Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by barry_x
The Submission by Amy Waldman
1.0
Pretty much hated this. SPOLIERS IN THE REVIEW
Even the premise of the book is hokum. There's a contest to design a memorial to the 9/11 attacks and submissions are anonymous from the jury. A Muslim wins....
Essentially if you're the kind of person that thinks it's compatible to have a religious or cultural identity with a national identity this book is going to annoy you. The premise that it's controversial for a Muslim to bulid a memorial is nonsense. If you blame 'Islam' for 9/11 then it's not to far of a stretch to blame humans for it also so perhaps memorials should only be built by Martians....
So then we have 300 pages of hand wringing and soul searching essentially over the 'problem of Islam', except it's dressed up in such wishy-washy language it grates. Waldman's insistence of presenting 'many sides of the argument' when there isn't really an argument in the book actually leads me to think this book is an insult to both Americans and Muslims - perhaps doubly so for Muslim Americans.
The key for me is that nothing actually happens of any interest in this book. The characters are amazingly one dimensional, neither evoking sympathy nor interest. After a couple of pages I got thoroughly sick of the 'Islamophobia' presented by the 'anti-memorial' camp. I got the message after a couple of pages. It seems Waldman had an interesting idea but not enough material for a book.
The 'anti-Islam' brigade - consisting of the 'victims families', ultra right wing special interest groups and shock jock media commentators have zero depth. There's a bunch of rascist polemics that go on for ever but again no real real exploration of a) why America was targeted and b) the nature of fundamentalist Islam and c) the experience of ordinary Muslims (personally I hate the term 'moderate' - you never hear of moderate Jews or Christians - I think 'moderate' equates to 'agreeing with the foreign policy of the West. Likewise, there is nothing 'radical' about the brand of Islam that seeks to drag civilization back to the medieval age).
There is plenty to criticise organised religion and how it subjugates people yet this book comfortably slips into two camps of 'you are all terrorists / let's share Ramadan'. Even portraying the winner as a non devout, drinking sexually active Muslim is a cop out. Why couldn't Mo be a devout Muslim? In the book's exploration of religion it falls at the first hurdles - the idea is 'why can't a Muslim be an American' but Waldman makes sure he's a 'palatable' Muslim
I get that there may be a lot of rascist anti-Islam feeling in America and also that the far right idiots have a voice (and also that the far right control the media and pass their ideology as common opinion on their networks). However, there is a distinct lack of ordinary American voices in this book. The families representative on the jury comes from a wealthy background - her dreamboat perfect husband (who always has a romantic purchasing solution to go along with his liberal opinions) died in the towers. She's pathetic, initially being strong in her support to 'needing answers'.
The outsider from the families representative is portrayed as an undecisive, unemployable, right wing rascist violent spouse beater. He's portrayed as a weak man, barely tolerated by his family. The rest of the families representatives fare the same - they HATE MUSLIMS. It's almost as though only the wealthy liberals have the intelligence to see past blatant rascism.
The heart strings are pulled by the Bangladeshi illegal immigrant who lost her husband in the attack. Predictably she's empowered by the debate and cuts a strong, yet sympathetic figure. The stereotypes and caracitures are exploited to the full. However, there isn't resolution to her character because in this book ordinary people don't matter - only the wealthy power brokers have any real input or voice.
Poor characters who you can't identify with. Issues explored via polemic and a completely unsatisfactory ending ('we know you're right, but America acknowledges it's hang ups, does nothing about them, but maybe learns). Waldman manages to write a book about a memorial about a terror attack that leads the reader not to care a jot or have any retrospective on those who lost their lives.
Even the premise of the book is hokum. There's a contest to design a memorial to the 9/11 attacks and submissions are anonymous from the jury. A Muslim wins....
Essentially if you're the kind of person that thinks it's compatible to have a religious or cultural identity with a national identity this book is going to annoy you. The premise that it's controversial for a Muslim to bulid a memorial is nonsense. If you blame 'Islam' for 9/11 then it's not to far of a stretch to blame humans for it also so perhaps memorials should only be built by Martians....
So then we have 300 pages of hand wringing and soul searching essentially over the 'problem of Islam', except it's dressed up in such wishy-washy language it grates. Waldman's insistence of presenting 'many sides of the argument' when there isn't really an argument in the book actually leads me to think this book is an insult to both Americans and Muslims - perhaps doubly so for Muslim Americans.
The key for me is that nothing actually happens of any interest in this book. The characters are amazingly one dimensional, neither evoking sympathy nor interest. After a couple of pages I got thoroughly sick of the 'Islamophobia' presented by the 'anti-memorial' camp. I got the message after a couple of pages. It seems Waldman had an interesting idea but not enough material for a book.
The 'anti-Islam' brigade - consisting of the 'victims families', ultra right wing special interest groups and shock jock media commentators have zero depth. There's a bunch of rascist polemics that go on for ever but again no real real exploration of a) why America was targeted and b) the nature of fundamentalist Islam and c) the experience of ordinary Muslims (personally I hate the term 'moderate' - you never hear of moderate Jews or Christians - I think 'moderate' equates to 'agreeing with the foreign policy of the West. Likewise, there is nothing 'radical' about the brand of Islam that seeks to drag civilization back to the medieval age).
There is plenty to criticise organised religion and how it subjugates people yet this book comfortably slips into two camps of 'you are all terrorists / let's share Ramadan'. Even portraying the winner as a non devout, drinking sexually active Muslim is a cop out. Why couldn't Mo be a devout Muslim? In the book's exploration of religion it falls at the first hurdles - the idea is 'why can't a Muslim be an American' but Waldman makes sure he's a 'palatable' Muslim
I get that there may be a lot of rascist anti-Islam feeling in America and also that the far right idiots have a voice (and also that the far right control the media and pass their ideology as common opinion on their networks). However, there is a distinct lack of ordinary American voices in this book. The families representative on the jury comes from a wealthy background - her dreamboat perfect husband (who always has a romantic purchasing solution to go along with his liberal opinions) died in the towers. She's pathetic, initially being strong in her support to 'needing answers'.
The outsider from the families representative is portrayed as an undecisive, unemployable, right wing rascist violent spouse beater. He's portrayed as a weak man, barely tolerated by his family. The rest of the families representatives fare the same - they HATE MUSLIMS. It's almost as though only the wealthy liberals have the intelligence to see past blatant rascism.
The heart strings are pulled by the Bangladeshi illegal immigrant who lost her husband in the attack. Predictably she's empowered by the debate and cuts a strong, yet sympathetic figure. The stereotypes and caracitures are exploited to the full. However, there isn't resolution to her character because in this book ordinary people don't matter - only the wealthy power brokers have any real input or voice.
Poor characters who you can't identify with. Issues explored via polemic and a completely unsatisfactory ending ('we know you're right, but America acknowledges it's hang ups, does nothing about them, but maybe learns). Waldman manages to write a book about a memorial about a terror attack that leads the reader not to care a jot or have any retrospective on those who lost their lives.