* AlternateAesopInterpretation: Being a ReclusiveArtist, all Silverstein ever stated about the book was that it was a [[https://www.nytimes.com/1978/04/30/archives/the-third-mr-silverstein.html depiction of a relationship where one gives and the other takes]]. Many fans have tried to interpret some sort of moral in the book in spite of its ambiguity:
** Many view the story as a cautionary tale against continuously giving people things when they keep asking, causing them to just keep taking and taking while giving you nothing in return.
** Others view the story as a GreenAesop, showing the consequences of when man continuously takes from nature while doing nothing to maintain it.
* AlternativeCharacterInterpretation:
** The Tree's love for the Boy is unconditional, but because the Boy is never said to give the Giving Tree anything in return, and doesn't seem to notice or appreciate the sacrifices the Tree is making for his happiness, some readers find the Boy to be very unsympathetic, which in turn makes the Giving Tree's sacrifice into {{glurge}}.
** Some have even interpreted it as a story about an abusive relationship, with the {{Jerkass}} boy taking advantage of the tree's hospitality.
%%%
%%* {{Glurge}}: The story is supposed to be a touching ode to the selflessness of a parent's unconditional love for their children. However, in highlighting just ''how'' selfless that love is, the Tree's sacrifice and the Boy's neediness can come across as rather creepy to some readers.
%%%
* TearJerker: The story is (intentionally) both heartwarming and sad. We cry in happiness for the selfless spirit of the Giving Tree even though we feel sad that she has sacrificed everything about herself to express that love.
----