Ph Vivian
July 2017
The story built in The
giving tree appeared to be simple featuring only two characters: the tree who
characterized the mother and the boy who was her child. In spite of its
simplicity, the subtle lesson from the story learnt by generation to generation
lasts long since the first time it was published fifty-three years ago: The
lesson of love and “For it is in giving that we receive” (Francis of Assisi)
Shel Silverstein started the
story with a peaceful scene where the tree and the boy happily played and did
everything together. How beautiful it was! From my perspective, I do believe
that this was one of the most felicitous moments in their lifetime.
But time went by.
And the boy grew older.
These brief words signal a
transition or the beginning of conflicts. The boy was growing up and his
demands of things were different over time. The first conflict came when the
boy now had his own friends and expanded his social life. He felt the need of
money to buy things and have fun. He then wanted a house, a wife and children. He
desired to pursue his own dream of a happy family. Afterwards, he wanted a boat
to take an adventure to discover the fascinating world. It is obvious that
every time he came, the tree was happy and she was even happier to give him all
she had. She was amazingly generous and willing to offer her apples,
branches and even sacrificed her trunk so that the boy could fulfill his
demands and wishes. When I read the story and tried to put myself in the
character’s shoes, I was deeply touched and those following words obsessed me
all the time:
“And the tree was happy
…but not really”
At first, I thought the tree
was happy to help the boy accomplish his dream of sailing away to broaden his
horizon, but this time she was not really happy. I even thought that the tree
was not really happy due to the fact that she worried one day when the boy came
back, would she have anything left to offer him? To be honest, those three echoing
words “…but not really” remained in me and provoked much of my thinking. Yes,
right! The boy was not the boy and the tree was not really the tree any more. The
boy then was a man. His point of view about life was different. The important
things in his life were not the same as those before. He wanted to uncover new
things and pursue new dreams. As for the tree, she had nothing left except an
old stump. Changes are the law of life. It is inevitable owning to the fact
that people have rights to follow and achieve their lifelong ambition. However,
There may be a majority of readers disagree with Shel Silverstein and argue why
the boy just wanted to receive all the time and didn’t even think of the tree’s
feelings and why the tree just gave, gave and gave from the beginning till the
end of the story. Personally, I do think that the author had his own idea to develop
his character demanding and going far enough away from his “home” in order to
let the boy realize how much valuable the tree was to him, how kind the tree
was to him, how warm the tree’s arms were to him and how tremendous the tree’s
love was to him. Eventually, after struggling hard in life, after bitter ups
and downs, the only place he thought of and wanted to come back was the tree – his
mother’s arms. Simultaneously, the tree as a capacity of a mother wished to gain
her satisfaction in terms of motherhood. She was truly happy to spare no effort
to support her son without the expectation of receiving anything in return. “It’s
not how much we give but how much love we put into giving”, Mother Teresa once
said. The tree’s love was unquestioning. By the same token, we children should
acknowledge that we owe our mother a perpetual, never-ending love which is
usually taken for granted.
And I am convinced that the
biggest message we all have learnt from the story is that: “Love bears all
things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never
ends.” (Bible – I Corinthian 13:7-8)
No comments:
Post a Comment