Take a photo of a barcode or cover
christinahj 's review for:
Sarah's Key
by Tatiana de Rosnay
I nearly DNF'd this book about 4 times but did decide to finish it out of curiosity. I will say I think I've exhausted myself on WWII historical fiction, so my reservation to this is likely influenced by the fact that I've read too much (still love several of them, just not this one).
From my perspective the most important contribution of this book is that it brings to light a part of the Holocaust that many (including myself) were not familiar with. It is awful to read, because it was an awful part of history. I dreaded reading every minute of it, but I understood its inclusion. I did think some of the references were written in a callous manner that did not feel respectful for the victims.
The only optimistic part of this book was that there was a lovely family that did support Sarah. Their introduction was the biggest spark of life. Otherwise, everything else was incredibly painful and hopeless. I do acknowledge that when talking about the Holocaust, an author does not need to include hope. It was a terrible part of our history and there were many reasons to feel hopeless. But it does make it hard to make it through 300 pages of reading with all that dread.
I did not particularly like Julia. And I didn't think she was well written. What I disliked most was that this story was supposed to be about Sarah and a large portion of it was about Julia's relationship with her husband. On one hand, I was initially intrigued to see if she would stand up to him (because he is also pretty terrible), but she doesn't really. I also struggled with the ethics of forcing the information about Sarah's life on her loved ones still living in the 2000s. I don't know if a journalist has a right to do that. It went from Julia's curiosity and passion for learning about Sarah, to feeling like she couldn't feel complete without the family knowing all of the horrible details. And everything she shared with them was awful so it's not like she was bringing in a spark of light. That said, it is possible that she was bringing in a piece of closure for them. I don't know the answer to this, but the way it was written rang wrong to me.
Like the French in the story who didn't want to talk about this dreaded part of their past, I realize it is important not to look away. I just didn't particularly appreciate the way this particular story was laid out. I do credit the author for her research, just not some of her literary choices.
From my perspective the most important contribution of this book is that it brings to light a part of the Holocaust that many (including myself) were not familiar with. It is awful to read, because it was an awful part of history. I dreaded reading every minute of it, but I understood its inclusion. I did think some of the references were written in a callous manner that did not feel respectful for the victims.
The only optimistic part of this book was that there was a lovely family that did support Sarah. Their introduction was the biggest spark of life. Otherwise, everything else was incredibly painful and hopeless. I do acknowledge that when talking about the Holocaust, an author does not need to include hope. It was a terrible part of our history and there were many reasons to feel hopeless. But it does make it hard to make it through 300 pages of reading with all that dread.
I did not particularly like Julia. And I didn't think she was well written. What I disliked most was that this story was supposed to be about Sarah and a large portion of it was about Julia's relationship with her husband. On one hand, I was initially intrigued to see if she would stand up to him (because he is also pretty terrible), but she doesn't really. I also struggled with the ethics of forcing the information about Sarah's life on her loved ones still living in the 2000s. I don't know if a journalist has a right to do that. It went from Julia's curiosity and passion for learning about Sarah, to feeling like she couldn't feel complete without the family knowing all of the horrible details. And everything she shared with them was awful so it's not like she was bringing in a spark of light. That said, it is possible that she was bringing in a piece of closure for them. I don't know the answer to this, but the way it was written rang wrong to me.
Like the French in the story who didn't want to talk about this dreaded part of their past, I realize it is important not to look away. I just didn't particularly appreciate the way this particular story was laid out. I do credit the author for her research, just not some of her literary choices.