<p>First, did anyone find this book “uplifting” (what one of the jacket blurbs called it)? I didn’t dislike the book, and it definitely kept my attention until the end, but I do feel like the dark vastly overshadowed the light. I guess I was expecting more of a balance.</p>
<p>Also (spoiler questions):</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Why did Werner toss the gem into the sea? How would he have known to do that?</p></li>
<li><p>What does the key unlock (the key that Marie-Laure gives to Werner and that he gives back to her in the model of the house)? </p></li>
</ol>
<p>I LOVED this book but found that it was about 80 pages too long and so drug on and was glad to be done.
I appreciated learning something new about WW11 with the knowledge of the horridness but a focus on another aspect.</p>
<p>He did not know anything about the stone at all. He was in love and knew she had held the litlte box house and had given him the key. For him they were parts of her that he knew.</p>
<p>The key unlocked the iron gate to the kennel in the rock wall that she entered to reach the sea. She did not know his destiny and that was the only thing she had to give (as she had tossed the house with the stone into the water).</p>
<p>The ending was sad (his death) but also so perfect that the key was in the little house and NOT the stone which was too haunting in its history.</p>
<p>Unless I missed something about his words with the German Jewel guy who suggested to him that they were both there for the same thing (the stone)…when they were in her bedroom just before W killed him>>>></p>
<p>I just finished the book last night. I suppose it was “uplifting” in the sense that it illustrated the ability of human beings to endure, even under the worst of circumstances, and also showed that, every once in a while, we find the strength to do the right thing, no matter how difficult.</p>
<p>I thought it was excellent, and yet…felt a little let down by the ending. I didn’t like the jump into the future. It took me out of the historical bubble of World War II. Also, I found the ending bleak—not, of course, in a terrible way like the bleakness of war, but in more of a “Is that all there is?” feeling about the scope of our lives. </p>
<p>I was bothered by never knowing the fate of Marie-Laure’s father, but I suppose that was quite realistic for those times. And as a literary technique, it reflected the unknown fate of Captain Nemo at the end of Marie Laure’s book, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.</p>
<p>I loved the character of Etienne and his relationship with Madame Manec.</p>
<p>Okay, those who know me from Book Club know that I could go on forever…but I’ll stop there. If anyone wants to discuss further, though, I’m in!</p>
<p>oregon101, I meant to also respond to your post in my comments above. I thought your description of why Werner did what he did was perfect:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As for Von Rumpel’s suggestion that Werner was in the house for the same reason as he was (to obtain the stone), that was just Von Rumpel’s madness talking. He had become so obsessed with the Sea of Flames that he assumed everyone else was after it as well. But Werner was only there to rescue Marie-Laure.</p>
<p>I just finished it. When did Werner throw the gem into the ocean? Was it after she took him the rock wall place? I enjoyed the book and it sure is interesting to read about ww2 from a German’s perspective - I don’t know that I’ve ever read anything from Werner’s perspective before. I didn’t get what the key at the end was all about either.</p>
<p>When I was younger I thought there was a big time difference between ww1 and ww2, in reality it had to have been a horrible time for the people of age during both. I love reading books from the ww2 era, I never tire of different perspectives and individual stories. </p>
<p>I had hoped the two would have found love, but really the way it was written was correct. Werner’s school reminded me of Lord of the Flies, with Frederick being Piggy. </p>
<p>I really enjoyed the book, nothing really exciting ever had me on the edge of my seat, but it kept me interested all the way through. I could have read how things evolved after the war. Being a child of the 70’s ww2 seemed so distant, but it’s like the distance between then and now!</p>
<p>But then why did he get rid of it? For all he knew (or at least seemed to me to know), Marie Laure might have wanted to keep it. I get that he threw it because that’s what she actually would have wanted, I just must have missed how he knew that is what she wanted. </p>
<p>I just finished it, too…I think the stone is somewhere in the grotto, waiting to be discovered again, hence the need to put the key back into the house box. eyemamom, I was hoping for a happy ending for Werner, too. If you believe the stone protects the bearer, he no longer has the stone when he steps on the mine, so he either put it in the sea or in the grotto somewhere. </p>
<p>I think that Marie-Laure gave the key to Werner as a keepsake to remember their short time together (as oregon101 pointed out, it was all she had to give). I doubt that she expected Werner to go back to the grotto. But after seeing her safely out of the city, he did return, and at that point, he removed the stone, left it in the water, kept the house, and put the key inside.</p>
<p>Werner probably guessed that Marie-Laure didn’t want anything to do with the stone, because she was insistent that the house be “drowned”: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think Werner returned to the grotto out of curiosity, perhaps combined with a longing to have something that belonged to Marie-Laure. The house had meaning for him, so he kept it, but he left the stone in the water because he believed that’s where she wanted it to be. As Tiredofsnow suggests, I think Werner left the stone secured among other rocks in shallow water, where it could be found again if need be: “Mantled with algae, bedecked with barnacles. Crawled over by snails. It stirs among the pebbles” (p. 520). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes. And to carry the analogy a little further, that makes Werner a bit like Ralph: sensitive, intelligent boys who gradually lose themselves when continually exposed to the savagery of their peers. </p>
<p>As the daughter of the keeper of the keys, the key would have special significance to Marie-Laure as the passing on of the secret to the grotto where she’d spent so much time. </p>
<p>What ever did happen to the hermit who gave M-L the key? One of the lost people of the war?</p>
<p>Was Werner redeemed by his saving of M-L? By his death? How would we think of him if he went on after the war to a mundane existence like “the Giant”? Was “the Giant” redeemed by his making sure Werner’s sister got his personal effects?</p>
<p>I have to say the descriptions of Werner reminded me of Owen Meany for some reason (which I need to go back and re-read).</p>
<p>I wondered about that, too. I thought there would be an explanation, but there never was. The women assume Harold Bazin was “disappeared” by the Germans, who got wind of his subversive activities. </p>
<p>He was an odd character, with that “enameled copper mask over half his face” and breath “like crushed insects” (ew). He proves eyemamom’s point about how close together the two wars were – he suffered badly in both.</p>
<p>I wasn’t sure what to make of him at first. I found it a little creepy when he slipped the key to Marie-Laure—I was afraid he was going to be some sort of predator—but it turned out that he was just being kind.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Fully redeemed, in my mind. Werner was a character who yearned for forgiveness, and I was more than ready to give it. Maybe because he seemed more human than the other characters – that is, I think the world has more Werners than Fredericks. It’s hard to be brave and do the right thing when paralyzed by fear of the consequences.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In a way, the Giant (Volkheimer) spent the rest of his life doing penance, without exactly realizing it. What a terribly lonely existence he led after the war.</p>
<p>To me The Giant and many others at that time had no opportunity to mature. They were not allowed to mature in a normal way and when they did have such freedeon…well. many did not catch up. To say or think that they wanted or needed forgiveness is saying that they had the develpmental time to move on. Many most likely had responsiblities that took over their energy, time and love.</p>
<p>I don’t think “the giant” was or should be redeemed. He did not go on to live any kind of interesting or fulfilling life. He neither paid a price nor did he gain anything from it. If we heard the individual stories of those he killed, we’d be way less tempted to forgive him. </p>
<p>I also think we have more Werner’s in the world, books and movies are made about the heroism and character of the Frederick’s of the world. Usually reading about someone who goes along with something horrific makes you less sympathetic to the character. That wasn’t so with Werner, and it can kind of make you understand how people can go along to get along - even in horrendous situations.</p>
<p>Von Rumpel did make the comment to Werner didn’t he about being there for the same reason? And Werner was listening to M-L on the radio so he knew he was there ransacking the house for days. So he had to have known he wasn’t there for anything to do with the radio transmissions. </p>
<p>^ That makes sense. With his intuition and his gift for figuring things out, Werner must have put two and two together as soon as he saw the stone. </p>
<p>At first, Werner thinks Von Rumpel is there for the radio, but he isn’t sure. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I was surprised that Marie-Laure asked Werner the question, since she she knows the man in the house is the same man who trapped her outside the grotto, wanting information about her father: “It is a walk she has heard before. The limp of a German sergeant major with a dead voice” (p. 304).</p>
<p>I think she asks Werner to see if he knows about the gem. But that shows he then thinks it’s something different. Especially since we know when they found people transmitting, they were just shot and that was that. It wasn’t the norm to stay at a house for days, so I’m guessing Werner figured it was something else. </p>
<p>That’s true. The story of how Volkheimer would take the boots and clothes from POWs made me cringe.</p>
<p>His one redeeming characteristic was his affection for Werner. Because of Volkheimer’s intimidating size and reputation, he wasn’t really close to anyone. I wonder if he was able to connect with Werner because Werner was young and physically very small. I noticed that after the war, Volkheimer is comfortable with Max, Werner’s nephew – folding paper airplanes with him on the patio while Werner’s sister and her husband talk in the other room. </p>