The Giving Tree 40th Anniversary Edition Book

I recently read this book to my little boy.

It's not the first time I've read it. It's probably not even the tenth time. But it's the first time I've read the book in a decade, and given the fact that my memory is like a cheese grater, I like to think I got a pretty fresh experience.

The result is this: I honestly don't know how I feel about this book.

Even if you haven't read the story, you probably know the gist of it. A tree loves a young boy and gives away pieces of itself to the boy to make the boy happy.

On one hand, this story can be taken as an open, honest exhortation toward selfless Agape-style love. Love which asks nothing. Love which gives everything.

On the other hand, this story can be read as a horrifying condemnation of dysfunctional unrequited co-dependance.

After reading the book, I honestly don't know which it is.

On one hand, taking this book at face value is probably a fool's game. Silverstein was a twisted sarcastic bastard. He wrote lyrics for Dr. Hook. (Most notably "Freaking at the Freaker's Ball.") And back in my misspent youth, I discovered a poem of his in one of my Dad's Playboys. It was called "The Great Pot Smoke-Off."

My point is, dude was part of the counterculture. He was full of mocking and meta. And as such, it seems odd that he would write something that seems like an obvious endorsement of Christ-like selflessness... and then that was it.

But on the other hand, when Silverstein was having fun with you, he usually didn't pussyfoot around. One of his earliest publications was "Uncle Shelby's ABZ book." Which *looks* like a kid's book, but is clearly not:

Here's a piece from the page on Potty Training:

"See the potty
The potty is deep
The potty has water in the bottom.

"Maybe someone will fall into the potty and drown.

"Don't worry. As long as you keep wetting your pants, you will never drown in the potty."

Not a lot of ambiguity here. His tongue is pretty clearly in his cheek.

But when I read through The Giving Tree, I don't see the author winking at me from behind the scenes. The story *seems* to be straightforward.

But here's the thing, even if the story *is* straightforward, I don't know how I feel about it. Is the boy selfish in the story? Absolutely. He's a little shit. Yet he doesn't get one bit of comeuppance. We kinda want him to, but that's not what happens. The boy doesn't seem to learn a lesson. And neither does the tree.

That seems to imply there is no lesson to be learned here.

Let's be clear. The tree is *happy* at the end of the book. There's no ambiguity about that. It's entirely possible that the tree has acted in its own best interest. It's entirely possible that the tree, if you'll forgive the expression, is acting according to the Lethani.

Even after thinking it over for a couple days, still I don't know how I feel about it. That's a rarity for me.

For that reason, I'm giving this five stars. If you write a book that leaves me asking questions. If you write a book that people can have legitimate disagreements about. If you write a book that people can still wrangle over after fifty years… that's pretty clearly a five-star book.