Memory
Bradford et al. argue that The Giver represents a community where the lack of cultural memory leads to an inability to avoid societal mistakes, preventing the community from becoming a true Utopia, thus conferring transformational potential on human memory.[17] Hanson interprets the restriction of memory as totalitarian and argues that Lowry demonstrates the emancipatory potential of memory in the Giver.[18] Triplett and Han suggest that Jonas's role as receiver of memory, allowing him a deeper understanding of his societal and cultural context, demonstrates the validity of suspicious methods of reading that attempt to obtain deeper rather than surface meanings.[19]
Religion
Bradford et al. suggest The Giver's depiction of Christmas at the novel's end implies that an ideal community is in part represented by a family Christmas, therefore situating the novel as conservative.[20] Graeme Wend-Walker, an academic, analyzed the then-trilogy in 2013 through a post-secular lens and suggested that removing religion entirely from human society and lives could diminish humanity's capacity for accepting differences rather than providing for human liberation as some may assume.[21] Countering Bradford's claim, which would suggest that the novel is conservative rather than transformative due to its religious imagery and undertones, Wend-Walker's post-secular reading suggests that the novel explores the ambiguity between the secular and religious binary which provides it progressive potential by allowing for the transformative potential of the spiritual.[22]
Color
Susan G Lea has emphasized that sameness is crucial to the world of The Giver, and furthermore that their monochromatic vision creates a color blindness within the community that cannot be aware of the effects of the absence of color.[23] She likens the lack of difference and literal color blindness of The Giver's community with color blind attitudes that act as if racial difference does not exist, and suggests that the book shows the way that colorblindness erases people of color and their experiences through their lack of visibility.[24] Kyoungmin and Lee examine Jonas's growing ability to see color rather than the lack of color in his community and argue that his selfhood grows as his memory and perception of color grow.[25] They suggest that Jonas's full perception of color at the end is what allows him to choose to travel elsewhere as an autonomous agent in comparison to others in his community.[26]
Eugenics and gene editing
Elizabeth Bridges reads an implication of gene editing in the development of the homogenous community, based on euphemistic language throughout the novel.[27] She suggests that the release of those who do not fit societal conventions represents the ways that eugenics were employed by the society of The Giver.[27] Robert Gadowski suggests that government control of bodies inhibits the society's freedoms.[28] He argues that through bio-technical planning, people's bodies become vehicles of state control rather than the locus of their autonomy.[29]
