The Reader - Bernhard Schlink

The Reader by German judge and law professor Bernhard Schlink was published in German in 1995 and translated into English in 1997. In 1999 it was selected for Oprah's Book Club, not to mention garnering various other literary awards. One can read this book as a story of a love affair set in post-war Germany between a 15 year old boy and a woman twice his age. Or one can read it and see the tale as something deeper than mere romance. I prefer the latter angle of understanding and that was how I approached the book.

I finished reading this book many weeks ago but held off writing a review about it in order that time and some space in between would enable me to look at the story more objectively. By this, I mean to be more detached from the characters of the book and to understand the circumstances and events in their proper historical context.

The Reader is written by German judge and law professor, Bernhard Schlink. It was published in German in 1995 and translated into English in 1997. In 1999 it was selected for Oprah's Book Club, not to mention garnering various other literary awards.

One can read this book as a story of a love affair set in post-war Germany between a 15 year old boy and a woman twice his age (whose illiteracy she tries to keep secret - at whatever cost), who is later exposed as an SS guard during the Second World War.

Or one can read it and see the tale as something deeper than mere romance; that the romance and the characters of the boy and woman, Michael Berg and Hanna Schmitz, respectively, as emblematic of two generations of Germans dealing with the issues of guilt and remorse stemming from their country's role as lead perpetrator of the Jewish Holocaust. And Hanna's illiteracy as synonymous with their denial and/or ignorance of the crimes committed by many in the name of the State.

The question that is posed is this: If the sins of the father are revisited on the son, then what about the sins of a generation of German people that lived through the war, many who did nothing and stood idly by as their Government went about the business of genocide and extermination of the Jewish people? What kind of guilt should be apportioned to this generation of Germans - or should guilt only be placed on those who can be singled out as those who actively worked for the Nazi regime leaving the rest 'innocent' by reason of their ignorance regardless of whether it was willful or not? Is it for the generation that comes after to seek absolution for their forefathers' sins? And if every generation carries the symbolic torch of their times, then what is the symbol of the generation of German baby boomers? Should theirs be one that represents collective remorse and guilt?

I prefer the latter angle of understanding and that was how I approached the book.

Allow me to give you a summary of The Reader. It is 1958, Germany. The young Michael is taken sick one rainy day on his way home from school. He throws up on the sidewalk and is helped by the woman Hanna, who is on her way home from her work as a tram conductor. Smitten by her, the young boy returns to her apartment to thank her 3 months later and from which time a sexual affair begins. A routine emerges where Michael and Hanna would bathe together each time before making love to each other. After a while, Hanna insists that Michael reads to her before their lovemaking sessions. This becomes a new routine and Michael begins to read from a wider selection of books all of which are enjoyed by the very appreciative Hanna. Signs slowly emerge (although not picked up by Michael) that Hanna is illiterate.

The affair lasts only a summer when Hanna suddenly disappears without a trace. Michael is distraught at first but slowly puts the relationship behind him and moves on with his life. Years passed and we see a 22 year old Michael attending law school. His law lecturer plans an excursion of sort for his class to attend a war crimes trial in the local court in which 6 defendants are being charged with murder for their role as SS guards. The charges against them were instituted after facts emerge from a book written by a Holocaust survivor in which she details the events of one night when she and her fellow prisoners are locked up in a church that was later bombed by Allied planes and caught on fire. It comes to light during that trial that Hanna and her 5 co-defendants were SS guards in charge of the camp and that they had chosen not to unlock the burning church.

In her defense, Hanna - showing her simple-mindedness and genuine ignorance of the consequences of her role during the war - explains that she was merely carrying out her duty as a guard; that it would have led to chaos if the guards had unlocked the church and let out the screaming masses inside. The judge retorts, "So you had a choice. And you chose to let them die."

"What would you have done?" Hanna asks the judge, twice. Silence befalls the court. The judge looks down, unable to answer. It is a biting question.

A report is produced in court, one written by the defendants to their superiors explaining what had happened. Hanna tells the court that the report was written based on what she and her co-defendants had discussed and agreed. During the trial however, the other 5 defendants deny this and allege that it was Hanna who was in charge that night and that it was Hanna alone who had written the report. To confirm this, the judge proposes Hanna give a sample of her handwriting. A notepad is placed before her. The tense moment ends only when Hanna informs the court that there is no need for a handwriting expert. There is no need for that because she did it; she wrote the report. By now, we know she is trying to conceal her illiteracy.

As a result of this 'admission', Hanna is sentenced to life imprisonment. Michael makes an attempt to visit her in prison but decides against it at the last minute. He goes back to his life in university, marries his wife Gertrude and has a daughter. It is many years later after his divorce from Gertrude that his mind returns to Hanna and he starts to tape himself reading from books. He sends these tapes to Hanna in prison. There are no correspondences or visits; just tapes of him reading. Through these tapes, Hanna slowly learns to read and in prison starts to explore books written by survivors of the Holocaust such as Elie Wiesel, Primo Levi and Tadeusz Borowski. Her decision to stop denying her own illiteracy led her to overcome it and from that, she was able to learn of the atrocities, and in the end, to accept accountability.

During a visit years later by Michael to her in prison just before her release after more than 20 years' incarceration, he asks her if she has spent a lot of time thinking about the past. She ponders for a while and answers -

"I always had the feeling that no one understood me anyway, that no one knew who I was and what made me do this or that. And you know, when no one understands you, no one can call you to account. Not even the court could call me to account. But the dead can. They understand. They don't even have to have been there, but if they do, they understand even better. Here in prison they were with me a lot. They came every night, whether I wanted them to or not. Before the trial I could still chase them away when they wanted to come."

Unable to live with the truth and the shame of her part in the deaths of so many, Hanna commits suicide one day before her release.

Michael asks at the end of the book -

What should our second generation have done, what should it do with the knowledge of the horrors of the extermination of the Jews? We should not believe we can comprehend the incomprehensible, we may not compare the incomparable, we may not inquire because to make the horrors an object of inquiry is to make the horrors an object of discussion, even if the horrors themselves are not questioned, instead of accepting them as something in the face of which we can only fall silent in revulsion, shame and guilt. Should we only fall silent in revulsion, shame and guilt? To what purpose?

It is a question that still grapples us today more than 60 years after the war.

One could call this book enjoyable. It is not thick and does not take too long to finish. But the questions it raises regarding morality and accountability leave a deep and long lasting impression. The book will linger in your mind even many weeks after you have put it back on your shelf - just as it still does for me.

I recommend this book, highly.

The Reader was adapted into a 2008 film written by David Hare and directed by Stephen Daldry - yes ofcourse, the same film that won the Academy, the BAFTA and the all the many what nots!