This one is on my son’s reading list. It turns out that this is a famous children’s book written by Silverstein in 1964. Though a bit corny and may carry some subtle religious overtone, it is nontheless a very touching story.

After I finished reading it to him, my son’s first reaction was : “The boy is too mean.”

================================================================================

The Giving Tree
By Shel Silverstein

   Once there was a tree..... and she loved a little boy. And every day the boy would come and he would gather her leaves and make them into crowns and play king of the forest. He would climb up her trunk and swing from her branches and eat apples. And they would play hide-and-go-seek. And when he was tired, he would sleep in her shade. And the boy loved the tree.......very much. And the tree was happy.
   But time went by. And the boy grew older. And the tree was often alone. Then one day the boy came to the tree and the tree said "Come, Boy, come and climb up my trunk and swing from my branches and eat apples and play in my shade and be happy"
   "I am too big to climb and play", said the boy. "I want to buy things and have fun. I want some money. Can you give me some money?"
   "I'm sorry," said the tree, "but I have no money, I have only leaves and apples. Take my apples, Boy, and sell them in the city. Then you will have money and you will be happy." And so the boy climbed up the tree and gathered her apples and carried them away. And the tree was happy.
   But the boy stayed away for a long time... and the tree was sad. And then one day the boy came back and the tree shook with joy and she said, "Come, Boy, climb up my trunk and swing from my branches and be happy."
   "I am too busy to climb trees," said the boy. "I want a house to keep me warm.  I want a wife and I want children, and so I need a house. Can you give me a house?"
   "I have no house," said the tree. "The forest is my house, but you may cut off my branches and build a house. Then you will be happy." And the boy cut off her branches and carried them away to build his house. And the tree was happy.
   But the boy stayed away for a long time. And when he came back, the tree was so happy she could hardly speak. "Come, Boy," she whispered, "come and play."
   “I am too old and sad to play," said the boy. "I want a boat that can take me far away from here. Can you give me a boat?"
   "Cut down my trunk and make a boat," said the tree. "Then you can sail away...... and be happy." And so the boy cut down her trunk and made a boat and sailed away. And the tree was happy.... but not really. And after a long time the boy came back again.
   "I am sorry, Boy," said the tree, "but I have nothing left to give you....My apples are gone."
   "My teeth are too weak for apples," said the boy.
   "My branches are gone," said the tree. "You cannot swing on them”
   "I am too old to swing on branches," said the boy.
   "My trunk is gone," said the tree. "You cannot climb"
   "I am too tired to climb," said the boy.
   "I am sorry," sighed the tree. "I wish that I could give you something------ but I have nothing left. I am just an old stump."
   "I don't need very much now," said the boy. "just a quiet place to sit and rest. I am very tired."
   "Well," said the tree, straightening herself up as much as she could, "Well, an old stump is good for sitting and resting. Come, Boy, sit down. Sit down and rest." And the boy did. And the tree was happy.

© Shel Silverstein

我喜欢这故事，温馨。

这种古老的美德，是否将一去不返了？现在国内的小孩还会读这样的读物吗？

和教小孩美德相反，现在的很多家长从小教自己孩子怎么占人家便宜，怎么骗人，怎么拍马P。

好故事。大人也应该读。

非常感人的故事。可能小孩子还没我看了那么感动呢。

树对男孩的爱，象父母，也象爱人对我们的爱，无私奉献，无怨无悔。

男孩子还是好的，最终回到了老树的身边。其实，对他来说，当他尝过了人生的冷暖悲欢，当他在外面游荡得累了以后，还有什么比那个始终等待着他的树墩更安全更温暖的呢？

好故事。美国人的一个优秀品德是乐善好施。

孩子们上小学，我也常陪他们读英文的儿童文学，一些作家写的故事让我也感动得一塌糊涂，小孩只当成趣事听听，真正优秀的儿童作品是同时写给成人和小孩子的，成人的收获可能比孩子还大。最近给儿子读Arnold lobel的书，我们俩都喜欢。优秀的童书作家用一种老人的目光来写故事，有故事有韵味更有哲理。

“男孩子还是好的，最终回到了老树的身边。其实，对他来说，当他尝过了人生的冷暖悲欢，当他在外面游荡得累了以后，还有什么比那个始终等待着他的树墩更安全更温暖的呢？”

这个男人只能回来。这么自私到了极点的人，在别处肯定是碰壁碰钉子。难怪他活的这么累。

为力的观点有一定的代表性，我7岁的儿子就持类似看法。

这个故事自发表以来引发不少讨论。我引一段维基上的：

Ever since the book was published, it has generated controversy and opposing opinions for its interpreted messages, on whether the tree is selfless or merely self-sacrificing, and whether the boy is selfish or reasonable in his demands of the tree. The story clearly shows childhood as being a time of relative happiness in comparison to the sacrifice and responsibility of adulthood. The story only uses the word "need" at the end to describe the "boy's"/old man's need of a place to rest- all of his other desires are "wants."

"A review of The Giving Tree: A Symposium" shows some academic readers describing the book as portraying a vicious, one-sided relationship between the tree and the boy: with the tree as the selfless giver and the boy as a greedy and never-satisfied being who constantly receives, yet never gives anything back to the tree; a selfish love that could be misrepresented and imitated by its children readers. Indeed, some of these speakers single the tree out as either an irresponsible parent whose self-sacrifice has left the boy ill-equipped to cope and make his way in the world (and therefore led to him ending up alone) or as hopelessly co-dependent. Other speakers, however, insisted that the book is a tale of unconditional love and generosity: the tree gives all it can to the boy because it loves him, and its feelings are reciprocated by the boy when he returns to the tree for a rest. In this way, the relationship between the tree and the boy as he grows up could be viewed as similar to that between a mother and her child; despite getting nothing in return for a long time, the tree puts the boy's needs foremost, because it wants him to be happy. Indeed, the only time the tree ever seems to be sad is when it feels that it has nothing left to give the boy and that the boy might never return.

As Timothy Jackson, a professor of Religious Studies at Stanford University put it:

“ Is this a sad tale? Well, it is sad in the same way that life is sad. We are all needy, and, if we are lucky and any good, we grow old using others and getting used up. Tears fall in our lives like leaves from a tree. Our finitude is not something to be regretted or despised, however; it is what makes giving (and receiving) possible. The more you blame the boy, the more you have to fault human existence. The more you blame the tree, the more you have to fault the very idea of parenting. Should the tree's giving be contingent on the boy's gratitude? If it were, if fathers and mothers waited on reciprocity before caring for their young, then we would all be doomed. ”

Jackson, linking the story to the human condition, asserts that readers ought to identify with both the boy and the tree.

这些话说的好. 我感动也是因为觉得, 我们不是完全象男孩, 也不是完全象树, 但又两者都兼备. 我们从别人那里得到爱, 我们也把自己的爱给别人. 故事里男孩一径的要求, 觉得也可以看作是象征,就象我们向父母的要求一样, 好多时候并不是那么直接的, 父母为我们付出, 往往不用我们要求. 而我们为所爱的人付出, 也往往是不求回报,只求被理解. 就象树的给予, 不是吗?

“ Is this a sad tale? Well, it is sad in the same way that life is sad. We are all needy, and, if we are lucky and any good, we grow old using others and getting used up. Tears fall in our lives like leaves from a tree. Our finitude is not something to be regretted or despised, however; it is what makes giving (and receiving) possible.

这个故事给儿女晚上讲了。

女儿：she read this story before, the tree is nice, the boy is greedy.
儿子：this is a sad story, he asked me to read it again tomorrow.

这个故事可以理解成父母与子女的关系，可以理解成自然与人类的关系。

多谢分享。

Arnold Lobel的Frog and Toad的故事，我也给孩子们读过，他们很喜欢。好的儿童文学作品，可以说是老少咸宜的，大人也会喜欢。

The Giving Tree这样的故事，孩子们一般不能完全理解。这也难怪，任何一个好的parable，都可以作多方面的理解。按楼上Baihe的说法，我们每个人都是树和男孩的统一。按我个人直观的狭义的理解，树(she)有母亲的影子，她对男孩的爱是无私的、无限的、无条件的、不求回报的。而反观天下的男孩子，其本性总是喜欢play，童年时母爱覆盖着的树荫下是他最好的playground，独立成人以后则要fly on his own, sail to uncharted waters, be in charge of his own kingdom (family/business)，他的生活始终是动态的、多变的；而那颗始终不移的老树，则是他的final refuge, 他的unfailing source of support; 老树源于对男孩的无条件的爱，总是无条件地付出。我感觉这个故事既刻划了母爱的无私，也刻划了男人的天性。如果要把故事中的男孩换成女孩，味道就大有不同。 (说男孩完全自私也不成立，因为他也care for his wife and children; want to be provider to, and protector of, his own family.)男孩与老树，其天赋禀性、情感构造、价值取向的不同，使他们的关系注定具有悲剧性。

从自然与人类的关系来理解，当然也是一个视角。只不过我对自然与人类的关系没有那么乐观。地球是人类的refuge不假，但是如果人类对自然只取不予，或者多取少予，以竭泽而渔的方式来满足自己对物质无止境的欲求，那么自然对人类，会有老树对男孩那样的胸襟吗？

希望我们多交流parenting的体会。有什么好书，大家分享。

悟空分析也有道理，自然是一种原始力量，没有善恶感，但自然是绝对公正的，这点我深信不疑。

受到自然的馈赠时，人要感恩。看到自然的处罚时，人要自省。