I Am the Messenger discussion

DON'T READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK..

That said...

I didn't understand the part at the end - "I killed your Father", and "I ordered that man to brutalize his wife", and such. What he serious, or was he speaking metaphorically? And what did he mean? What do you think?

I'm with you...I totally didn't get the ending. Such a shame, too, since I liked the rest of the book. The ending just seemed too...philisophical.

The ending is a big disappointment. Basically, the "I" is the author. The author is basically saying all those things happened because they were written that way. As the reader, I felt the author was saying, "Ha, ha! Joke's on you! Did you really think this story was going to have a valid conclusion?" It felt the author suddenly got lazy and opted for the easy way out rather than conclude the tale in a more satisfactory manner. Lame.

Marla wrote: "The ending is a big disappointment. Basically, the "I" is the author. The author is basically saying all those things happened because they were written that way. As the reader, I felt the autho..."

well put. obviously Markus Zusak matured a lot before writing The Book Thief, I really liked that and that's what prompted me to read this. Sometimes, though, an author's earlier work is not so good. I also read "When Dogs Cry" aka Getting the Girl, written (or at least published) a year before this one, I remember the style being similar, but then ending was better.

Actually, having read some posts on the other discussion groups for this book, and having reread the last few pages, I've decided I don't feel cheated, I quite like the ending. Maybe because it wasn't a difficult book to read. I hadn't invested quite as much effort into reading it as I had in Atonement, where I felt completely cheated. Zusak really did get the feel of small town Australia. And he did create a character who becomes real to us. And the message did get across. I guess it would have been difficult to end it any other way.

i love markus zusaks books, i read the book thief first and loved it so then i read i am the messenger. both very good books

I disagree. I was not disappointed with the ending of the book. I thought it was creative and playful. He even put his picture at the end with the folder to cue the reader if they missed it in the text. I think it is a statement of the power that authors have as they create these worlds. I enjoyed the ambiguity with the first pass through and then laughed as I reread the ending and read the peritext. As a reader I was certainly influenced by reading Book Thief first and looked for aspects of that book but was pleasantly surprised to read two very different books.

the book was well written, and how would YOU end it? what possible way would you have ended that book without wrecking it? i would much rather have it end in an semiconclusive manner than a stupid and not thought out way. i a agree with marianne

I agree the book was well written. I really enjoyed the book - until the end. I personally felt the ending took the book from being outstanding to a book that was engaging, and interesting with a disappointing conclusion. But that's just me, (and the two other people I loaned the book to.)
To defend the ending by challenging any disappointed reader to come up with a better one that doesn't wreck the book misses the point, I think. In this reader's opinion, the published ending impacted the overall quality of the book as a whole. I won't say that it wrecked it - but the ending does discount the creative aspect of the story and characters. Most of the intrigue of the book was considering all of the characters, the mystery behind the person sending the cards and how everything could possibly make sense and get all tied together at the end. Contemplating the creative imagination that went into the development of the story and then anticipating the conclusion that would provide that satisfying revelation, proving the author to be one of the most clever writer's I have encountered in a long time fizzled to enormous disappointment because of the ending.
I understand how some would enjoy that sort of unexpected twist, but I did not. That particular type of story twist reminds me of soap operas that have bizarre story lines where key characters are killed off, only to have a character wake up and start talking about the awful dream they just had. The viewer is suddenly hit with the realization that everything they just watched was a dream sequence and nothing was real. The viewer, or in the case of the book, the reader, was duped. It's over-done and I consider it to be lazy. It's easy to write something crazy and outlandishly creative if you don't have to tie it all together or explain some of the bizarre plots. In my opinion, the only good thing about the ending is that it sparks discussion.

i thought the ending was the author's lament. it showed that in order for the Ed, and the reader, to experience the change and emotions that we did, Zusak had to create awful characters and horrible scenes and lots and lots of pain. i think it waxed philosophical at the end for sure, but for me that only added to the impact of the book on me. knowing the author struggled with creating such heartwrenching situations and characters showed me that he was fully invested in his story, to the point of his own grief.

while i do think that he executes it better in The Book Thief, i believe he uses the same principle of an "omniscient narrator" in both books. it's wildly creative and something that i found to be completely and utterly emotionally raw.

I totally agree! The ending to the Messenger is confusing. The Book Thief is one of my favorite books though.

Okay, so wait...the guy at the ending was supposed to Markus??? I was so confused...

i went to the Literature Festival in Perth and Marcus Zusak was there and our class got to listen to his talk/discussiuon/tips it was soooo awesome he sooo funny

I always replied with my thoughts so I will spare future readers. Here's the down and dirty. It is a great book. I can't imagine what is wrong with you people. (Sorry, I never learned to share with others.) The evil man was convinced to move along and not come back.The fact that he is the message and not the messenger is great! I'll make you a deal. Since I'm so lovesick about this book. Suggest a book for me--a book that you totally love, I'll read it and review it.

There are so many directions the author could have gone with the ending of this book to help the main character and the reader grow and reflect about our impact on the world around us. What ended up happening at the end of this book was confusing and meaningless. The saving grace is the last line about how he is the message and not the messenger. The thought that keeps sticking in my head is that he could have done a lot more with the ending to add even more power to the last line of the book.

Andrew, interesting thoughts. You wrote eloquently about us readers and our impact on the planet. Now I feel a small urge to reread the book to discover why so many people were disappointed with the ending. But if I take the time to reread The Messenger, that will be less time to read a book I've never read. Alas.

Bronte, the ending just seemed to complete the book. For me, it was an "OK! Of course!" moment.

Not all journeys are defined by their destination. And this is one of those - I loved the trip along the way, the revelations and discoveries about self, the ruminations on friendships and the love of animals, and the complete lack of guile in the major characters. These are simple, stripped down, bare-bones suburban people, with all their failings writ large on the page, and the beauty and the power of that is a wonder to behold.
This book made me laugh and cry in equal parts, and made me appreciate blokes kicking a footy around the park, or girls out running for the sheer pleasure of running. More and more we seek beauty in its constructed forms, when all around us the simple beauty of the human condition is there for us all to see, if only we look for it. That's Markus Zusak's message for me.

Beautiful comment.

I love a writter that can actually understand the privilage of being the third party while the book-reader relationship is being stablished. For me the big surprise was understanding that, as the story ended, I became an observant of their relationship and it felt right!

Suzette wrote: "I disagree. I was not disappointed with the ending of the book. I thought it was creative and playful. He even put his picture at the end with the folder to cue the reader if they missed it in the..."

I missed that obvious clue. Thx!

Marla wrote: "I agree the book was well written. I really enjoyed the book - until the end. I personally felt the ending took the book from being outstanding to a book that was engaging, and interesting with a..."

Marla I completely agree. I have to admit I didn't get the ending. So I'm glad this discussion was created. I think the ending lacked the creativity of the rest of the novel. Some say they liked the existentialism of the ending,but I agree that an author can write any outlandish story if he/she doesn't intend to make a valid ending to tie up the plot.

I wasn't too bothered by the ending, but it would have been a more "real" ending if Ed's father or mother would have been the person behind the whole thing. The ending Zusak chose ended up making the characters just that - characters in a book - rather than "real" people. I still loved the book though!

I just finished this book, and I really liked it. But I can't decide whether I like the ending or not. On one hand, it feels really abrupt after all of this development that the author all the sudden shows up. But at the same time, it's kind of an interesting twist, especially when Audrey says, "I think this belongs to us." To me, this says that the characters in the novel each have a life of their own past what's written down for them. In the same way, the people we encounter have a deeper life than what we observe or write them off as, which was his whole point with making Ed watch all those he was given on the cards.

This is my favorite book of all time - excluding the masterful Ms. Rowling's chronicle, of course - but I disliked the ending. On one hand, it's a bit of a trap. There's no easy answer. Saying his dad did it while he was still alive is unrealistic and a little ridiculous, but it fits better than the ending we have. I don't mind the fact that a man came and orchestrated the entire thing - perhaps it was an experiment and Ed was the pioneer, now others will follow suit as a messenger (please no sequel, though, just a random hypothesis) - but the two aforementioned sentences bring the ending into the realm of the ludicrous. It doesn't really matter, though, the book is imperfect. The Book Thief is incredibly written and realized, but not entirely original. I'd rather have an imperfect masterpiece like I Am the Messenger any day.

I read this as an audio book, and I loved it! The reader was Australian, and he read very well, with a lot of warmth and humour. I thought the ending was a bit of a neat, tidy bow in a package, but in Zusak's defense, no ending can ever live up to how well he plotted out the story. I kept listening, getting excited about the finale, but knowing that there was no way to make one "grand" enough (not to mention, "grand" in whose opinion??). Government conspiracy? It'd be too "blockbuster movie." Mom or Dad behind it? Out of character for Mom, way too Hallmark for Dad. I do like that the ending is kinda meta--although I didn't have the benefit of seeing the author's picture at the end! I should buy this book...

I was going to write out a long passage about my thoughts on the ending, but i'm just going to link you to the very unorganized rant i made shortly after finishing the book. it's not terribly coherent, but i feel the need to share and get some thoughts. to me, the ending felt like a contradiction that, in the end, struck me with a bit of... egotism and pessimism maybe?... on the part of the author. it feels like my confusion is a bit different from those above? :3

http://inglouriously.tumblr.com/post/...

Lisa wrote: "i thought the ending was the author's lament. it showed that in order for the Ed, and the reader, to experience the change and emotions that we did, Zusak had to create awful characters and horribl..."

I quite like this take on the ending though!

Great insight because I didn't realise the "I" was the author. I thought that I am the Messenger was a great book and agree that the end was slightly confusing. Never the less the ending was unusual which I can appriciate.

Matt wrote: "DON'T READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK..

That said...

I didn't understand the part at the end - "I killed your Father", and "I ordered that man to brutalize his wife", and such. What he ser..."



Okay, to those who don't understand what the ending was, I just want to clear it up. The author eludes to being the messenger all along. He used Ed as the message.

When he says I killed your father and all that, basically he means that as the author it was his fault in a way that he died.

So yeah, hope that clears it up.

I happen to think that this is the most creative and unusual ending of all time.

Marla wrote: "The ending is a big disappointment. Basically, the "I" is the author. The author is basically saying all those things happened because they were written that way. As the reader, I felt the autho..."
Agreed.

Funny story, when I checked this out from the public library, there was a sticky note with a little review from a previous reader. The part I remember said something like, "It should have been his (Ed's) story, not a story". I didn't get it until after I read it. I guess they were talking about the whole " I am the message, not the messenger" thing.

to me the ending seemed rushed

I loved the ending, when I read it to when I understood that the man was the author. I don't feel cheated, or as if he suddenly got lazy, I loved it because that was what the author was feeling. It wasn't anything else. It was how he felt about stories and books, and he wanted to get a message across. I feel as if he did this perfectly, and in the best way possible.

Mady wrote: "Matt wrote: "DON'T READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK..

That said...

I didn't understand the part at the end - "I killed your Father", and "I ordered that man to brutalize his wife", and such..."

Mady wrote: "Matt wrote: "DON'T READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK..

That said...

I didn't understand the part at the end - "I killed your Father", and "I ordered that man to brutalize his wife", and such..."

Banba wrote: "I loved the ending, when I read it to when I understood that the man was the author. I don't feel cheated, or as if he suddenly got lazy, I loved it because that was what the author was feeling. It..."

I agree. Only an author as brilliant as Zusak could pull this off.

I greatly enjoyed this book, especially the ending. It didn't hit me in the face, but dawned on me, causing me to grin with surprise and delight. I congratulate Markus Zusak for his imaginative and unique ending of this book. It never even occurred to me that others would somehow feel let down by this marvelous literary device. I thought it was wonderful.

Elaine wrote: "I always replied with my thoughts so I will spare future readers. Here's the down and dirty. It is a great book. I can't imagine what is wrong with you people. (Sorry, I never learned to share with..."

Try Shadow of the Wind by Carlos Ruiz Zafon. You will love it.

Mady wrote: "Matt wrote: "DON'T READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK..

That said...

I didn't understand the part at the end - "I killed your Father", and "I ordered that man to brutalize his wife", and such..."

Andrew wrote: "There are so many directions the author could have gone with the ending of this book to help the main character and the reader grow and reflect about our impact on the world around us. What ended ..."

Every author is the messenger. That's not unique.

I got a completely different idea about the whole ending. I picked up on the fact how Ed thought at the end: "it makes me think that maybe I should write about all of this myself. After all, I'm the one who did all the work. I'd start with the bank robbery. Something like 'The gunman is useless'."

I then turned to the first page of the book and what did the book start with? It started with, "The gunman is useless."

Also in the book when Ed is about to kill that rapist he thinks "what would you do if you were me?... Your fingers turn the strangeness of these pages that somehow connect my life to yours... The story is just another few hundred pages of your mind."

So I came up with the idea that it is Ed who is writing the story as a memory narrative or some sort of recount. This also can show how Ed bet the man who he thought would write about it and Ed is writing it as he is "the message" to us all.

I don't know, I spoke to my English teacher about this and she agrees. Although the whole "I killed your father" defeats my idea or is just beyond my idea.

Stephen.b wrote: "the book was well written, and how would YOU end it? what possible way would you have ended that book without wrecking it? i would much rather have it end in an semiconclusive manner than a stupid ..."
When Ed had the realization that his father had orchestrated the whole thing, I actually thought that fit very nicely. I was much more satisfied with that conclusion than I was with the final one. I feel like it was an interesting idea that doesn't leave you with a very emotionally satisfactory result - and for a book all about human emotion, that's a huge fault.

I was ambivalent about this book until the end. I kept thinking he had borrowed these characters from other works. His mother reminded me of Emma Bovary. Then those two guys...Rosencrantz and Guildenstern??? At any rate, my perception that the author plucked great characters from great literature made the ending absolutely perfect.

I read this book because I love 'The Book Thief.' It has become one of my fav. books of all time, but...

With the 'I Am the Messenger', the ending seemed contrived and pointless. As to his dead father putting all this together? Craziness. Any time something gets overly-complex (in a book) I am okay, right, yeah, just like life works. It's a big secret, a conspiracy. Dad worked out like a 1,000+ possible variables for everything to work out just the way it did, in the book.

So I liked the book until the end, then thought, okay another author trying to show how clever he is.

I'll still read another book by Zusak, though.

Elaine wrote: "Andrew, interesting thoughts. You wrote eloquently about us readers and our impact on the planet. Now I feel a small urge to reread the book to discover why so many people were disappointed with th..."

I often feel the urge to reread a book because of things that other people caught in the story that I missed. I always feel the same though. If I reread this book, then I lose that time on a book I haven't read yet. It's a Catch 22 (which I have also not yet read or watched).

Lisa wrote: "i thought the ending was the author's lament. it showed that in order for the Ed, and the reader, to experience the change and emotions that we did, Zusak had to create awful characters and horribl..."

I believe that I must agree with you on this one, Lisa. I also feel like Zusak was fully invested. The things everyone is saying make me want to go back through the book and contemplate the different experiences to align them with the ending. I didn't feel like I was "jipped" or anything of the sort, but the ending that Zusak chose did command a little foresight from him, and it did creep up on me in a very unexpected way.
The folder at the end is practically the book, with every experience written as it happened, and especially the experience when the gentleman in the suit gave Ed the folder. It was a huge clue when that very scene was also written as it happened, but it was clearly written in the story before it happened to the character as I was reading the story. Complex, eh?
I felt that this ending was an elaborate web that pulled together the story with the reality of the author. As I am pulled into the story, I forget that there is a person who is putting all these things together and I just feel like "here I am, watching all this happen". That is what a really good book can do for you. However, the end makes you come back out of dreamland so suddenly that it had to be purposeful, and I really don't think it was a "fake-out".
At worst (or best? How do you see it?), I feel that "disillusioning" might be an appropriate description of the ending due to its potential to spark discussions about reality versus fantasy, and how clearly related they are.
Another reader's opinion.

The book is a fresh new song, that has flowed through me and after finishing it, I have changed for the better.
But I do agree the ending was confusing. For a second, I thought Ed had written this book but then, upon searching on Goodreads, I realised that the stranger-with-the-folder was supposed to be Markus. Sort of messed up...

First chapter was good and it promised interesting characters . It was pretty much a let down after that, couple of chapters were good . But it started sinking down after first half and end just made it equally worse.

No sense of closure. Makes me feel I wasted time reading this book .

I rarely post comments, but thought I might add to this thread... if you don't already follow Markus on Tumblr (zusakbooks.tumblr.com) or Facebook (Facebook.com/MarkusZusak) and are still wanting to get an answer to this question... you might want to. I have it on good authority that he will soon be posting an answer.

Loved the Book! It's called a Metafictional ending. The author, Markus Zusak comes into the story to talk at the end...

It's a cop-out ending, imo. Used when a writer doesn't know how to untangle the tangled story he's just made. And if the reader doesn't 'get it,' then it's the reader's fault, not the writer's. It's similar to the ending of the TV show, 'Lost.' The writers just say, hey, sorry if you didn't understand our big meaning, and yes, we left a few (A LOT!) of threads dangling, but that's just the way it is. A lot of viewers went along with this, but many others didn't.

So I was terribly disappointed in the ending of this book. I LOVE 'The Book Thief.' It will forever be near the top of my favorite books, but the ending of this novel, 'Messenger' leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth, a 'why did I waste my time on this?' sort of feeling. Plus, a writer shouldn't have to 'explain' his story or ending, etc. If a writer says, look, this is what I intended to do...

Well, then just do it. I like metafiction and odd books and strange endings, but this ending was just sort of 'cobbled on' because, it seems, the writer didn't know where else to go.

I completely agreed with you. I LOVED the book until the last few pages, and I HATED the ending. And it seems that people fall about 50/50 into the two camps. I didn't feel confused, I saw what he was doing, but I so resented the author inserting himself into the story--it ripped me right out of it when I wanted to stay in. I would still recommend the book, even with that, because the story and the language are so wonderful…