this on. I write this in memory of my cousin, Irving Maurer, who lived through seven concentration camps and shared his experiences via s Shoah Foundation tape. His reality as a young teen who miraculously survived horrible bestiality and a death march after four years at the hands of the Nazis is antithetical to the distorted "truth" this movie portrays.

The book clearly states that it is a fable, it doesn’t claim to be a historical novel. The true tragedy here is not that the author painted an unrealistic picture of a tragedy, but that teachers and parents are presenting it as fact. This beautifully written book should not be on the reading list in high school history classes, they should be learning the truth of the horrible events that took place. No one should believe that it’s fact, but no one should deface it when it never claims to be. I am very disappointed in this article. As a grandchild of a survivor of the camp who adored this book as a fictional novel, it is appalling that one persons opinion was presented as a whole. I would hope that more time and research is put into the next well meaning article written.

The smell of 3,000 burnt human beings after 9/11 in Manhattan lingered for months-what happenened to the olefactory sense of those who lived near the concentration camps where many, many more people were burnt every single day?

I read the book several months ago and I do not agree with your review - although I don''t totally disagree with it. However, I think that the book shows that no matter how the Nazis tried to shield their own children - the horror that they perpetrated could catch up with them, often in unexpected ways. I have not seen the movie, nor do I intend to.

Very good article! There must be strong warnings about books and films that are filled with half-truths and distortions of history. coming generations will not be able to discern between truth and poorly researched fiction. If not guarded and truthfully presented, there will come a day when it wil be easy to deny the holocaust, or just to brush it off as a time when some people ran around in striped pajamas!

As per "Anonymous" who stated that teachers who assign this book need to provide insight, the truth about the distortions in this book need to reach not only the schools but the larger world as well. People who read this website can easily understand the importance of this article, it's those who don't read such a website who need to be educated.

This book is disturbing. It is almost worst than the Holocaust deniers, because it distorts the truth. I had not heard of this book & am sorry to learn of it. It reminds me of the movie "Life is Beatiful", in which a Jewish father (supposedly) convinces his son, that they are temporarily in a special place & NOT a concentration camp. I haven't seen the movie, because I couldn't stomach the perversion. Thank you for informing me about this book.

What we need is more books & movies about Jewish resistance to the Nazis so the world can learn the strength of the Jewish people.

I am a child survivor of the holocaust, although I was never in a camp. My grandparents were killed in Auschwitz and many people in my extended family were also murdered. Presently, I both docent and speak at the Florida Holocaust Museum in St. Petersburg. I dread to think about the misconceptions young people will have about the holocaust, both after reading the book and seeing the movie. It will be more difficult to explain the true horrors of what happened after reading and/or seeing such a misguided account. We should always endeavor to tell the truth even while taking into account the ages of our readers, listeners, and viewers.

I just finished The Book Thief and found this profoundly moving, so moving I wrote to the author in Australia. This is very much about the Holocaust and feels real to me in terms of the humanity of the characters and their situation. I would find the same problems with this book, given your commentary and so will not read this or recommend it. I trust your judgment.

It is generous of your Rabbi Blech to label this book well meaning, but I think it's safe to assume that there is an agenda here, which tries to remove blame from all but the most central Nazi figures. Maybe I'm wrong, but that would be my guess.

It continues to amaze me that people are still denying the holocaust. I was 15 years old when the war ended. I can still see in my minds eye the terrible picture that were in life magazine of the survivors. I continue to wonder why no one has gone to Life magazine's library and obtained those pictures, surely they will comply and release them. Sincerely, Marilyn Stovall

Thanks to the rabbi for elucidating the problems of this book. Downplaying the knowledge that the citizenry had of the atrocities is alarming. Holocaust studies have brought us to a time when we know how complicit the citizenry was and how prevalent the camps were. The thought that a boy could not have an understanding of what was happening in Auschwitz, is disturbing and does seem to want to give credence to claims following the Holocaust that the “ordinary men” did not know what was happening. But books like “Ordinary Men” do tell the truth. It may not be palatable, but such atrocities rarely are. This is a dangerous story to distribute. As another writes, there are enough real stories. Why fabricate one that is so misleading? When my children were nine, they were certainly wise enough to discern good from evil and reality from fantasy. Let’s hope our high school students can do the same.

I bless my grandparents for having the insight to flee Europe well before the Shoah began. My maternal grandfather walked from Russia to France where he worked as a tailor to earn his way to England and ultimately to the United States. I cannot begin to image what he must have gone through in order to ensure that his children be born in freedom. Thanks you, Rabbi, for this heads up about this book. I will make certain that people find out about it. Anything that minimizes the torture our people went through should be considered a sin against those who experienced the Holocaust. Last night I heard someone praise FDR. I informed them of what his refusal to bomb the railroad tracks leading to the death camps, making him implicit in the slaughter of so many of our people. Further, his refusal to permit Jews to enter the country, instead forcing them to return to the land that executed them, further shows that the so-called hero was nothing more than a monster who was in league with Hitler and Stalin. May his memory be forever cursed and linked with Amalek and his ilk.

Let those who are offended, not read it. I remember being terribly offended by a TV miniseries in the 70's called "Holocaust" because the Jews were ostensibly plump and had straight white teeth. I remember being offended by the movie "Schindler's List" because it didn't show the true horror of such depravities as my people having to dig their own graves. I remember being not so very horrified, because it made me laugh, of a foolish holocaust movie entitled "Life is Beautiful." Since when has fiction had to be true? Those who are offended, close the book, walk out of the movie. Works such as these are not evidence for Holocaust denial.

Many of us spent a good deal of time and energy trying to convince library book buyers that the book is a dangerous "phantasy" on several counts. It is a soap opera with all the necessary heart-tugging strings that belie the experience of the death camps. There is so much that is dangerous and deluding, Random House never should have released it. Even the publishing history is tangled.

As a teenager I survived Auschwitz. I totally agree that this idealized version of a book misses the point of the Holocaust. It teaches nothing!!!

Todah for the truth how ever hard it my be,we as a country and people can never forget what has happened in the past one hundred years, from the Holocaust to the killing fields of Cambodia. We must stand up and defend those who can not help them self's or we have failed G-d. No matter what the cost we have to free and help all people.I will never isolate myself and hide behind a fence from what is right I would rather die than fail my G-d my country and my people. Ester did not fail us and I will not fail my children, Lest we never forget the past or distort it for money or personal gain. May the word live in us around us and be with us forever never give up the fight for the truth or for others it is what makes us G-d's children and the keepers of his house and his word Thank you for your article it lit my fire again. With Love from the United States Marine Corps it's why were here.

Truth should be said, even in a fictional book. As a Jew from Iran, we did not see. Be that as it may, I read, speak and put my shoes in the souls of by gones. Truth is trugh and we and generations to come, SHOULD never forget or forgive. The whole world knew and did nothing, never again

Good article Rabbi Bleich, Yasher Koach! My Dad ad 120! is a Holocaust survivor and one of his best friends B" was in Auschwitz. B" described to me once the frightful nature of the camp and how years later here in Australia he wouldn't be able to sleep when he remembered the methodical way the nazis destroyed the Jews.

Trying to write a fictional account in a non-fiction setting is quite daunting. I myself have struggled for a long while with trying to piece together a story that tries to some small level show the horrors of Shoah but with a fictional character. Personally I feel accuracy to history must take precident over making a story entertaining to read.

Let's hope that teachers who assign the book might also assign critical commentary like this article. Can we mail this article to high schools around the country?

This is an excerpt from an interview with the author from another website: The author says, ‘I wrote the entire first draft of ‘The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas’ in two and a half days. I barely slept, I just kept writing until I got to the end. The story just came to me, I have no idea where it came from. As I was writing it, I thought, just keep going and don’t think about it too much. With the other books I plan them all out. I think about them for months before writing anything down. But with this one on Tuesday night I had the idea. On Wednesday morning I started writing, and by Friday lunchtime I had the first draft. The following Wednesday I gave it to Simon. I said ‘I’ve written this book, it’s very different to anything I’ve done before. I think it may be a children’s book but I think adults might like it too." He didn't "think about it too much"...this says a lot.

Yasher Koach for bringing this issue to light. I just saw an interview with the author in leau of the upcoming movie. My initial reaction was admiration for his publication,but after reflecting on the content of the book and soon to be movie I realized that he does not depict the reality of the brutality in the camps. My feelings immediately changed from admiration to anger. The actors that he hired for the film were not given any introduction to what the holocaust really was like, so they could play their roles with a blithely and innocently. Only now, after the film has been produced, are the children receiving the foundation of a holocaust awareness. If this is the case with the actors in the film, imagine all of the students who have read the book thinking it was an accurate description of what transpired. This publication gets away with murder, because they deny that murder ever happened.

Elie Wiesel's "Night" is perfectly suited - my 10th grade public high school English class learned it, and it worked for us just fine. My 11th grade AP World History class, during our WWII unit, saw movies visually depicting the ghettos and the concentration camps. Is this not enough? If so, learn Art Spiegelman's Maus. It's sad that anyone thinks we need to replace these works, and it's even sadder that a book like the one Rabbi Blech reviewed, is the replacement.