In Lois Lowry’s The Giver, we are introduced to a world where emotions are suppressed, choices are controlled, and memories of the past have been erased in favor of maintaining societal stability. The protagonist, Jonas, is chosen to be the next Receiver of Memory—a title that places him in direct contact with the powerful and painful memories of the world before the society’s creation. But what if the mentor guiding Jonas, the titular Giver, isn’t the wise, benevolent figure we’re led to believe? What if, instead, The Giver is an enabler of the system—a deceitful, complacent villain who not only avoids responsibility but actively protects his own position at all costs?
When Jonas is selected to be the new Receiver, he is given a set of rules that seem to offer him freedom and privilege compared to the rest of the society. Among these rules, Jonas is allowed to lie, is exempt from certain societal rules, and cannot share his training with others. At first glance, these seem like benefits of his new role, granting him a freedom that others don’t have. However, these rules also serve a selfish purpose for The Giver. By granting Jonas these privileges, The Giver ensures that he remains in control of the flow of knowledge, unable to be questioned or challenged. Jonas becomes isolated, forced to rely solely on The Giver’s guidance and wisdom, making him even more dependent on the very system that The Giver supports.
The rule allowing Jonas to lie is particularly telling. This privilege isn’t just about giving Jonas a way to protect himself or others from the truth—it’s a tool of control. By giving Jonas this power, The Giver keeps the power dynamic intact. Jonas is allowed to lie, but he’s also restricted in how he shares his knowledge. The rule is designed to prevent any meaningful change, allowing Jonas to hold the knowledge but not share it with others, keeping the society in the dark about their own past.
It’s important to note that these rules were likely set in place by the society itself, as part of the institutionalized structure of the Receiver’s role. The rules that Jonas follows were not just randomly handed to him by The Giver; they are part of the society’s control over the role of the Receiver, ensuring that this position is one of power and influence. The fact that Jonas is allowed to lie is an intentional act of social manipulation—an essential element of maintaining the system. And, for years, The Giver has used these rules for his own self-preservation, ensuring his continued control and preventing anyone else from challenging the society’s rules.
When we consider The Giver’s own role in this system, it becomes clear that he hasn’t just been passively guiding Jonas. Instead, The Giver has been manipulating the situation to protect his own power. The rules he gives Jonas aren’t just about passing on knowledge—they’re about keeping Jonas in a position of isolation, controlling the information he receives, and ensuring that The Giver’s position as Receiver remains secure.
But what if The Giver didn’t just want to protect his position for the sake of power alone? What if, in addition to that, The Giver enjoyed the privileges that came with his role? In both the book and movie, The Giver is portrayed as someone who avoids the responsibilities that others in society must bear. As Receiver, he doesn’t have to participate in the daily work of the community. He doesn’t raise children or do any of the other demanding jobs that others do. He’s isolated, given the privilege of rest and respect without ever having to do actual labor. This avoidance of work could very well be the selfish reason why The Giver is so reluctant to give up his position.
He has found a way to coast through life, living off the benefits of his role without having to sacrifice his comfort or stability. The fact that he is exempt from societal duties—and likely has enjoyed this freedom for years—is a powerful motivator for him to maintain the status quo. Why would he want to give up all the privileges that come with his role if it allows him to avoid hard work and live a life of comfort?
This sense of self-preservation, in which The Giver actively avoids any real responsibility, underscores his selfishness. The fact that he has sustained his position as the Receiver of Memory—not through active engagement with the world or society but rather through maintaining a position of power and isolation—shows just how far he is willing to go to preserve his own comfort. His complacency with the system is not just about holding power for the sake of power; it’s about avoiding any kind of disruption to his privileged existence.
As we think about the previous Receiver, Rosemary, whose failure is mentioned in passing by The Giver, we can’t ignore the possibility that The Giver might have actively or passively sabotaged her success. In the movie, we learn that Rosemary’s failure was disastrous, and it’s presented as a significant turning point in the society’s history. The idea that The Giver might have seen Rosemary as a threat to his position adds another layer of complexity to his character. If he did sabotage her, it would have been to preserve his privileged existence—a desire to keep control and continue his comfortable life.
Additionally, the idea that previous Receivers came before Rosemary and Jonas is important. If we assume that The Giver has been the Receiver for a long time, there may have been others before him—perhaps multiple generations of Receivers who followed the same pattern. These Receivers were likely not encouraged to question the system or rock the boat. Instead, they were likely conditioned to accept their role passively, much like The Giver. Rosemary and Jonas are anomalies—the first to challenge the system and question the very nature of their roles.
As the story progresses, The Giver’s reluctance to let go of the memories and his refusal to escape with Jonas when given the chance become even more revealing. The Giver’s passivity and complacency with the system, which he has maintained for so long, are shown in his reluctance to challenge the status quo, even when he has the opportunity to do so. In choosing to stay behind, The Giver ultimately shows that he values his comfort and power over any real attempt to change the system. He passively accepts the role he’s been given, even when it requires him to sacrifice Jonas’s chance at a better life.
In the end, The Giver’s selfishness and complacency with the system are undeniable. Rather than using his power to create change or challenge the society, he uses his unique position to preserve the status quo—even at the cost of Jonas’s future and the potential for revolution. The rules he sets for Jonas reflect a carefully designed system that ensures control while limiting the possibilities for real freedom. The Giver’s refusal to relinquish the role of the Receiver—whether because of his desire to keep his power or because he’s fearful of what will happen if he lets go—reveals his true nature as a gatekeeper who has protected his own position at the expense of everyone else.
The movie’s depiction of Rosemary’s failure adds another layer of complexity to The Giver’s character. If we view her failure as a direct result of The Giver’s manipulations, then it’s clear that his ultimate goal has always been about preserving his role. Whether or not he actively sabotaged Rosemary, his inaction and his refusal to challenge the system make him complicit in the perpetuation of a flawed and oppressive society.
Finally, even after the memories are shared with the community, The Giver would still retain his privileged status. While others may now have access to the memories, The Giver’s deep understanding of them would continue to set him apart. He would likely remain exempt from societal duties, helping people navigate their emotional turmoil and serving as a guide. His continued exemption from work would ensure that he could maintain his role as a counselor without ever having to face the same challenges and responsibilities that others in society do. His privileges would persist, even in a society where everyone has memories, and he would likely remain in control of his life, untouched by the demands of regular labor.
