Scan barcode
A review by doyoudogear
Deogratias, a Tale of Rwanda by Alexis Siegel, Jean-Philippe Stassen
2.0
Originally, I requested this on NetGalley to read, but the PDF expired before I could get to it. It wasn't the book itself, but the content that made me hesitate to pick this one up. Deogratias isn't something you grab for a little light reading. The Rwandan genocide "lasted 100 days and took 800,000 lives." I decided to buy the book after stumbling across a copy, and I almost wish I hadn't.
I hate to say this, but I was disappointed with the overall story. The forward was the most interesting and informative part of the book, and it's only a few pages long. I felt like it really set the tone for the story, while also conveying the severity of the situation. The forward also mentions that Stassen didn't go to Rwanda with the intention of writing a book about the genocide, but he did, and he's profiting from it. I think this story needs to be told by those who were there and experienced what happened firsthand, or at least by someone who was affected by what happened. It seems like Stassen told his version of events through a character that he himself is unable to relate to. How can you write about something like this as a white male with an outsider's perspective?
Speaking of perspective, the main character was an unreliable narrator. We see the boy he was before (someone only interested in having sex with girls), to the broken shell of a person he is after. When the Hutu started killing Tutsi, the author didn't show us how Deogratias felt, only that he chose to participate in what was happening around him. I couldn't connect with Deogratias and what he was experiencing, because it felt like everything that happened to him was out of his control. There was no depth to him or what he was feeling as the world fell apart around him.
It's clear that Deogratias has been through something traumatic, and it's impacted his mind and how he perceives himself and the world, but the author still uses him to mention female mutilation and dogs devouring bodies (always random and without warning). When we finally discover what happened to him, it's very choppy, and also disturbingly graphic. There's no explanation of his actions, and we're not given any information that would help us understand how certain parts of the story unfolded. We're just supposed to infer based on broken conversations, and images that I won't describe.
I have very little experience with this topic, so I went into this without any expectations. I do know that children were often made to do things they wouldn't normally do, and they did them to survive. I'm not sure how old the main character was supposed to be, but I think we're supposed to believe that his actions were mostly forced. However, the author doesn't even pretend to give him a choice, but makes one for him without giving us any relevant information.
None of the other characters were expanded on either, which made the story feel somewhat flat. The author has a full cast of diverse people, yet chooses to focus on other aspects of the story. The illustrations felt like caricatures of people, which felt wrong when the author was depicting graphic scenes from the genocide. The violence was often sudden and unexpected, and while it may be accurate, felt like it was included to shock an audience instead of inform them.
The Rwandan genocide is something that happened fairly recently, and I disagree with how this author chose to depict the horrific events that occurred. His story feels like an insult to the people who were there, and to those who lost loved ones to unfathomable cruelties.
Originally posted at Do You Dog-ear? on June 16, 2019.
I hate to say this, but I was disappointed with the overall story. The forward was the most interesting and informative part of the book, and it's only a few pages long. I felt like it really set the tone for the story, while also conveying the severity of the situation. The forward also mentions that Stassen didn't go to Rwanda with the intention of writing a book about the genocide, but he did, and he's profiting from it. I think this story needs to be told by those who were there and experienced what happened firsthand, or at least by someone who was affected by what happened. It seems like Stassen told his version of events through a character that he himself is unable to relate to. How can you write about something like this as a white male with an outsider's perspective?
Speaking of perspective, the main character was an unreliable narrator. We see the boy he was before (someone only interested in having sex with girls), to the broken shell of a person he is after. When the Hutu started killing Tutsi, the author didn't show us how Deogratias felt, only that he chose to participate in what was happening around him. I couldn't connect with Deogratias and what he was experiencing, because it felt like everything that happened to him was out of his control. There was no depth to him or what he was feeling as the world fell apart around him.
It's clear that Deogratias has been through something traumatic, and it's impacted his mind and how he perceives himself and the world, but the author still uses him to mention female mutilation and dogs devouring bodies (always random and without warning). When we finally discover what happened to him, it's very choppy, and also disturbingly graphic. There's no explanation of his actions, and we're not given any information that would help us understand how certain parts of the story unfolded. We're just supposed to infer based on broken conversations, and images that I won't describe.
I have very little experience with this topic, so I went into this without any expectations. I do know that children were often made to do things they wouldn't normally do, and they did them to survive. I'm not sure how old the main character was supposed to be, but I think we're supposed to believe that his actions were mostly forced. However, the author doesn't even pretend to give him a choice, but makes one for him without giving us any relevant information.
None of the other characters were expanded on either, which made the story feel somewhat flat. The author has a full cast of diverse people, yet chooses to focus on other aspects of the story. The illustrations felt like caricatures of people, which felt wrong when the author was depicting graphic scenes from the genocide. The violence was often sudden and unexpected, and while it may be accurate, felt like it was included to shock an audience instead of inform them.
The Rwandan genocide is something that happened fairly recently, and I disagree with how this author chose to depict the horrific events that occurred. His story feels like an insult to the people who were there, and to those who lost loved ones to unfathomable cruelties.
Originally posted at Do You Dog-ear? on June 16, 2019.