Schlink’s The Reader as read and watched
Bernard Schlink’s The Reader recently completed the predictable best-seller life cycle as it morphed from a hit book into a must-see movie. As a stubborn believer that the book is always better, I’m ashamed to admit that in this instance I saw the movie first. Alas, I was compelled to pursue Schlink’s original novel in the hopes of having a few key questions answered, such as, is this taking place in 1900, or 1980? Was Hanna hit over the head as a child? And, why is adult Berg (played by the amazing Ralph Fiennes) being such a baby? Thankfully, the book filled in a few holes.
Both versions begin with our young hero, Michael Berg (David Kross), a fifteen-year-old German schoolboy, puking on his future ladylove’s doorstep. Hanna Schmitz (Kate Winslett), a stern woman of 36, comes to the rescue, briskly washing away the mess and escorting him home. Months pass in which Michael is sick with hepatitis, but upon his recovery he visits Hanna to thank her. Michael loses his virginity to Hanna soon after, and they develop a daily routine: they wash (Hanna is a clean-freak), they make love, and then Michael reads aloud to Hanna, beginning what will become a lifelong romance for them both.
A year or two later Hanna ends the affair by simply disappearing, not to be seen by Michael for years. Their lives cross again when Michael, now a law student, becomes interested in a trial investigating Nazi crimes. Hanna is one of the accused. At this point, Michael finally puts two and two together and discovers that Hanna took her S.S. guard job to hide that she is illiterate. Her admittance to this fact could save her from a life in prison, however her pride, and Michael’s unwillingness to reveal her secret, land Hanna in the bighouse.
Frustratingly, Michael stagnates and spends his time after college and the trial comparing every woman he meets to Hanna, eventually having a child, getting divorced, and then spending his time recording books on tape to send to Frau Schmitz in prison. His lack of personal growth is distracting and confusing. Sure, he met some woman who he loved when he was fifteen and they broke up. Sad, tragic, yeah, yeah. 
Get over it.
In both versions I wasn’t buying the picture of love that Michael and Hanna painted—and it doesn’t help that their affair begins with statutory rape. Hanna is selfish, harsh, and she uses Michael in ways only a young, inexperienced man would allow. Michael’s obsessive behavior is forgivable in the beginning of film and book, but as time passes, his apathetic self-pity doesn’t come across as tortured or believable—it’s angsty and annoying.
Hanna’s role only becomes marginally likeable during the time she’s standing trial and tells only the truth (except for that little part that she can’t read or write). She becomes frustrated during the questioning of her motives for joining the Nazi party, finally breaking down and asking the judge, “What would you do?” While this does provoke a moment of pity for Hanna, the supposed bad guy, I wonder if this emotion is warranted.
Plenty of movies and books in recent times have asked the viewer to understand the difficult position in which some Nazis were put, but haven’t we felt sorry for them enough? Sure, they suffered during WWII, but not even close to the proximity of what their prisoners experienced. It is somewhat admirable to see Hanna take responsibility for her crimes, but she only does so because to her, coming out as illiterate is more shameful. She would rather go to prison for horrifying crimes against humanity, rather than admit she is unable to read and write. Not feeling the pity.
As far as contrasts between book and movie, there was one major difference that I spied. During the movie, Michael’s relationship with his daughter is apparently fraught with tension, and the two plus hour film allows the audience only a small glimpse as to why. The director may have had good reason for punching up the importance of Michael’s daughter, but it only added confusion. I was left wondering what happened in their history, and gave their relationship more importance than it was due. I had hoped that the book would develop this piece, however, it took the opposite route and barely discussed the daughter. There was no problematic relationship. There were no issues to be resolved. The director chose to invent more drama, which had no place in the book, and ended up developing it poorly. Rather a bad choice I think.
Overall the film and novel were similar, containing the same highlights and complexities. Schlink’s work is simultaneously beautifully simply and poetic, mixing sections of dialogue and action with Michael’s older and wiser philosophic observations about love, life, and what it means to be part of the generation of Germans dealing with the mess of the Holocaust. Kate Winslett, David Kross, and Ralph Fiennes give compelling and consistent performances, capturing the essence of Schlink’s characters. Despite the confusing timeline (which I have yet to figure out), and occasionally frustrating moments, The Reader flows beautifully and keeps its readers interested in the fate of Michael and Hanna.
Interested? Please don’t make the mistake I did. Go read the book.