Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.63 AVERAGE
3.63 AVERAGE
In a lot of ways, Waldman took the easy way out. One perspective wasn't cutting it, so she decided to have six perspectives. Bringing it all together in the end was difficult, so she thrust us 20 years into the future and created a character who is making a documentary to help gather thoughts in hindsight from the novel's major characters.
For me, the convenience of all this made the reading a little boring and took away the chance for one thing I really enjoy about reading fiction: being amazed at the author's creativity and ability to convey complexity. It also took away from her characters - each of them is far less complex and depthful than they could be if the book had just one or two star players.
Additional, the style is a little weak - cliched descriptions and really odd metaphors pop up frequently.
All that said, Waldman does accomplish what was probably her goal: she captures the complexity of the American situation immediately post-9/11. By creating an intense situation (the winning design for the 9/11 memorial turns out to have been created by an American of Muslim background) she is able to delve deeply into the complex opinions and viewpoints of Americans on all sides of the issue. Different characters have different reactions, not all of them based on their politics and many of them based very much on the extent to which the characters are under media scrutiny.
Read this way, with the situation as the "main character" and the characters as just tools to help define its complexities, this is an excellent first novel. I will probably always prefer novels that subordinate plot to characters rather than the other way around, but I definitely see the appeal. Waldman's speculations on the aftermath of a situation that could have easily happened in America are fascinating and strike me as quite realistic.
Themes: America, post 9/11, politics, journalism, public opinion vs. principles
For me, the convenience of all this made the reading a little boring and took away the chance for one thing I really enjoy about reading fiction: being amazed at the author's creativity and ability to convey complexity. It also took away from her characters - each of them is far less complex and depthful than they could be if the book had just one or two star players.
Additional, the style is a little weak - cliched descriptions and really odd metaphors pop up frequently.
All that said, Waldman does accomplish what was probably her goal: she captures the complexity of the American situation immediately post-9/11. By creating an intense situation (the winning design for the 9/11 memorial turns out to have been created by an American of Muslim background) she is able to delve deeply into the complex opinions and viewpoints of Americans on all sides of the issue. Different characters have different reactions, not all of them based on their politics and many of them based very much on the extent to which the characters are under media scrutiny.
Read this way, with the situation as the "main character" and the characters as just tools to help define its complexities, this is an excellent first novel. I will probably always prefer novels that subordinate plot to characters rather than the other way around, but I definitely see the appeal. Waldman's speculations on the aftermath of a situation that could have easily happened in America are fascinating and strike me as quite realistic.
Themes: America, post 9/11, politics, journalism, public opinion vs. principles
This book reminded me of JK Rowling's A Casual Vacancy in that it made me think outside of my comfort zone but I didn't actually like any of the characters. Fascinating read. I recommend it if you'd like to push yourself to think about new ideas.
Amazing. I mean made me want to tear my hair out and throw the book across the room several times. I don't really know what to say about it. Waldman goes around and around, looking at all sides. Read it. Seriously. I can't recommend it enough.
One of my favorite lines: "Emotions are not legal rights."
One of my favorite lines: "Emotions are not legal rights."
Loved the way this book dealt with everything post 9/11 as a mediated identity war, but didn't like it's very positive representation of America, the American dream and so on. Great read!
Very thought-provoking book. I really enjoyed it. The character of Mo was complicated and deep. I really liked how the story didn't fall into the cliche, typical stereotypes on either side of the fence.
Although this book definitely sucked me in at times, I felt let down at the end of it. One reason is that for some reason I really disliked the ending, which is a flashfoward to what would still be the future.
The situation the book is about is pretty bullet proof. There's no way not to get caught into the train wreck that is this kind of premise: committee choosing a design for a 9/11 memorial blindly chooses a Muslim American artist. Chaos ensues. As others have mentioned, the book is full of types who embody povs just by being who they are: the rich widow on the jury, the Bangladeshi illegal immigrant widow, the trashy, ambitious reporter, the screw-up Irish-American brother of a fireman hero, the professional racists, the Muslim representatives. You can't help but feel something when everything everyone says gets effortlessly twisted into something else.
Oh, and in the center is the architect who seems to cause the most controversy due to his American outlook, not a Muslim one: why shouldn't he get a chance to enter a contest with anything he wants and have his design built the way anyone else's would be?
There were times when I'd be slightly pulled out by thinking about certain unrealistic things. Namely, that in the aftermath of 9/11 there's no way there would be an anonymous contest, period. And no way would it take people that long to connect a garden to a martyr's paradise. I wasn't actually sure--and I don't think this was a bad thing--that I was supposed to think Kahn's design was very good anyway. It sounded from the beginning like a generic, sentimental thing that didn't connect to the attack to me at all.
My favorite moment that I loved so I feel I should mention. At one point Mo goes to a reception with a lot of other Muslim guests where a heated discussion breaks out. The author tells us how everyone's talking very fast, but as this is taking place during Ramadan they're also shoving food into their mouths very fast, because they can't eat from dawn til dusk. I don't know why this made me laugh so much, but I just loved this detail. It was the most humanizing moment in the book.
The situation the book is about is pretty bullet proof. There's no way not to get caught into the train wreck that is this kind of premise: committee choosing a design for a 9/11 memorial blindly chooses a Muslim American artist. Chaos ensues. As others have mentioned, the book is full of types who embody povs just by being who they are: the rich widow on the jury, the Bangladeshi illegal immigrant widow, the trashy, ambitious reporter, the screw-up Irish-American brother of a fireman hero, the professional racists, the Muslim representatives. You can't help but feel something when everything everyone says gets effortlessly twisted into something else.
Oh, and in the center is the architect who seems to cause the most controversy due to his American outlook, not a Muslim one: why shouldn't he get a chance to enter a contest with anything he wants and have his design built the way anyone else's would be?
There were times when I'd be slightly pulled out by thinking about certain unrealistic things. Namely, that in the aftermath of 9/11 there's no way there would be an anonymous contest, period. And no way would it take people that long to connect a garden to a martyr's paradise. I wasn't actually sure--and I don't think this was a bad thing--that I was supposed to think Kahn's design was very good anyway. It sounded from the beginning like a generic, sentimental thing that didn't connect to the attack to me at all.
My favorite moment that I loved so I feel I should mention. At one point Mo goes to a reception with a lot of other Muslim guests where a heated discussion breaks out. The author tells us how everyone's talking very fast, but as this is taking place during Ramadan they're also shoving food into their mouths very fast, because they can't eat from dawn til dusk. I don't know why this made me laugh so much, but I just loved this detail. It was the most humanizing moment in the book.
A great read. What would happen if a nation wide contest, held to choose a design for the 9/11 memorial, was won by a Muslim? The book was thought provoking and beautifully written. It do a nice job of showing how loyalties and ideals are flexible in some and rigid to a fault in others. Beautiful.
After 9/11, a contest was held to select a memorial design to commemorate the attacks. The jury selected the winner from anonymous entries only to find that the architect was Muslim.
The book chronicles the subsequent aftermath of naming a Muslim as designer of a memorial to remember attacks by Muslim terrorists.
All sides of the (fictional) issue were addressed: victims' families, the press, government officials.
A really thought-provoking book that would be great for a book club to discuss.
The book chronicles the subsequent aftermath of naming a Muslim as designer of a memorial to remember attacks by Muslim terrorists.
All sides of the (fictional) issue were addressed: victims' families, the press, government officials.
A really thought-provoking book that would be great for a book club to discuss.
When I read the blurb about this book I thought it would be a good read but as I got further into the story I realized that I didn't care for any of the characters. They had no depth and I had no interest in any of them attaining their goals. It seemed that stereotype after stereotype was offered up for characters and nothing else was offered to connect with. The end with the so called wrap up was a nice way to end the book but again the lack of affinity left me wanting.
1/31/12: The Submission wants to make you uncomfortable; as I read, I wanted to squirm in my seat, to turn away. In imagining what might have happened had the winning design for the 9/11 Memorial, submitted anonymously, been discovered to be by an American Muslim, Waldman creates an impossible, awful, situation--then sees it and all of its ramifications through to the end. (Sorry, no spoilers here!) The jury's unwitting choice leaks to the press, the press sensationalizes the news, the public seizes on it as a rallying cry for and against Muslims--and it all goes viral. As the conflict expands, the author layers complexity upon complexity, conflict upon conflict, until her characters are no longer able to think their way rationally out of the situation: from an array of victims' family members, to the members of the jury who chose the design, to the architect himself, each character is faced with choosing sides--and in the process, understanding him or herself in new and uncomfortable ways.
Waldman's writing is sturdy, sometimes venturing into poetic, though a bit tentatively--which makes her effort a bit too noticeable. Still, an extraordinary first novel--clearly Waldman is an experienced writer, even if she's not yet the most graceful. But her plot construction, her explication of the growing muddle, and her resolution of the constellation of conflicts--even though I didn't like them!--are consistent, thoughtful and fascinating. And she's great at dialogue.
The title has as many layers, I think, as the plot. Of course it refers to the design submitted to the jury. But it refers to many other meanings of the word as well, as it echoes through the book. Submission is considered the woman's role in Islam, and this is key to the characters and fates of a number of female characters--whether Muslim or not. Submission also points to the problem of polarization: if a conflict is set up with two opposing sides, and no chance of compromise, then only one side can "win"--and the other must "submit". These are only the most obvious ways it is used--I think there are many others as well.
Waldman's writing is sturdy, sometimes venturing into poetic, though a bit tentatively--which makes her effort a bit too noticeable. Still, an extraordinary first novel--clearly Waldman is an experienced writer, even if she's not yet the most graceful. But her plot construction, her explication of the growing muddle, and her resolution of the constellation of conflicts--even though I didn't like them!--are consistent, thoughtful and fascinating. And she's great at dialogue.
The title has as many layers, I think, as the plot. Of course it refers to the design submitted to the jury. But it refers to many other meanings of the word as well, as it echoes through the book. Submission is considered the woman's role in Islam, and this is key to the characters and fates of a number of female characters--whether Muslim or not. Submission also points to the problem of polarization: if a conflict is set up with two opposing sides, and no chance of compromise, then only one side can "win"--and the other must "submit". These are only the most obvious ways it is used--I think there are many others as well.