Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.62 AVERAGE
3.62 AVERAGE
The aftermath of picking a winner for a WTC memorial in an anonymous competition - the winner is an American Muslim (non practicing). Media frenzy, pressure on jurors, how opinions shift. All too real.
This is a great conceit, well executed. The aftermath of 9/11 is reimagined with America plunged into a dilemma by a jury's choice of a Muslim architect to design the memorial. The understandable* misgivings of the victims' families spread outward and are soon blown up into open mistrust, hostility and eventually open racism by the misjudged actions of those involved and the cynical manipulations of the media and politicians.
The book it most reminded me of was Bonfire of the Vanities, another New York novel about racial tension and competing interest groups, and it has some of the same flaws, like the fact that it's characters seem to be hand-picked to exemplify particular types in the society. As a result, it's a little contrived, but that's not to say it's a bad book, by any means. I especially like the ending, which was all the more moving for being so unexpected.
*I considered leaving this word out because I think I'm supposed to look down on their small-mindedness or something, but I find it easy to imagine them being unhappy on a gut level in that position, no matter what their rational selves might think, especially when the designer himself is such a spikey, insensitive dick.
The book it most reminded me of was Bonfire of the Vanities, another New York novel about racial tension and competing interest groups, and it has some of the same flaws, like the fact that it's characters seem to be hand-picked to exemplify particular types in the society. As a result, it's a little contrived, but that's not to say it's a bad book, by any means. I especially like the ending, which was all the more moving for being so unexpected.
*I considered leaving this word out because I think I'm supposed to look down on their small-mindedness or something, but I find it easy to imagine them being unhappy on a gut level in that position, no matter what their rational selves might think, especially when the designer himself is such a spikey, insensitive dick.
The story takes place in NYC two years after the 9/11 attacks. A contest is held to determine the design for a memorial. The winning submission is by a Muslim-American architect, Mo Kahn. The committee, the city, and various communities involved are thrown into turmoil as everyone brings their own, personal feelings and prejudices to the decision making. A few of the characters were too stereotypical: the reporter who is irresponsible and marginally unethical in reporting the story, the governor who is making political hay with the situation, the stoic, WASP widow representing the families, the dead-beat younger brother of a NYC firefighter who cannot seem to do anything right. This is a well written book, with an interesting premise that lends itself to conversations on religious/ethnic identity, patriotism and love of country, freedom of artistic expression.
While this book is a work of fiction, there is no reason that it could have been a real scenario in American society post September 11th. The book deals with a national memorial competition for the site of the World Trade Center attacks. The designers and architects behind each submission are kept anonymous until the final selection has been chosen. On the selection committee are members of local government, art scholars, architects, and a representative of the families of those who died in the attacks. Everybody's sense of right and wrong is blurred when it is revealed that the winner is a Muslim by the name of Mohammad Khan.
The author told this story through many character's unique stories, from the architect with the winning design to the widow of a wealthy businessman who died in the attacks. The story that struck me as the most moving was that of the widow of an illegal immigrant from Bangladesh who was working in the towers on 9/11. This was a point of view that I feel did not get addressed at all following the attacks in 2001. Whether or not an illegal immigrant had the right to be acknowledged on the memorial is an ethical dilemma that I had never considered before.
The author told this story through many character's unique stories, from the architect with the winning design to the widow of a wealthy businessman who died in the attacks. The story that struck me as the most moving was that of the widow of an illegal immigrant from Bangladesh who was working in the towers on 9/11. This was a point of view that I feel did not get addressed at all following the attacks in 2001. Whether or not an illegal immigrant had the right to be acknowledged on the memorial is an ethical dilemma that I had never considered before.
This drew me right in with it's subject. I really enjoyed the story, the characters and the subject. I felt Waldman did an amazing job of making the story realistic. While I didnt like most of them they were well developed and had an interesting part to play in the story. I was divided when I finished the story. Well crafted and a great and timely read.
dark
funny
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
With a journalist's knack for identifying deeper political and cultural undercurrents - the story behind the story - and distilling it into lively prose, Amy Waldman explores the gap between what the U.S. claims to represent and what it actually is, and how the symbols and fictions we cling to can distort reality. Led by the appealingly complicated/not-always-sympathetic Mohammad Khan and Claire Burwell, The Submission is also populated with actual characters, not just ideological stand-ins. Alyssa Spier is the kind of detestable reporter only an actual reporter could know well enough to write. A superior use of architecture to interrogate the foundations of American identity to The Brutalist.
This book is excruciating to read. Waldman does a brilliant job of bringing everything back -- the sights, smells, arguments, hatreds from 9/11. She posits a competition to create a memorial to the victims of 9/11 that, Maya Lin style, is won by a very conflicted secular American born Muslim. The novel is absolutely 100 percent credible. There are twists and turns, some telegraphed most not, that keep the novel moving like a runaway train. At the same time, I was reading between my fingers because it so horrible, the visceral hatred and political maneuvering.
We were in New Jersey when the towers fell and could smell the smoke from our house. Instant memorials sprang up everywhere there were overlooks with the Manhattan skyline. At one, a French tourist came up to me and said our people stand with you. But of course our bumbling frat boy president squandered all that goodwill when he attacked the wrong country. None of that is in the book, but it all burbles up again as you read -- the incredible administrative incompetence and lack of leadership, the irrational hatred of Muslims (and Sikhs who were confused with Muslims), the confusion about who or what had done this and then the realization that our government had been told by the outgoing Clinton administration who to watch and Bush had laughed it off.
Of course a lot of people in New Jersey were affected by 9/11. I knew a kid whose father was killed and he insisted on sitting with his younger sister during lunch because he had said goodbye to his father in the morning and his father never returned and he had trouble recovering from that. All that sorrow is revived by the book, all the confusion about why here? Why the World Trade towers?
In some ways, those emotions are too powerful which is why the book is so hard to read. In an alchemical trick, Trump seems to have turned that hatred that was so focused on Muslims into an equally visceral hatred of Hispanics. He toyed with anti Muslim sentiment early on in his presidency and has since moved on to a new target. The book also captures how anti Muslim sentiment has largely moved on. But I like to protect myself against the news today, not reading the stories that will upset me too much, and I felt the same way about this book -- I read it, but I don't seek out this kind of book that causes too much raw anger against the government and the gratuitous haters because you see the effects everywhere and it is draining not to be able to do much about it but vote for a side I can believe in.
So I guess the end thought is beware. This is a book that will throw you back into that horrible feeling of anger and loss and powerlessness that was never really resolved. We never did build something even as simple as a memorial garden and I think she is arguing here that we should have and I think she is right.
We were in New Jersey when the towers fell and could smell the smoke from our house. Instant memorials sprang up everywhere there were overlooks with the Manhattan skyline. At one, a French tourist came up to me and said our people stand with you. But of course our bumbling frat boy president squandered all that goodwill when he attacked the wrong country. None of that is in the book, but it all burbles up again as you read -- the incredible administrative incompetence and lack of leadership, the irrational hatred of Muslims (and Sikhs who were confused with Muslims), the confusion about who or what had done this and then the realization that our government had been told by the outgoing Clinton administration who to watch and Bush had laughed it off.
Of course a lot of people in New Jersey were affected by 9/11. I knew a kid whose father was killed and he insisted on sitting with his younger sister during lunch because he had said goodbye to his father in the morning and his father never returned and he had trouble recovering from that. All that sorrow is revived by the book, all the confusion about why here? Why the World Trade towers?
In some ways, those emotions are too powerful which is why the book is so hard to read. In an alchemical trick, Trump seems to have turned that hatred that was so focused on Muslims into an equally visceral hatred of Hispanics. He toyed with anti Muslim sentiment early on in his presidency and has since moved on to a new target. The book also captures how anti Muslim sentiment has largely moved on. But I like to protect myself against the news today, not reading the stories that will upset me too much, and I felt the same way about this book -- I read it, but I don't seek out this kind of book that causes too much raw anger against the government and the gratuitous haters because you see the effects everywhere and it is draining not to be able to do much about it but vote for a side I can believe in.
So I guess the end thought is beware. This is a book that will throw you back into that horrible feeling of anger and loss and powerlessness that was never really resolved. We never did build something even as simple as a memorial garden and I think she is arguing here that we should have and I think she is right.
I was expecting to like this book quite a bit more than I actually did. I didn't really care about the characters and flew through it just to get to the end and see if it got better for me.
This book isn't perfect: the characters are distant, not likeable, almost cold. But the story is fabulous: an ethical dilemma that is played out well.
This is a very clever idea for a book, that also shows the danger of writing fiction about reality. The story is that there is a contest to design a 9/11 memorial, and the winning design turns out to be submitted (get it?) by a Muslim, named Mohammed, no less. The resulting fictional uproar allows the author to probe and describe all kinds of reactions. points of view, relationships and biases. Some of the people in the book seem to have close similarities to real people, but most just stereotype a particular viewpoint. I tried to tease out the author's real sympathies, but couldn't untangle them from my own. It is a good book for thinking, "What would you do?" To the author's credit, once you think you've figured that out, she throws in another wrinkle to make you think again. And despite the additional wrinkles that challenge your biases, the scenarios always seem possible, like they could have really happened.
The major events of the book take place two years after 9/11, so 2003. The denouement takes place 20 years later, so 2023. The book was released in 2012. This is where the danger of writing about reality comes in. The author clearly and optimistically did not anticipate Donald Trump and his fans.
A word on the writing. The similes are awful, frequently stop-the-tape-did-she-really-write-that laughable. I didn't write down any examples, but here's one from an Amazon review that I do remember: A man notices that the part in a woman's hair is "as straight and white as a jet's contrail". There were many more. Also, the viewpoints in the book tend to get a little repetitious. But really, there are only so many ways to be bigoted (or totally unbiased) so I excuse the author for that.
The major events of the book take place two years after 9/11, so 2003. The denouement takes place 20 years later, so 2023. The book was released in 2012. This is where the danger of writing about reality comes in. The author clearly and optimistically did not anticipate Donald Trump and his fans.
A word on the writing. The similes are awful, frequently stop-the-tape-did-she-really-write-that laughable. I didn't write down any examples, but here's one from an Amazon review that I do remember: A man notices that the part in a woman's hair is "as straight and white as a jet's contrail". There were many more. Also, the viewpoints in the book tend to get a little repetitious. But really, there are only so many ways to be bigoted (or totally unbiased) so I excuse the author for that.