Scan barcode
A review by laurenjpegler
Atta by Jarett Kobek
2.0
I've done it. I've read the final book for my Terrorism & Modern Literature module. Each book I've read looks at terrorism in different time periods, and for the last novel it was only right I looked at the 9/11 attacks.
I cannot rely on my own words to summarise this for you. They would not do the novel justice. So, instead, I have taken the most relevant and important sentences out of the ridiculously long Goodreads summary: In the summer of 1999, Mohamed Atta defended a master's thesis that critiqued the introduction of Western-style skyscrapers in the Middle East and called for the return of the -Islamic-Oriental city. The novel's main concern is asking the question: what if 9/11 was as much a matter of architectural criticism as religious terrorism?
To be honest, I didn't hate this (surprisingly, considering I've hated all the others). It was interesting and very well written. I think the main reason I liked this was because it was (sort of) contemporary. I was five when this happened, so I have absolutely no recollection of the attack. But I do remember it was all people talked about for years, so I felt like I could connect to this narrative through that.
The reason I'm rating this down so much is because the first 2/3 of the novel was quite boring. It was interesting to get one of the attacker's backstory, but I didn't really care for it all that much? Why would I want to read and occasionally feel sympathy or understanding to a man who committed such an atrocious attack? I can't help but feel like this book removes some of the blame from the attackers, placing it on different people, capitalism, etc. etc. etc.
Essentially, the only reason I am giving it 2 stars is for the final third of the novel. Despite this being the most horrific part, it was interestingly depicted. It was brutal, violent and graphic, but it showed Kobek's writing abilities. I was drawn in by this part of the narrative, but I feel like I shouldn't have been? I'm not too sure, to be honest, I'm so conflicted right now. It was good, but raised a lot of issues for me, too.
But to summarise this review, I will refer back to the Goodreads summary: "ATTA is a brutal, relentless, and ultimately fearless corrective to ten years of propaganda and pandering".
I cannot rely on my own words to summarise this for you. They would not do the novel justice. So, instead, I have taken the most relevant and important sentences out of the ridiculously long Goodreads summary: In the summer of 1999, Mohamed Atta defended a master's thesis that critiqued the introduction of Western-style skyscrapers in the Middle East and called for the return of the -Islamic-Oriental city. The novel's main concern is asking the question: what if 9/11 was as much a matter of architectural criticism as religious terrorism?
To be honest, I didn't hate this (surprisingly, considering I've hated all the others). It was interesting and very well written. I think the main reason I liked this was because it was (sort of) contemporary. I was five when this happened, so I have absolutely no recollection of the attack. But I do remember it was all people talked about for years, so I felt like I could connect to this narrative through that.
The reason I'm rating this down so much is because the first 2/3 of the novel was quite boring. It was interesting to get one of the attacker's backstory, but I didn't really care for it all that much? Why would I want to read and occasionally feel sympathy or understanding to a man who committed such an atrocious attack? I can't help but feel like this book removes some of the blame from the attackers, placing it on different people, capitalism, etc. etc. etc.
Essentially, the only reason I am giving it 2 stars is for the final third of the novel. Despite this being the most horrific part, it was interestingly depicted. It was brutal, violent and graphic, but it showed Kobek's writing abilities. I was drawn in by this part of the narrative, but I feel like I shouldn't have been? I'm not too sure, to be honest, I'm so conflicted right now. It was good, but raised a lot of issues for me, too.
But to summarise this review, I will refer back to the Goodreads summary: "ATTA is a brutal, relentless, and ultimately fearless corrective to ten years of propaganda and pandering".