Exploring The Relationship Between Michael And Hanna In The Holocaust

1685 Words4 Pages

Is it plausible to believe the relationship between Michael and Hanna in the reader is much different than what it’s supposed to be? In this story, Michael is fifteen, Hanna is thirty-six, and the age difference doesn’t spark up many concerns in the story. It is clear that Bernard Schlink doesn’t want much negativity associated with the moral issue of the relationship, but more specifically negative feelings she left him, and was guilty of war crimes during the Holocaust. The obvious, negative, real life situation of this relationship should not be overlooked however. They have a twenty-one-year difference at the time of the relationship, and the sexual relations they have with each other are statutory rape. Hanna also purposely establishes dominance over a younger Michael making this a dominant-submissive relationship. These key facts of the relationship should not be avoided in the context of the story, and they create a side story that is not as recognized because it’s not the point Bernard Schlink, and Stephen Daldry were trying to make with this story. The dominant-submissive, statutory rape nature of this relationship …show more content…

Imagine a dog, and its owner live with each other for years. One key quality that a dog has with relationships is loyalty, and they act as a submissive to their owner. Imagine the feelings a dog has when it’s owner dies, and the life-long depressive state that a dog feels because of missing its owner. This is arguably what happened to Michael in the story. Late into his life Michael is still having eidetic flashbacks of the time he spent with her, and it seems that shortly after Hanna left he could have easily committed suicide because of missing her so badly. This is exactly what happens with Michael, and we’re able to see a better glimpse into Michael’s mind in the book rather than the

Open Document