You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.08 AVERAGE
4.08 AVERAGE
informative
medium-paced
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
An informative 100 years of Israeli history through a personal lens. Significantly expanded my knowledge and understanding
hopeful
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Very interesting. I learned a lot of historical context that I feel I should have known by now. I did not understand the origins on Zionism, and yet I’ve had strong opinions about it for a long time. Pardon me, I’m glad to have read it. Shavit writes unfortunately like a misogynist. Parts of simply did not keep my attention, and I thought the memoir/sentimentality parts were a bit disjointed in a book this long. Still working out my feelings on the American university commentary. Glazed over during the intense nuclear descriptions (sorry
This is a very good book for what it is. It is not really meant to be a history book, nor is it meant to be a balanced perspective of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. "My Promised Land" has two major themes: Ari Shavit's personal connection to the land, and the history of marginalized and minority peoples in Israel/Palestine. From early pioneers to Holocaust survivors to Sephardic Jews forced to leave Arab countries to Tel Aviv's nightclub and gay scene, Shavit explores how minorities have shaped Israel, and how the state has at times oppressed and at other times boosted communities. Shavit does a great job giving voice to these minorities. The chapter on how Israel left Holocaust survivors to cope on their own is powerful, as is the chapter on the adrift Sephardic community and rise of the political party Shas. I learned quite a lot from the book.
Shavit has a few central arguments.
1. The Yom Kippur War, not the Six Day War, pushed Israel onto a new, perilous path. After 1973, Labour lost power, Likud and the right-wing military parties became more powerful, and settlements began to pop up - first illegally, then with increasing government support.
2. The left-wing in Israel focuses on ending the occupation as the means to Palestinian statehood and mollifying Palestinians' historical claims. Shavit argues that this is misguided. Palestinians are angry about being forced off their land in 1948; while they are upset about the occupation today, ending occupation won't end their deep anger.
3. Shavit's main theme is a tragic one, that Zionism has a contradiction at its core. Israel needed to be brought into existence after the Holocaust, so the creation of the state was necessary. But in order to bring Israel into existence, Zionists had to commit crimes, from forcing Palestinians from their lands to murder. Shavit explores the tragedy of Israel's existence, that it is both refuge and expeller.
4. One of the most interesting of Shavit's arguments is that early Zionist pioneers almost literally did not see the Arabs who lived on the land. They just didn't think about them at all. They didn't think of Palestine as "settled," but as mostly empty land to be developed.
Regarding common criticisms:
1. I repeat, this is NOT meant to be an academic history book. There are no footnotes, and most things aren't sourced. Shavit relies a lot on interviews. I'm sure this approach drives some historians crazy, and normally this would really bug me. But Shavit's journalistic style keeps the focus on personal stories rather than historic analysis. If you want a book with the general history of Israel, you should look elsewhere.
2. This is meant to be a book about Israelis, not about Palestinians. I know some reviewers complained that the book wasn't "balanced" because it didn't emphasize how Palestinian anti-Semitism and poor government have undermined their attempts for statehood. In graduate school, one of my professors would get annoyed at us for criticizing books for not including information about some topic or other. He would tell us, "Criticize the book for what is says, not for what we think it should have said." Shavit's focus is Israel and the Jews. He does include a lot of information about Palestinians, and I did think he definitely got across internal Palestinian problems and anti-Semitism. But that is not the focus of the book, and that's okay. Again, if you want a book that compares how Israelis and Palestinians have dealt with the past century, look elsewhere. Shavit mostly wants to emphasize that Palestinians are angry, and that they often had reason to be. He is not trying to write a comprehensive history of the conflict!
I found Shavit's style somewhat annoyingly repetitive, and he expects his audience to have a pretty good grasp of Israeli history coming in, which might be problematic for some readers.
Overall, I really did find the book insightful. I would recommend the book to anyone interested in a "different" history of Israel and its path today.
Shavit has a few central arguments.
1. The Yom Kippur War, not the Six Day War, pushed Israel onto a new, perilous path. After 1973, Labour lost power, Likud and the right-wing military parties became more powerful, and settlements began to pop up - first illegally, then with increasing government support.
2. The left-wing in Israel focuses on ending the occupation as the means to Palestinian statehood and mollifying Palestinians' historical claims. Shavit argues that this is misguided. Palestinians are angry about being forced off their land in 1948; while they are upset about the occupation today, ending occupation won't end their deep anger.
3. Shavit's main theme is a tragic one, that Zionism has a contradiction at its core. Israel needed to be brought into existence after the Holocaust, so the creation of the state was necessary. But in order to bring Israel into existence, Zionists had to commit crimes, from forcing Palestinians from their lands to murder. Shavit explores the tragedy of Israel's existence, that it is both refuge and expeller.
4. One of the most interesting of Shavit's arguments is that early Zionist pioneers almost literally did not see the Arabs who lived on the land. They just didn't think about them at all. They didn't think of Palestine as "settled," but as mostly empty land to be developed.
Regarding common criticisms:
1. I repeat, this is NOT meant to be an academic history book. There are no footnotes, and most things aren't sourced. Shavit relies a lot on interviews. I'm sure this approach drives some historians crazy, and normally this would really bug me. But Shavit's journalistic style keeps the focus on personal stories rather than historic analysis. If you want a book with the general history of Israel, you should look elsewhere.
2. This is meant to be a book about Israelis, not about Palestinians. I know some reviewers complained that the book wasn't "balanced" because it didn't emphasize how Palestinian anti-Semitism and poor government have undermined their attempts for statehood. In graduate school, one of my professors would get annoyed at us for criticizing books for not including information about some topic or other. He would tell us, "Criticize the book for what is says, not for what we think it should have said." Shavit's focus is Israel and the Jews. He does include a lot of information about Palestinians, and I did think he definitely got across internal Palestinian problems and anti-Semitism. But that is not the focus of the book, and that's okay. Again, if you want a book that compares how Israelis and Palestinians have dealt with the past century, look elsewhere. Shavit mostly wants to emphasize that Palestinians are angry, and that they often had reason to be. He is not trying to write a comprehensive history of the conflict!
I found Shavit's style somewhat annoyingly repetitive, and he expects his audience to have a pretty good grasp of Israeli history coming in, which might be problematic for some readers.
Overall, I really did find the book insightful. I would recommend the book to anyone interested in a "different" history of Israel and its path today.
Not sure I should even rate this book as I did not finish it, so consider the three stars based on about the first half of the book. Ultimately it wasn't what I was looking for which was an unbiased account of how Israel/Palenstine came to be and some explanation of the unrest in the region. It was a lofty ask I know, but I had hoped . . . However, Shavit is not an unbiased narrator. His great-grandfather was one of the early Zionist visionaries, and Shavit betrays his admiration for the early Jewish "settlers" over and over again in this book. He forgives early atrocities because the settlers were blinded by their zeal, then proceeds to inventory every tit for tat attack between the Palestians and Israelis in an attempt to be impartial, but by that point he has set the stage and it is clearly an Israeli backdrop.
Very well written and incredibly informative. This book covers an extremely controversial topic, however I don’t feel like it’s written to give full support to one side. The complications and tragedies of the history of Judaism, Israel, and Palestine gives insight and a multifaceted view on the circumstances of war today.
Okay, I'll be honest. I didn't finish this book. And I really wanted to. Like, really, really wanted to. But after 11 days of struggling through just half of it, I finally made the conscious decision to put it down and stop. I admit that I am extremely ignorant to the politics of this book. I constantly hear about Palestinian-Israeli conflict, so when my book club decided to read this, I was excited! But the author tries to do too much. Partially personal memoir/reflection, partially dates and events like a typical history textbook, and then some (too many, actually) interviews from people who took part in the history are sprinkled in. I had a really hard time following where the author wanted to go with this. And it feels much longer than it should be. I consider myself a fairly quick reader, but not with this book. However, I'm looking forward to discussing the topic at hand at our discussion. Perhaps I'm missing something that others are able to spot?
I thought this was a very even-handed and human history of Israel. It starts with the story of the authors ancestor, arriving in a Palestine run by the British, intent on acquiring land and being part of the movement to build a Jewish state. By today's standards it seems a relatively peaceful time, and while Jews displaced from Europe and elsewhere displaces Arabs in Palestine it's not until decades later that violence becomes part of every day life. The book traces the generations from these early zionists to 1948 when the UN divides Palestine in Jewish and Arab parts, through to the present day and the series of wars launched by the Arab neighbours and won by Israel that shaped the country's psyche and borders.
It's a tragic story telling both sides of history from the perspective of an Israeli secular intellectual. Depending on your point of view, you might find it apologetic, biased or find yourself challenged, which would be all the more reason to read it.
It's a tragic story telling both sides of history from the perspective of an Israeli secular intellectual. Depending on your point of view, you might find it apologetic, biased or find yourself challenged, which would be all the more reason to read it.