The Boy at The Top of the Mountain

Fiction | Novel | Middle Grade | Published in 2015

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more. For select classroom titles, we also provide Teaching Guides with discussion and quiz questions to prompt student engagement.

Download PDF

Summary

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapters 1-4

Chapters 5-7

Chapters 8-10

Chapters 11-14

Character Analysis

Themes

Symbols & Motifs

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Character Analysis

Pierrot (Pieter) Fischer

Conflicting identities are a core aspect of Pierrot’s character. Born into a French-German family just after World War I, he initially enjoys his dual identity. For instance, he speaks French with his mother and German with his father, and he entertains guests by singing “La Marseillaise” in German and “Das Deutschlandlied” in French. As the tensions grow during the years between the World Wars, his mother urges him not do to speak both languages, since some “find it difficult to forget the war, that’s all. Particularly those who lost loved ones in the trenches” (7). However, his father, having served on the German side in World War I, remains proud despite his nation’s loss, and he encourages Pierrot to celebrate his German identity.

The conflicts between his mother and father, and the confusion about his identity, precipitate Pierrot’s growing struggle for a sense of self. Losing both his father and mother at a young age only exacerbates this struggle, as this leaves Pierrot’s search for identity incomplete and unfulfilled. Furthermore, the bullying that Pierrot experiences both in Paris and at the orphanage in Orléans increase his feelings of self-doubt and insecurity. All of this creates a void within Pierrot’s personality.

When he is brought under Hitler’s wing at Berghof, the Führer’s domineering power and influence rush in to fill this lack that Pierrot feels. He attaches quickly to Hitler’s authority, which models a clear sense of identity (German nationalism). Pierrot feels his attachment validated when Hitler dotes on him, entering him into the Hitlerjugend, spending time with him, and giving him special projects.

Pierrot’s arc within the story tracks the way that this attachment causes a loss of innocence. As he deepens in his acceptance of Nazi ideology, he becomes more cruel, self-important, and even violent, leading to the deaths of Ernst and Beatrix and his assault on Katarina. In this sense, Pierrot serves as an explanation for how so many Germans might have been able to accept Nazi rule because it provided a model of strength and identity for people who felt disenfranchised and powerless; the allegiance to these ideals was so powerful that some committed atrocious acts.

The close of this novel, however, explores the possibility of making amends and earning forgiveness. Pierrot realizes that the validation he longed for led him to seek self-importance, and in the aftermath of the war, he instead looks back to the connections he’d forged early in life and nearly shed entirely. Anshel’s acceptance of Pierrot at the close of the novel brings it full circle.

Anshel Bronstein

While Anshel is only physically present at the beginning and end of The Boy at the Top of the Mountain, he is an important influence throughout the novel. He serves as a foil to Pierrot. While his friend is bullied at school, for instance, Anshel is recognized as the “smartest boy in the class” (4). He also represents key elements in the novel: the arts and literature, feelings, emotions, and inner life. Despite being silent on account of his deafness, Anshel represents expressivity; while Pierrot is interested in the stories that his friend creates, he is better equipped to listen and edit them rather than to create.

Despite facing persecution as a Jew, Anshel is steadfast in his allegiance to home and his values, while Pierrot is susceptible to outside influences—most significantly, Hitler. The letters Anshel writes to Pierrot are a consistent reminder of home and what Pierrot left behind. They are also one of the few instances in which he learns the truth about the atrocities going on and the challenges faced by Europeans outside the sheltered walls of Berghof. When Pierrot ultimately rejects these letters and his friend while living at Berghof, while at the same time growing in cruelty and self-importance, it signifies that he is willfully shedding the grounding force that Anshel provides.

While Pierrot’s character arc charts his conflicts, loss of innocence, and search for forgiveness, Anshel’s evolution is a story of perseverance and success in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. Dreaming in his youth of becoming a writer, he achieves this goal in the end despite suffering during the Nazi era—losing his mother when soldiers capture Jews in Paris, and hiding with a family who claimed him “as their own despite the trouble it had caused them” (258). When Pierrot finally returns to Anshel—who forgives him—it shows the significance of Anshel as a validation of Pierrot’s moral evolution. This is underscored when the two old friends make the signs they had used as children: Anshel the fox, and Pierrot “the dog, kind and loyal” (258). Readers discover in retrospect that The Boy at the Top of the Mountain is Pierrot’s story as told by Anshel’s pen, emphasizing his central importance.

Beatrix

Like Anshel, Beatrix is a link to Pierrot’s past. Although she was not physically present in Pierrot’s youth, she is indelibly connected to him as his aunt, the only family member that remains after the deaths of his father and mother. Her attempt to rescue Pierrot from the orphanage in Orléans is motivated both by a desire to connect with her family and her fear that life in Paris—and Europe more broadly—will soon become more dire. At the same time, her effort demonstrates that even good intentions can have unintended consequences. By placing Pierrot in proximity to Hitler, Beatrix starts the process of his moral corruption rather than saving him, leading her to eventually wonder if she “made a terrible mistake” in bringing him to Berghof (154).

In terms of her own character, Beatrix provides a steadfast model of calm and justice. She attempts to be Pierrot’s moral compass, but never forces him. Her activities with Ernst also prove that she is a vital participant in the resistance to Nazi power, putting her life in danger through her involvement with the plot to poison Hitler. The example she sets is one Pierrot could have followed instead of Hitler’s; the fact that Beatrix gives him an alternative emphasizes his responsibility for his choices and the need to accept their consequences.

Beatrix’s evolution over the course of the novel does not involve a change in her character, but rather what is revealed about her to readers. Specifically, when her participation in the resistance effort becomes clear, her selfless part in the attempt to save others by eliminating Hitler contrasts sharply to Pierrot’s self-absorbed desire to seem important to Hitler. When he reveals the plot and calls Ernst and Beatrix traitors, leading to their executions, Beatrix declares Pierrot’s failure without even saying a word, “looking up at his window, staring directly at him” just before she is shot to death (190). The powerful impression of this look, and what it symbolizes, linger with Pierrot years later as he comes to terms with his actions during Nazi rule.

The Berghof Staff (Emma, Ernst, Herta)

The other Berghof staff, much like Beatrix, serve as a kind of moral compass for Pierrot, albeit one that he largely ignores. At key moments in the novel’s plot, they provide models of just behavior and/or reminders of correct action, sometimes pointing out when he is guilty of wrongdoing. The extent of Pierrot’s corruption is evident in the fact that he often fails to acknowledge or respect their goodwill.

Emma enters at significant moments in the novel to provide moral guidance to Pierrot, although he tends to reject it. When she asks him to help slaughter the chickens, for instance, he recoils; in retrospect, it is an important lesson that participation in violence cannot be excused by innocence. Later, she stands up to him when he assaults Katarina, proclaiming his loss of innocence.

Pierrot is initially more accepting of Ernst, admiring his uniform and confidence. Ernst provides guidance meant to protect Pierrot, suggesting the dangers of uniforms and warning him for his own safety “to never mention [Anshel’s] name when you are in the house at the top of the mountain,” for instance (102). By the time of the plot to poison Hitler comes about, Pierrot turns his back on Ernst, calling him a traitor; thus, he rejects Ernst’s guidance, just as he does Emma’s.

Herta plays an equally important role in the shaping of Pierrot’s moral sensibility. Symbolically, she is the first staff member he encounters upon arrival at Berghof, and the last he sees in the waning days of World War II. While seeming to treat him brusquely when he first arrives at Berghof, impatient with his “silly questions,” Herta also has Pierrot’s best interests in mind (76). This is shown when she counsels Pierrot about how to manage life after the fall of Nazi rule, advising him to take ownership of his wrongdoings.

The Berghof staff do not really evolve as characters, but stay essentially the same. Their earnestness and consistency are a foil to Pierrot’s growing cruelty and loss of innocence. However, Pierrot’s relationship to Emma, Ernst, and Herta does change over time. Beginning as wide-eye, cautious acceptance, the relationship transforms into one of rejection, as Pierrot refuses to heed their moral guidance. By the end of the novel, the relationship transforms yet again, as Pierrot attempts to make amends, asking Herta if there will be forgiveness, and later writing to Ernst’s mother, accepting blame for her son’s death.