Question:
Conducting a survey on " The Giver"?
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Conducting a survey on " The Giver"?
21 answers:
DeadLine
2009-05-27 17:46:17 UTC
the giver's a good book.
MJ
2009-05-27 17:46:51 UTC
this book should not be banned!! i am in 7th grade and we read this book last weak and it is one of my favorite books. I think this is no worse than what people are seeing on T.V
Ol' Dirty Jedi
2009-05-27 17:50:12 UTC
good book



but it looks like someone wants us to their homework
2009-05-27 17:49:22 UTC
This looks like homework that you don't want to do, so you ask us instead.

Never even read the book.
Sacrificial Lamb
2009-05-27 17:48:07 UTC
I agree with Jim. Sounds like more of an essay test than a survey to me.
caitebug
2009-05-27 18:01:56 UTC
1. No. I think middle school kids are old enough to learn about euthanasia. It exists. There's no reason to hide it from them.

2. No. The Giver makes people think, which contrary to popular belief, is not a bad thing.

3. I don't think so. I'm sure that some kids will be, but from what i remember of middle school, we knew what happened when the dog never came home from the vet.

4. No. people die. It's a fact of life. kids should be able to talk about it.

5. It's okay for 12 year olds. not much younger though.

6. I could never do it.
2009-05-27 17:50:38 UTC
no the book should not be banned

and do your own homework it's more rewarding



sheesh lazy kids these days
2009-05-27 17:50:04 UTC
1. No the point of it is to show how bad Jonas' society is. And if knowing about abortion is not too graphic, why should that be?

2.The book does not believe in euthanasia. As above stated, it is to show the evil and badness of the community Jonas lives in.

3. No, I don't think so.

4.The topic of death may be talked about, it is all around us anyway. And he says "released" because that is what those in the community call it to keep people from realizing it means death.

5. No, it isn't too mature. Come on, I read it when I was 10.

6. Yes, because it is killing somebody. Killing is always bad. And when you kill the person, it's like saying to them, you're useless, so we're just gonna get rid of you.
2009-05-27 17:48:15 UTC
oh we just finished that book about 2 weeks ago (:

&

1. No, i am a middle school student and i didnt find it too graphic. It was somewhat sad, but not inappropriate.

2. I dont necessarily think euthanasia should be banned.

3. I dont think young children should be reading this in the first place. It's like middle schoolers and up.

4. No it should, its reality.

5. It is something they have to learn.

6. It totally depends.
James
2009-05-27 17:47:48 UTC
its a good book but im not going to do your homeowrk
Z
2009-05-27 17:57:16 UTC
1. No, it is not graphic for middle school children. Have you seen those kids? Twelve-year-olds watch movies like "Halloween" and "A Nightmare On Elm Street" those are way more graphic than that passage.

2. No, in the Harry Potter books people get killed all the time and grade school kids read that. I don't think that the book is violent enough to be banned.

3. No, that would be silly. Kids know that they can trust whoever their parents can trust, they will not be afraid of needles unless they already have a phobia of them.

4. Yes, because, lets face it, kids are going to learn about death either way, at least they learn about it educationally. Also, I have read the book and I don't even think kids would pay close attention to it because it isn't an action-packed thrill ride movie. Face it, kids despise reading, normally.

5. I do not think this is too mature, because the book never uses the words "sex" or "intercourse" or any other word that really refers directly to sex. Besides, by the time kids read this book they will have already had sex-ed before.

6. Of course I think it's wrong, unless the person/animal/plant is going to die anyways and of a more painful death. I think it is good to "put them out of their misery" so they don't have to suffer.



Is this some sort of petition or something?
*(~Beatin' A Dead Horse~)*
2009-05-27 17:59:52 UTC
1. No. Banned books usually turn out to be the ones with the best stories/morals to them. (Ex. To Kill a Mockingbird, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest). Plus, if someone tells a middle schooler that they can't read The Giver, it will only make them want to read it that much more. So either way, they'll read it, whether it's too graphic or not.



2. First off, this book does not "believe" in euthanasia. It is practiced in a setting which is purposely being shown as flawed, so you have to think more. The author is not saying that euthanasia is good, she is pointing out the fault of it.



3. If they don't have anyone to properly teach them the difference between lethal injections and simple vaccinations, they very well could. However, most parents whose children read this book would most likely reassure their children that no, the Measles shot they are getting will not kill them.



4. I do believe that is should. That doesn't mean that it should be glorified, making kid's books bloody rampages, but I believe that kids need to understand death, not simply ignore it, whether it scares them or not.



5. Again, this is somewhat the same question as #4, just a different idea in question. So again, my answer is that they will learn it sooner or later. Similarly, as I don't think children's books should be bloody murder novels, I also don't think they should be reading flat out porn stories, but such a small mention such as that in The Giver is nothing out of the ordinary, and should be treated as such.



6. No. I do not condone killing anyone, even if it is deemed "humane".
smartypants22
2009-05-27 17:54:18 UTC
1. In the passage above you read about a graphic scene of a baby being put to sleep, do you feel that this passage is too graphic for its targeted audience of middle school children? Why & or Why not? No because I read the book in 4th grade and my teacher didn't think it was bad for our class. It was my favorite book!

2. This book contains graphic images and believes in euthanasia (the practise of ending a life in a painless way). Do you think that is enough for it to be banned? No, again I read in 4th grade and I thought it was a good book.

3. Do you think after reading the passage young children will become more scared by needles and the images of being put to death? no because it's just a book.

4. In this book the author uses the word “released” to represent death throughout the book, do you think the topic of death should not be talked about in books for young children? Why or Why not? no

5. One of the reasons why this book was banned was because of sexual desire, when the main character a boy of 12 had to take pills every morning when he was stating that he wanted to give his female friend a bath. Is this material too mature for children? Or is it something they have to learn about later on in their life no



6. Do you think euthanasia is wrong? Why or Why not? no
Karolinus
2009-05-27 18:06:41 UTC
1. In the passage above you read about a graphic scene of a baby being put to sleep, do you feel that this passage is too graphic for its targeted audience of middle school children? Why & or Why not?

No, because the graphic scenes help readers picture the story. Without them, readers may not fully understand what is happening and what the conveying message is.

2. This book contains graphic images and believes in euthanasia (the practise of ending a life in a painless way). Do you think that is enough for it to be banned?

No, because readers have the right to read all about that if they choose, and in order to fully understand the function of the community, the redaers must picture euthanasia.

3. Do you think after reading the passage young children will become more scared by needles and the images of being put to death?

No, because this book is probably a book suited for young adults, and I think that they are mature enough to decide what is right or wrong for themselves.

4. In this book the author uses the word “released” to represent death throughout the book, do you think the topic of death should not be talked about in books for young children? Why or Why not?

I believe that young children should know death. They often see it in their families and did not know what happened. They have the right to know the truth about what happened, and they're going to know later at old age anyways.

5. One of the reasons why this book was banned was because of sexual desire, when the main character a boy of 12 had to take pills every morning when he was stating that he wanted to give his female friend a bath. Is this material too mature for children? Or is it something they have to learn about later on in their life

No, once again sex should be taught to children. They have the right to know what is happening to their growing bodies, and it's pretty stupid to have to ask strangers on Yahoo answers about it. It's too late if they had already had sex before they knew what sex is.

6. Do you think euthanasia is wrong? Why or Why not?

Well, that depends. If euthanasia is desired by the person and is appropriate for a certain situation, then it is not wrong.



Please help me with my Giver hw. Please. https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20090527170245AAfkVuf
2009-05-27 18:11:45 UTC
1. I am 14, and I have read this book many times. No, I definitely do not think this passage is too graphic for its targeted audience. The author was obviously trying to put across the point that, the perfect world is not always so perfect, it is created on a foundation of lies, deceit, and cruelty. Horrible things happen all over the world, and while it is completely unnecessary to be educated on all points of these events, why would you try to hide the truth from someone, no matter what age?



2. No, I do not. I have seen books banned or challenged for much less, such as the Captain Underpants books, Huckleberry Finn and Gone With the Wind, simply based on someones decision that the thinking was somehow inappropriate. Euthanasia is a widely debated topic, and will probably always continue to be, but, whether we decide to face it or not is up to us. Do we really want to hide away from all the bad things in life, or accept them?



3. Probably, but then again, this is not a young children's book, this is a book aimed at an older age group, 12+.



4. Why should it not be? Death is the end, and every story must have an end. Every day you live your life, you are closer to dying, and there is not one thing we can do to stop it.



5. On this point, I don't think that children need to receive a sexual education at a young age, such as 5 or 6. However, I do think that every child must be taught it eventually, for ignorance is not always bliss, it can actually cause problems when misunderstandings occur, but yes, I think this is not something children should not really be sucsepted to at a very young age.



Euthanasia. Oh boy, you chose a good one. Every issue or problem has two sides, and I do agree with both. However, I must argue pro-Euthanasia. If you ever heard of the case of Tracy Latimer, you would understand why. Tracy Latimer was a young girl suffering from a sever case of cerebral palsy due to a lack of oxygen at birth. Unable for her paint o be controlled by medication, Tracy lived a very painful and limited life, unable to communicate, feed herself, or go to the bathroom without assistance. In October of 1993, Tracy's father, Robert, was accused of murdering his daughter. Some people may call his actions cruel and unnecessary, as Tracy was loved by her parents and her life had value. But I say what value can a person's life have when they can't feed themselves, can't talk, are fed through a tube in their stomach, and will never have the opportunity at a normal life? Who has the authority to decide whether or not someone's life is worth living better than the man that raised her and watched her suffering day in and day out? Bravo to the man who finally faced reality and showed some mercy on his poor vegetable of a daughter. Did he do it cruelly? No. He sat his sleeping daughter in his truck and filled it with carbon monoxide, killing his daughter peacefully and painlessly. As hard as it must have been to raise his daughter on a limited budget and watch her suffer everyday, it truly must have been ten times harder to finally let her go.



Think about it. Would you, the father/mother of a child, be willing to sit back and watch your son or daughter suffer and know that you could never do anything about it, never even have the luxury of easing your child's pain with medicine? For keeping someone alive who's life no longer has any meaning or value is not showing kindness or compassion for the handicapped, it is cruel no matter how you look at it.
DoneWithThisPlace
2009-05-27 17:48:02 UTC
I read the book in college for my children's literature class and I thought it was too intense for the elementary level. It's a GREAT book, though.
Jacquline
2009-05-27 17:47:48 UTC
Well I didn't read all that

But I read About 5 chapters of the Giver

Then got bored, because I have a tiny brain

And get bored very easily.
2009-05-27 17:46:55 UTC
this is weird that u asked this today cuz i swear i was thinking about that book today
♥ нαρρу вυввℓє ♥
2009-05-27 17:45:03 UTC
Wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too much for P&S
steve
2009-05-27 17:46:17 UTC
boring *** book. isnt it about communism?
M\C
2009-05-27 17:44:52 UTC
stupid book


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...