What do you think?
Rate this book
Jerusalem Spring
Everything was going according to plan. Scott had a steady job as the prison warden in a sleepy little town in the South. He and his wife were planning to have a baby soon. He was modernizing the prison, gaining notice from his superiors, and rising through the ranks thanks to the reliability of his informant, Joe.
But one day Scott wakes up to find his world crumbling around him. Forced to reevaluate his life, Scott decides to stand up for what he believes in and embarks on a path toward redemption. He knows things are about to change. What he doesn't realize is that nothing will ever be the same again.
But one day Scott wakes up to find his world crumbling around him. Forced to reevaluate his life, Scott decides to stand up for what he believes in and embarks on a path toward redemption. He knows things are about to change. What he doesn't realize is that nothing will ever be the same again.
221 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 2010
269 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
April 9, 2011
I know that Fares Aoun is full of hope. Like the pulp floating in freshly squeezed orange juice, the slightest jostle against his words reveals the hope palpable in his story.
I want to hope like he does, but the very structure of his novel, Jerusalem Spring, makes that hope difficult, if not impossible. I should probably mention that, quite by mistake, I read Angela Y. Davis’ Are Prisons Obsolete in conjunction with Jerusalem Spring, so what little hope I could have had was erased by the book that became Jerusalem Spring’s unfortunate companion. But Aoun himself must take some of the credit for my hopelessness as I closed his book because the structure of Jerusalem Spring -- wherein the same tale plays out in two lands separated by fifty years and thousands of miles -- suggests hopelessness.
It tells us that nothing changes, not really, and that if any change does occur the same thing is happening somewhere else, somefuture else. Our nasty, racist, human behaviour plays itself out over and over and over again.
I don’t think Aoun wants us to leave with that feeling, though. I think he wants us to look at the horrific imprisonment of black men in 60s USA, look at Obama in the White House, and say, “See, change is not just possible it’s inevitable!” I think he wants us to believe that if we behave like Gandhi or Jesus Christ or Martin Luther King Jr. -- even if we are of a people under attack by the powers that be -- change will happen, and the hearts and minds of our enemies will change forever and for the better.
It is lovely to believe in and hope for. It is something I wish I could believe in and hope for. And Fares Aoun’s expression of his beliefs and hopes is rather beautiful. But I don’t think change can come about the way he believes it can, and I know that the changes we’ve seen are too slow, and they’re never enough.
Aoun believes that there are innocent people in the world. I do not. Aoun believes that education will out. I do not. But I’ll say it again: I wish I did. And for that part of me that is full of Aoun’s wishes, for that part of me that wants to believe and hope, this book was a balm.
I wish I could believe it. I know many who can and will, and for those of you who still feel that hope, please take the time to read Jerusalem Spring. It deserves an audience.
I want to hope like he does, but the very structure of his novel, Jerusalem Spring, makes that hope difficult, if not impossible. I should probably mention that, quite by mistake, I read Angela Y. Davis’ Are Prisons Obsolete in conjunction with Jerusalem Spring, so what little hope I could have had was erased by the book that became Jerusalem Spring’s unfortunate companion. But Aoun himself must take some of the credit for my hopelessness as I closed his book because the structure of Jerusalem Spring -- wherein the same tale plays out in two lands separated by fifty years and thousands of miles -- suggests hopelessness.
It tells us that nothing changes, not really, and that if any change does occur the same thing is happening somewhere else, somefuture else. Our nasty, racist, human behaviour plays itself out over and over and over again.
I don’t think Aoun wants us to leave with that feeling, though. I think he wants us to look at the horrific imprisonment of black men in 60s USA, look at Obama in the White House, and say, “See, change is not just possible it’s inevitable!” I think he wants us to believe that if we behave like Gandhi or Jesus Christ or Martin Luther King Jr. -- even if we are of a people under attack by the powers that be -- change will happen, and the hearts and minds of our enemies will change forever and for the better.
It is lovely to believe in and hope for. It is something I wish I could believe in and hope for. And Fares Aoun’s expression of his beliefs and hopes is rather beautiful. But I don’t think change can come about the way he believes it can, and I know that the changes we’ve seen are too slow, and they’re never enough.
Aoun believes that there are innocent people in the world. I do not. Aoun believes that education will out. I do not. But I’ll say it again: I wish I did. And for that part of me that is full of Aoun’s wishes, for that part of me that wants to believe and hope, this book was a balm.
I wish I could believe it. I know many who can and will, and for those of you who still feel that hope, please take the time to read Jerusalem Spring. It deserves an audience.
February 14, 2011
I would say that this novel is amazing, but that would be a gross understatment.
After reading the description on the back of the book, I was quite puzzled, what with the book's title, and description, in my oppinion, not adding up. I proceeded to read the first part of the story, and after finishing the part, I still felt a sense of confusion, yet this feeling was offset by the pleasant emotions associated with the book's tale. I was deeply intrigued by the relationship's between the main characters, and looked forward to seeing how it would all play out. However, the book wasn't what I expected, and the 1960's segregation topic hadn't really captured my attention.
By the end of the book, I was amazed. Such a beautiful contrast and parallel was drawn, one that noone could have expected, but one that everyone would appreciate. My confusion was increased after the first few pages of the second part were read, but all too soon did the connection appear to me. Seeing the same exact character's lives being played out in the second part, but in a complete new light, was fascinating.
I don't want to write anymore, for I am afraid that I might give something worth reading individually away. I commend the author for writing such a masterpeice, and I encourage him to bless us with another novel.
Thank you,
Adem Cemerlic
After reading the description on the back of the book, I was quite puzzled, what with the book's title, and description, in my oppinion, not adding up. I proceeded to read the first part of the story, and after finishing the part, I still felt a sense of confusion, yet this feeling was offset by the pleasant emotions associated with the book's tale. I was deeply intrigued by the relationship's between the main characters, and looked forward to seeing how it would all play out. However, the book wasn't what I expected, and the 1960's segregation topic hadn't really captured my attention.
By the end of the book, I was amazed. Such a beautiful contrast and parallel was drawn, one that noone could have expected, but one that everyone would appreciate. My confusion was increased after the first few pages of the second part were read, but all too soon did the connection appear to me. Seeing the same exact character's lives being played out in the second part, but in a complete new light, was fascinating.
I don't want to write anymore, for I am afraid that I might give something worth reading individually away. I commend the author for writing such a masterpeice, and I encourage him to bless us with another novel.
Thank you,
Adem Cemerlic
February 12, 2011
I'm going to fail the author. When an author writes a book, especially one this good, they deserve a well written review for everyone to see. And I'm a reader, not a writer. I'm going to try but please know I'm not doing it justice.
I'll get to the few "problems" (not sure if they are in fact problems or if I didn't understand) after awhile.
The first thing I want to point out is that this is not for people looking for that "easy" read. You won't like it. This will make you think. It made me think and I've been thinking about the subjects brought up in this book for many years now. I think the best part of the book is that it'll get people that haven't been thinking starting to do so.
This is somewhat small but it needs to be said - this is self-published and you can barely tell. I have more than a handful of friends who stay away from self-pub's because of the problems. Those are nonexistant here. Aoun's wife, Sonja, did the editing and she did a damn good job. This is edited far better any any self-pub book I've ever read. (It's edited better than a lot of others as well.)
About the story. The main friendship that the story centers around is striking. I've thought for awhile on what word I could use to describe it and striking was the first word I came up with. After thinking more about it I till agree with myself. :) I don't know that I've ever read a book with a friendship like this.
There is a large amount of dialogue here, more so than in the average book IMO, and a good many parts are one-sided. An example is maybe Scott, one of the main characters, on the phone with someone. We only get Scott's side of the conversation. Aoun makes it so the reader can tell exactly what's being said. It's different than anything I've come across but it works here.
I would have liked the ending to have been drawn out a little more and I'd definitely have liked Scott's wife to have a larger role. No spoilers so I have to be vague but there is one part nearing the end when Scott's wife is riding a bus and gets off for one reason or another right before something major happens. Some questions are raised and the story seems to be going one way and then goes in the opposite direction. I don't mind that, it worked for sure, but I would have liked to have seen that part more detailed also. Like why were those questions raised in the first place? Was there anything that came after or was the end of all of the questions directed at her finished right then?
One part with Scott's wife that bothered me was (and it's hard to convey this without any spoilers so hang with me here) about a certain condition she was in. One minute she's in that condition and the next she's not. Why she's no longer in that condition is mentioned but it's not explained really. If that would really have happened the previous incident would have had to have been a little different.
Lastly, when the book begins we're in 1960's America. Part II of the book is in Jerusalem today. What I don't understand is that there is no lag time. What was ending in the first part was still ending in the second part. There was an interview winding down at the end of Part I that was still winding down in the beginning of Part II. I don't need to say that a 40+ year long interview is fairly looooong. But I'll be real quick to say that maybe I didn't fully understand what Aoun was trying to do. I'm going to reread this and quite honestly I may reread it again after that. It's one of those books where something new will pop up each reading, if only a thought you hadn't had the previous time(s) around.
The locations also gave me pause but this goes back to the timeline. Part I finds Joe, Scott, and 12 in jail and Part II has them in a camp. 'Camp' and 'jail' seem to be intertwined here but there is a question about the freedom each one has in Part II if they're still actually in this camp/jail.
Maybe some of these questions will be answered after I reread the book. I don't want anyone to think that because I have these questions they will. Maybe they won't. Maybe I failed to understand something(s). I gave this story my full attention and didn't pick up anything else while reading it but that doesn't mean that I would automatically understand everything handed to me.
Jerusalem Spring is well worth reading. In fact it's well worth reading more than once. I only wish I could articulate my thoughts and feelings better.
I recommended this to a number of friends and I will keep doing so. I'm very, very interested in what my friend Felicia thinks and I hope she reads this soon.
This is the type of book that will start a great many conversations.
Having just read a review on here one major question of mine was explained. The parallel setting. I do think that this was confusing and maybe could have been cleaned up a bit.
But I will say that Aoun's writing is beautiful. If he keeps writing I'll keep reading and I think he'll only get better and better. He travels that fine line between too detailed and not enough - he manages to get it just right.
I'll get to the few "problems" (not sure if they are in fact problems or if I didn't understand) after awhile.
The first thing I want to point out is that this is not for people looking for that "easy" read. You won't like it. This will make you think. It made me think and I've been thinking about the subjects brought up in this book for many years now. I think the best part of the book is that it'll get people that haven't been thinking starting to do so.
This is somewhat small but it needs to be said - this is self-published and you can barely tell. I have more than a handful of friends who stay away from self-pub's because of the problems. Those are nonexistant here. Aoun's wife, Sonja, did the editing and she did a damn good job. This is edited far better any any self-pub book I've ever read. (It's edited better than a lot of others as well.)
About the story. The main friendship that the story centers around is striking. I've thought for awhile on what word I could use to describe it and striking was the first word I came up with. After thinking more about it I till agree with myself. :) I don't know that I've ever read a book with a friendship like this.
There is a large amount of dialogue here, more so than in the average book IMO, and a good many parts are one-sided. An example is maybe Scott, one of the main characters, on the phone with someone. We only get Scott's side of the conversation. Aoun makes it so the reader can tell exactly what's being said. It's different than anything I've come across but it works here.
I would have liked the ending to have been drawn out a little more and I'd definitely have liked Scott's wife to have a larger role. No spoilers so I have to be vague but there is one part nearing the end when Scott's wife is riding a bus and gets off for one reason or another right before something major happens. Some questions are raised and the story seems to be going one way and then goes in the opposite direction. I don't mind that, it worked for sure, but I would have liked to have seen that part more detailed also. Like why were those questions raised in the first place? Was there anything that came after or was the end of all of the questions directed at her finished right then?
One part with Scott's wife that bothered me was (and it's hard to convey this without any spoilers so hang with me here) about a certain condition she was in. One minute she's in that condition and the next she's not. Why she's no longer in that condition is mentioned but it's not explained really. If that would really have happened the previous incident would have had to have been a little different.
Lastly, when the book begins we're in 1960's America. Part II of the book is in Jerusalem today. What I don't understand is that there is no lag time. What was ending in the first part was still ending in the second part. There was an interview winding down at the end of Part I that was still winding down in the beginning of Part II. I don't need to say that a 40+ year long interview is fairly looooong. But I'll be real quick to say that maybe I didn't fully understand what Aoun was trying to do. I'm going to reread this and quite honestly I may reread it again after that. It's one of those books where something new will pop up each reading, if only a thought you hadn't had the previous time(s) around.
The locations also gave me pause but this goes back to the timeline. Part I finds Joe, Scott, and 12 in jail and Part II has them in a camp. 'Camp' and 'jail' seem to be intertwined here but there is a question about the freedom each one has in Part II if they're still actually in this camp/jail.
Maybe some of these questions will be answered after I reread the book. I don't want anyone to think that because I have these questions they will. Maybe they won't. Maybe I failed to understand something(s). I gave this story my full attention and didn't pick up anything else while reading it but that doesn't mean that I would automatically understand everything handed to me.
Jerusalem Spring is well worth reading. In fact it's well worth reading more than once. I only wish I could articulate my thoughts and feelings better.
I recommended this to a number of friends and I will keep doing so. I'm very, very interested in what my friend Felicia thinks and I hope she reads this soon.
This is the type of book that will start a great many conversations.
Having just read a review on here one major question of mine was explained. The parallel setting. I do think that this was confusing and maybe could have been cleaned up a bit.
But I will say that Aoun's writing is beautiful. If he keeps writing I'll keep reading and I think he'll only get better and better. He travels that fine line between too detailed and not enough - he manages to get it just right.
February 11, 2011
Aoun is attempting to draw a parallel between the Deep South of the 1960s and the current situation in the Middle East with the Palestinians; the intent is lovely but fails by using the exact same characters with the almost-exact same situations, I am so confused in the second half of the story as to what and where I am that the message misses me by a mile. Although, it probably would make this an excellent choice for a bookclub as everyone could argue their hearts out!
As for the individual stories, in US 1960s, I am enraged and furious within the first two chapters. I will NEVER understand how people can treat others like this. There is no humanity in this. At the very least, where are their brains?
Scott and Sarah are both white and Scott is the warden in a prison in the South and they both are against segregation. Scott appears to be more consciously active than Sarah who is more of a lip-service kind of person. She wants to make a difference but as soon as something is asked of her, she wants out. (There is a nice bit, which illustrates Sarah’s fears on page 23 with the anecdote of the pregnant woman on the bus.) Joe is a long, long-time inmate who is the prisoners’ interface with the warden with whom he is “friends”. As “friend” as you can get when you’re black and a prisoner with a white warden. Both Joe and Scott are between a rock and a hard place. Scott likes Joe for his conversation and the fact that they can both share books and Scott’s frustrations over the current prison system although he must always remember the roles they each play. Joe truly does like Scott as a person and respects him for what he is trying to do for the prisoners but also knows “his place” particularly when reminded of it in the aftermath of the kitchen riot. Then there’s prisoner 2012 (12). It’s frustrating to read all the innuendo about 12 and not know what happens to him or his potential family. What has he been doing on the outside that Joe respects so much? Does he manage his escape?
The writing itself is abrupt and choppy. Which could simply be part of setting the atmosphere. I was getting rather frustrated with the timeline jumping around so much but then realized how useful it is as not knowing what leads to 12 and 13's incarceration is part of the tension. Then when you read Chapter 9...goddammit, what is wrong with people!
Wow. Just started the Jerusalem section. It’s difficult to cope with the sudden change. I don’t know when or where I am. It’s hard to concentrate on the story parallels when I’m struggling so hard to understand what’s happening. Is that part of the message? Struggling to understand?
I’m unhappy with the second half because I’m so busy trying to reconcile the characters and their relationships appear to be exactly what they are in the first half and yet they are two completely different groups.
I do like the message that Yusef is trying to convey to Mustafa about not attacking civilians. He’s right. And he’s right about the right-wing terrorists giving Islam a bad name—is the parallel supposed to be with the Ku Klux Klan and others of their ilk? We still have no idea what role Mustafa has played on the outside only that Yusef [still] respects what he is trying to do. Yusef/Aoun makes an excellent point about the politicians’ being more interested in manipulating the situation(s) for their own glory/power than in helping their own people…a rather similar parallel to the upper-echelon inmates being more concerned with the individual than the group. I’m not sure about the parallel between the Bible group in the prison and the extremist faction both of whom take over 13 when he is released from hospital except that they are both about religion. The Bible group was preaching forgiveness while the Jerusalem group so very obviously was not.
The obvious parallel between the two is the prison set-up of walls and passes and guards. In some respects the Deep South may be more lenient for Joe’s college attendance than was the Ministry and the University of Tel Aviv. Terrorism by whites of blacks and the terrorism of the right-wing Muslims of Israelis is, I suppose, another parallel but not, perhaps, the one Aoun was considering.
I like the characters in the first half best; they’re well-written although the dialog feels off at times. There are a number of sections of dialog, which don’t use contractions and it feels very formal when it shouldn’t be that way. The characters in the second half I…I don’t even know them.
I think the title, Jerusalem Spring refers to Mustafa’s baby’s due date? I do love the cover but then I’m prejudiced as I adore well-done graffiti and it seems to be an abstract for both US and Jerusalem—another parallel if you will.
An easy read that leaves you with a LOT of questions...
As for the individual stories, in US 1960s, I am enraged and furious within the first two chapters. I will NEVER understand how people can treat others like this. There is no humanity in this. At the very least, where are their brains?
Scott and Sarah are both white and Scott is the warden in a prison in the South and they both are against segregation. Scott appears to be more consciously active than Sarah who is more of a lip-service kind of person. She wants to make a difference but as soon as something is asked of her, she wants out. (There is a nice bit, which illustrates Sarah’s fears on page 23 with the anecdote of the pregnant woman on the bus.) Joe is a long, long-time inmate who is the prisoners’ interface with the warden with whom he is “friends”. As “friend” as you can get when you’re black and a prisoner with a white warden. Both Joe and Scott are between a rock and a hard place. Scott likes Joe for his conversation and the fact that they can both share books and Scott’s frustrations over the current prison system although he must always remember the roles they each play. Joe truly does like Scott as a person and respects him for what he is trying to do for the prisoners but also knows “his place” particularly when reminded of it in the aftermath of the kitchen riot. Then there’s prisoner 2012 (12). It’s frustrating to read all the innuendo about 12 and not know what happens to him or his potential family. What has he been doing on the outside that Joe respects so much? Does he manage his escape?
The writing itself is abrupt and choppy. Which could simply be part of setting the atmosphere. I was getting rather frustrated with the timeline jumping around so much but then realized how useful it is as not knowing what leads to 12 and 13's incarceration is part of the tension. Then when you read Chapter 9...goddammit, what is wrong with people!
Wow. Just started the Jerusalem section. It’s difficult to cope with the sudden change. I don’t know when or where I am. It’s hard to concentrate on the story parallels when I’m struggling so hard to understand what’s happening. Is that part of the message? Struggling to understand?
I’m unhappy with the second half because I’m so busy trying to reconcile the characters and their relationships appear to be exactly what they are in the first half and yet they are two completely different groups.
I do like the message that Yusef is trying to convey to Mustafa about not attacking civilians. He’s right. And he’s right about the right-wing terrorists giving Islam a bad name—is the parallel supposed to be with the Ku Klux Klan and others of their ilk? We still have no idea what role Mustafa has played on the outside only that Yusef [still] respects what he is trying to do. Yusef/Aoun makes an excellent point about the politicians’ being more interested in manipulating the situation(s) for their own glory/power than in helping their own people…a rather similar parallel to the upper-echelon inmates being more concerned with the individual than the group. I’m not sure about the parallel between the Bible group in the prison and the extremist faction both of whom take over 13 when he is released from hospital except that they are both about religion. The Bible group was preaching forgiveness while the Jerusalem group so very obviously was not.
The obvious parallel between the two is the prison set-up of walls and passes and guards. In some respects the Deep South may be more lenient for Joe’s college attendance than was the Ministry and the University of Tel Aviv. Terrorism by whites of blacks and the terrorism of the right-wing Muslims of Israelis is, I suppose, another parallel but not, perhaps, the one Aoun was considering.
I like the characters in the first half best; they’re well-written although the dialog feels off at times. There are a number of sections of dialog, which don’t use contractions and it feels very formal when it shouldn’t be that way. The characters in the second half I…I don’t even know them.
I think the title, Jerusalem Spring refers to Mustafa’s baby’s due date? I do love the cover but then I’m prejudiced as I adore well-done graffiti and it seems to be an abstract for both US and Jerusalem—another parallel if you will.
An easy read that leaves you with a LOT of questions...
February 11, 2011
...Powerful!
...Brilliant!
...A Must-Read!
I love when writers decide to use fiction to tell an opinion or express concern about some situation. Fares Aoun has created a powerful, brilliantly conceived method and story to do just that. I applaud this work and consider it a must-read, especially given I read the book from front to back in one sitting. The impact for me was dramatic; I hope the impact for some will be enlightening...
It is the 1960s and somewhere in the south, readers find themselves inside a segregated prison. A new group is coming in and we see how the all-white guards treat the new prisoners. There are two who are highlighted; one is very young and has been hurt somewhere and is in bad shape. Another who was on the bus is helping him. The identity of these individuals is "13," and "12," the latter.
Immediately trouble begins because 12 was trying to get somebody to help 13. There would be no doctor tonight, but the warden, at least, ordered that 13 be given food that night. He never received any from the guards. After the mandatory shower, etc., the guards literally pushed them forward into a room at which other prisoners stood at the bars and quickly closed the door. They were in a large, long hallway; the prison was extremely overcrowded and though the warden kept insisting that no further men be sent there, nothing changed.
Needing to know his present situation, 12 immediately started to look and walk around and when no food came, he tried to find somebody to help 13.
Finally, he came upon one man in a cell--all the doors were kept open so the crowded group could at least move around, but the toilets were broken and the smell horrendous.
Joe was alone in his cell with stacks and stacks of books. Everybody knew that he was this warden's inside man, but at least he got one slice of bread for 13.
The warden and his wife were both individuals who did not discriminate nor feel differently about those of other races. His wife wanted to leave the south and go somewhere else and start a family because of the tense racial situation. Unknown to his wife, the warden had already started the transfer process months ago; but he didn't want to raise her hopes. The warden was a good man most of the time; he hated what he sometimes had to become in order to do his job. But when a fire, and then a kitchen riot erupted, he became who he felt he had to be to do his job. And then hated his actions because they were similar to his father's...
Even Joe was surprised at how the warden was treating those who had been caught in the riot, even if they personally hadn't been the instigators. For Joe and the warden had become at least cordial and the warden got Joe his books and was even discussing his taking college courses...
Readers may stumble just as Part II begins in present time but will quickly continue on.
Because, actually, the same story continues! Yes, there are a few slight changes--Joe is now called Yusef. The prison becomes a "camp" of people. Scott is still waiting to transfer...
From the author (p. 223, Acknowledgments) "My mom raised us to treat others the way we would want to be treated. My Dad taught us to tell the truth and stand up for the weak." From the Dedication--...this book [is dedicated] to my children and to every child throughout the world with the hope that we adults will give them a better place to live.
I pray with that hope too... If you also have hope...read this book and share it. I'm also hoping the author's next book runs along similar lines! Can there ever be a happy ending? I have a feeling this author has much to say to the world...and I want to read it!
Book Received Via
Blogger LinkUp
GABixlerReviews
...Brilliant!
...A Must-Read!
I love when writers decide to use fiction to tell an opinion or express concern about some situation. Fares Aoun has created a powerful, brilliantly conceived method and story to do just that. I applaud this work and consider it a must-read, especially given I read the book from front to back in one sitting. The impact for me was dramatic; I hope the impact for some will be enlightening...
It is the 1960s and somewhere in the south, readers find themselves inside a segregated prison. A new group is coming in and we see how the all-white guards treat the new prisoners. There are two who are highlighted; one is very young and has been hurt somewhere and is in bad shape. Another who was on the bus is helping him. The identity of these individuals is "13," and "12," the latter.
Immediately trouble begins because 12 was trying to get somebody to help 13. There would be no doctor tonight, but the warden, at least, ordered that 13 be given food that night. He never received any from the guards. After the mandatory shower, etc., the guards literally pushed them forward into a room at which other prisoners stood at the bars and quickly closed the door. They were in a large, long hallway; the prison was extremely overcrowded and though the warden kept insisting that no further men be sent there, nothing changed.
Needing to know his present situation, 12 immediately started to look and walk around and when no food came, he tried to find somebody to help 13.
Finally, he came upon one man in a cell--all the doors were kept open so the crowded group could at least move around, but the toilets were broken and the smell horrendous.
Joe was alone in his cell with stacks and stacks of books. Everybody knew that he was this warden's inside man, but at least he got one slice of bread for 13.
The warden and his wife were both individuals who did not discriminate nor feel differently about those of other races. His wife wanted to leave the south and go somewhere else and start a family because of the tense racial situation. Unknown to his wife, the warden had already started the transfer process months ago; but he didn't want to raise her hopes. The warden was a good man most of the time; he hated what he sometimes had to become in order to do his job. But when a fire, and then a kitchen riot erupted, he became who he felt he had to be to do his job. And then hated his actions because they were similar to his father's...
Even Joe was surprised at how the warden was treating those who had been caught in the riot, even if they personally hadn't been the instigators. For Joe and the warden had become at least cordial and the warden got Joe his books and was even discussing his taking college courses...
Readers may stumble just as Part II begins in present time but will quickly continue on.
Because, actually, the same story continues! Yes, there are a few slight changes--Joe is now called Yusef. The prison becomes a "camp" of people. Scott is still waiting to transfer...
From the author (p. 223, Acknowledgments) "My mom raised us to treat others the way we would want to be treated. My Dad taught us to tell the truth and stand up for the weak." From the Dedication--...this book [is dedicated] to my children and to every child throughout the world with the hope that we adults will give them a better place to live.
I pray with that hope too... If you also have hope...read this book and share it. I'm also hoping the author's next book runs along similar lines! Can there ever be a happy ending? I have a feeling this author has much to say to the world...and I want to read it!
Book Received Via
Blogger LinkUp
GABixlerReviews
May 5, 2011
I like it when an author highlights an issue and makes it very clear to the reader. The book is set in the 1960's, the reader finds him/herself viewing a segregated prison. Two prisoners, numbers 13 and 12, have just been brought in with a group of new prisoners. The prisoners are overcrowded, the new prisoners, 13 and 12, never receive the food they are promised.
The warden and his wife, two people one might think the author would decide to make "mean characters", are actually the opposite. The wife and warden treat everyone the same regardless of race. The wife wants to leave the South permanently, unbeknownst to her the husband has already started this process. The warden is a bit of a softie, but he "reigns himself in" after a fire and kitchen fight break out. I was surprised that the previously peaceful warden treated the prisoners who were not the instigators so harshly. Joe, an inmate who receives books and even discusses possible college courses with the warden, is shocked as well. The story continues with further development of the characters and the plot.
The author is attempting to draw a parallel between the racial situation in the 1960's South and the current situation in the Middle East with the Palestinians. The writing is a little uneven and I had a hard time transitioning from the first part to the second (I think it was the same characters who confused me). This book left me with a lot of questions and the intense desire to research the situation (I knew a little about already) on the Internet. I think this is a wonderful read and would recommend it to young adults/adults alike. The meaning is crystal clear and the author does a great job portraying the situation in the Middle East with the Palestinians.
The warden and his wife, two people one might think the author would decide to make "mean characters", are actually the opposite. The wife and warden treat everyone the same regardless of race. The wife wants to leave the South permanently, unbeknownst to her the husband has already started this process. The warden is a bit of a softie, but he "reigns himself in" after a fire and kitchen fight break out. I was surprised that the previously peaceful warden treated the prisoners who were not the instigators so harshly. Joe, an inmate who receives books and even discusses possible college courses with the warden, is shocked as well. The story continues with further development of the characters and the plot.
The author is attempting to draw a parallel between the racial situation in the 1960's South and the current situation in the Middle East with the Palestinians. The writing is a little uneven and I had a hard time transitioning from the first part to the second (I think it was the same characters who confused me). This book left me with a lot of questions and the intense desire to research the situation (I knew a little about already) on the Internet. I think this is a wonderful read and would recommend it to young adults/adults alike. The meaning is crystal clear and the author does a great job portraying the situation in the Middle East with the Palestinians.
July 27, 2011
Jerusalem Spring is a story about a segregated prison in the 60s. Two new prisoners arrive, and the reader learns about the harsh reality of prison in that time. The prisoners are treated so poorly, and have to live in an extremely overcrowded and unsafe situation.
The warden and his wife are not racist, like many of the prison guards. They want to move away from the South, and the tension. The warden tries to make small changes to help the prisoners, but can't do too much.
My thoughts:
Reading about life in the prison is heart-wrenching, and made me feel so incredibly sad. I appreciated the fact that the author was brutally honest about the conditions in the prison. Nothing was sugar-coated, or hidden. All the cruelty, mistreatment of prisoners, and horrible living conditions were explained as they must have existed. This really made me think hard about what happened in the past.
I found the transition between the first and second half of the novel distracting. I understood the parallels between the racism in the 60s with the situation in the Middle East, but it was really hard to accept the sudden switch in the story. I was really interested in what was happening in the first half of the book, and wanted to see the outcome. That being said, I would have liked to know more background about the characters in the second part.
This is my only criticism of the book. It was well-written and really made me think about what happened in the past, and what is happening now. The transition was just really hard for me to overcome. I would have preferred 2 books instead.
Thank you for writing a book that made me think about the world we live in.
The warden and his wife are not racist, like many of the prison guards. They want to move away from the South, and the tension. The warden tries to make small changes to help the prisoners, but can't do too much.
My thoughts:
Reading about life in the prison is heart-wrenching, and made me feel so incredibly sad. I appreciated the fact that the author was brutally honest about the conditions in the prison. Nothing was sugar-coated, or hidden. All the cruelty, mistreatment of prisoners, and horrible living conditions were explained as they must have existed. This really made me think hard about what happened in the past.
I found the transition between the first and second half of the novel distracting. I understood the parallels between the racism in the 60s with the situation in the Middle East, but it was really hard to accept the sudden switch in the story. I was really interested in what was happening in the first half of the book, and wanted to see the outcome. That being said, I would have liked to know more background about the characters in the second part.
This is my only criticism of the book. It was well-written and really made me think about what happened in the past, and what is happening now. The transition was just really hard for me to overcome. I would have preferred 2 books instead.
Thank you for writing a book that made me think about the world we live in.
October 2, 2011
I'm not sure what to think of this novel.
I got confused by the title in comparison to the contents of the novel. At first I was wonderig if I did not mistake placing the novel in the south of the US during the racial segragation. But then there were too much clues leading me to that conclusion, so no, I was reading it with the right picture in my mind.
I liked the first part. That is, overlooking the sometimes awkward dialogues, lack of background information on the situation and what happens in the prison.
I really was wondering was would happen next, when the warden was challenged, Joe trying to get into university, 12 trying to get out for his own reasons.
But then all of a sudden the novel jumped to another time / another place. Leaving me totally confused, why a warden in the south of the US should speak Hebrew. I read the title of the part (Jerusalem) and first of all I thought that that was the name of the small town the prison was situated in.
The second part I did not like at all. To me it felt rushed, not like the first part at all. No time taken for elaboration, explaning the situation. Just drawing paralells between the south of the US and the occupied territories / the Palestinian problem. For me the compearison went wrong. I do not have enough knowlegde of both issues to judge, but to me there would be more of a similarity between South Africa and the south of the US than here.
Having said all that: I liked the way the chapters were written in the first part. That, when reading, I had an idea how much time went by since the last one.
I got confused by the title in comparison to the contents of the novel. At first I was wonderig if I did not mistake placing the novel in the south of the US during the racial segragation. But then there were too much clues leading me to that conclusion, so no, I was reading it with the right picture in my mind.
I liked the first part. That is, overlooking the sometimes awkward dialogues, lack of background information on the situation and what happens in the prison.
I really was wondering was would happen next, when the warden was challenged, Joe trying to get into university, 12 trying to get out for his own reasons.
But then all of a sudden the novel jumped to another time / another place. Leaving me totally confused, why a warden in the south of the US should speak Hebrew. I read the title of the part (Jerusalem) and first of all I thought that that was the name of the small town the prison was situated in.
The second part I did not like at all. To me it felt rushed, not like the first part at all. No time taken for elaboration, explaning the situation. Just drawing paralells between the south of the US and the occupied territories / the Palestinian problem. For me the compearison went wrong. I do not have enough knowlegde of both issues to judge, but to me there would be more of a similarity between South Africa and the south of the US than here.
Having said all that: I liked the way the chapters were written in the first part. That, when reading, I had an idea how much time went by since the last one.
March 17, 2011
"It was still dark in the cells, but bits of light were beginning to break in through the tiny windows stealthily, without a sound, the way the inmates dreamed of breaking out of prison."
In a bare-bones novel, the quote above is not only one of the few elegant descriptions, it also encapsulates the themes explored in a southern U. S. prison in the 1960's. As the Civil Rights movement grows, promising big changes, a white, reform-minded prison warden, Scott, makes small improvements in his prison--even befriending a black, life-long resident, Joe. Like a sit-in or protest march, the arrival of new inmates disrupts the flow, catalyzes changes.
Friendship is stitched together by the threads of honesty, empathy, respect, and, most importantly, equality. The old saw is that power corrupts, but power also divides; power imbalances in a relationship prevent the formation of true friendships--as between the warden Scott and the prisoner Joe. When a new person is brought in as prisoner, his power is less than Joe's, but their predicament is so close--in their over-all relationship to real power--that they are able to start forging true bonds. Relationships across power divides are usually tested.
A monopoly on violence is the traditional start when one begins to define the State, which then requires systems to maintain this monopoly, which then translate into power and authority (systems are also employed in reinforcing the narratives that justify their existence). Those not recognizing the State's exclusive right to violence--whether through violence of their own or peaceful protest--are punished.
As the initial establishment of power washes across the landscape of time, it is transformed into "the way things are." The pattern replicates throughout: men over women, wealthy over poor, white over black (in the U. S.), this religion over that one, and so on. Power imbalances are now systematized: hence racism, sexism, and the like.
Have I forgotten that I was reviewing a novel and not writing an anarchist polemic? No, for these systems are at the center of the novel, dominating human lives and relationships, as they do in the real world (however much we are ignorant of them or pretend they don't exist). So many of us desire to do good; to follow what we believe are moral rights with regards to how we treat other people. Many want to like others and have that reciprocated regardless of position, ethnicity, or what have you. Why, then, don't we already live in a peaceful, cooperative world? The systems derived to protect power imbalances prevent the world from taking shape, as Joe finds out in the novel when Scott's duty as a warden comes into conflict with resistance form some prisoners. That duty is both mandate and excuse--few are the people who will buck the system's mandates to treat other people like other people.
There's a point in the novel where everything changes and everything is the same: it is a time jump, a geographical transportation, but a familiar situation. I'm reluctant to spring the surprise, but it was a bold authorial move (though such comparisons have been made, of course). This change of time and place reinforces the seeming immutability of systems and how they work their oppression; interfering with positive relationships and building for better conditions. The change also suggests that hope isn't unfounded, if the reader were to think back to the gains of the Civil Rights movement (though one might point out, for all the positive gains, the U. S. still has the highest incarceration rate in the world, disproportionally interring people of color).
Here, then, in this new prison after the novel shifts, the novel drags a bit as a conversation is used as a way to introduce possible positive solutions. The novel veers from showing us how systems disrupt positive relationships, to telling us that education and the children are our future.* This was an unnecessary passage, as Aoun had already shown us that, while power imbalances can prevent friendship and understanding, making the effort is worthwhile--especially amongst those who are on the sharp end of the stick. In other words, the inmates can fight over scraps or cooperate and maybe look outside their cells for what to fight over.
The writing isn't always smooth. Some of the dialogue has an unnaturalness to it, and sense of place through description is underwhelming. That said, I read this as more of a play than a novel, with the characters creating the scene; with the arena of ideas at the forefront there is less need of description.
I didn't turn the last page and set the book down filled with hope for the future, but I enjoyed the journey, appreciated the light shone on how power and systems divide us, and thank Mr. Aoun for sending me his novel to review. 3.5 stars, and, recommended.
*To paraphrase Daniel Quinn: solutions that rely on people just being better aren't going to make things better, we have to change the systems we operate under. This becomes a chicken/egg type of thing: education to change minds so they make a better system--or way of living, my preferred term--or destroy the system so we can learn to make a new kind of way of living.
In a bare-bones novel, the quote above is not only one of the few elegant descriptions, it also encapsulates the themes explored in a southern U. S. prison in the 1960's. As the Civil Rights movement grows, promising big changes, a white, reform-minded prison warden, Scott, makes small improvements in his prison--even befriending a black, life-long resident, Joe. Like a sit-in or protest march, the arrival of new inmates disrupts the flow, catalyzes changes.
Friendship is stitched together by the threads of honesty, empathy, respect, and, most importantly, equality. The old saw is that power corrupts, but power also divides; power imbalances in a relationship prevent the formation of true friendships--as between the warden Scott and the prisoner Joe. When a new person is brought in as prisoner, his power is less than Joe's, but their predicament is so close--in their over-all relationship to real power--that they are able to start forging true bonds. Relationships across power divides are usually tested.
A monopoly on violence is the traditional start when one begins to define the State, which then requires systems to maintain this monopoly, which then translate into power and authority (systems are also employed in reinforcing the narratives that justify their existence). Those not recognizing the State's exclusive right to violence--whether through violence of their own or peaceful protest--are punished.
As the initial establishment of power washes across the landscape of time, it is transformed into "the way things are." The pattern replicates throughout: men over women, wealthy over poor, white over black (in the U. S.), this religion over that one, and so on. Power imbalances are now systematized: hence racism, sexism, and the like.
Have I forgotten that I was reviewing a novel and not writing an anarchist polemic? No, for these systems are at the center of the novel, dominating human lives and relationships, as they do in the real world (however much we are ignorant of them or pretend they don't exist). So many of us desire to do good; to follow what we believe are moral rights with regards to how we treat other people. Many want to like others and have that reciprocated regardless of position, ethnicity, or what have you. Why, then, don't we already live in a peaceful, cooperative world? The systems derived to protect power imbalances prevent the world from taking shape, as Joe finds out in the novel when Scott's duty as a warden comes into conflict with resistance form some prisoners. That duty is both mandate and excuse--few are the people who will buck the system's mandates to treat other people like other people.
There's a point in the novel where everything changes and everything is the same: it is a time jump, a geographical transportation, but a familiar situation. I'm reluctant to spring the surprise, but it was a bold authorial move (though such comparisons have been made, of course). This change of time and place reinforces the seeming immutability of systems and how they work their oppression; interfering with positive relationships and building for better conditions. The change also suggests that hope isn't unfounded, if the reader were to think back to the gains of the Civil Rights movement (though one might point out, for all the positive gains, the U. S. still has the highest incarceration rate in the world, disproportionally interring people of color).
Here, then, in this new prison after the novel shifts, the novel drags a bit as a conversation is used as a way to introduce possible positive solutions. The novel veers from showing us how systems disrupt positive relationships, to telling us that education and the children are our future.* This was an unnecessary passage, as Aoun had already shown us that, while power imbalances can prevent friendship and understanding, making the effort is worthwhile--especially amongst those who are on the sharp end of the stick. In other words, the inmates can fight over scraps or cooperate and maybe look outside their cells for what to fight over.
The writing isn't always smooth. Some of the dialogue has an unnaturalness to it, and sense of place through description is underwhelming. That said, I read this as more of a play than a novel, with the characters creating the scene; with the arena of ideas at the forefront there is less need of description.
I didn't turn the last page and set the book down filled with hope for the future, but I enjoyed the journey, appreciated the light shone on how power and systems divide us, and thank Mr. Aoun for sending me his novel to review. 3.5 stars, and, recommended.
*To paraphrase Daniel Quinn: solutions that rely on people just being better aren't going to make things better, we have to change the systems we operate under. This becomes a chicken/egg type of thing: education to change minds so they make a better system--or way of living, my preferred term--or destroy the system so we can learn to make a new kind of way of living.
January 30, 2022
I was so looking forward to reading Jerusalem Spring, mainly because - like the author - I spent my formative years in the Middle East and, due to my father's job at the time, the complexities of the Middle Eastern conflicts are more familiar to me than my "own" country's history.
Unfortunately I can't overlook the novel's literary shortcomings, and that is a shame, because there is potential here.
The main problem, in my opinion, is the uneven structure of the novel. Two-thirds of the narrative is set in a time past, and the last segment of the present doesn't adequately balance or complement the first section.
The first two thirds did try my patience. I was reading on and on trying to get to some "substance"; a deeper meaning of it all seemed to elude me. Moral and existential issues were touched upon, but not fully developed.
In the latter part of the novel, the narrative is by contrast rushed and almost summarily presented, with insufficient background explication or character development. For me it ends with a fizzle rather than a bang.
In the first part the slow exposition gives the reader a sense of the crushing routine of the injustices, but because the later "Jerusalem" segment is brief, by comparison, the reader doesn't necessarily connect all the dots from racial segregation in the southern US to the human rights violations that Palestinians must endure in their current stateless & citizenshipless existence. (Here's my main objection of the novel's premise: This analogy is not a good one, historically and politically speaking.)
As for the narrative's expository style, Jerusalem Spring reads like a transcript from court proceedings rather than a novel. The dialogue most of the time resembles an interrogation instead of a conversation between two characters. Admittedly, there is a power imbalance between the warden and his prisoners, so this is a plausible effect. But I'm not sure that this was the author's intention, at least not for the whole length of the novel. Even the scenes between Scott and his wife came off as formal, despite the words of endearment peppering their sentences.
Maybe there's too much dialogue and not enough exposition. At some point I even wondered if Jerusalem Spring wasn't a novel in the conventional sense; instead, that it was meant as a quasi-religious parable, or a philosophical text implementing the "Socratic method" to lead the reader to a specific (moral) conclusion. This could explain the moralistic tone that another reader found overbearing.
Personally, I didn't find the tone to be that moralistic or didactic overall. In fact, I sensed there was an attempt by the author to avoid making outright statements, especially on the Palestinian issue. The few exceptions being the neutral tone of "education is the way" and the political correctness of "we have the right to resist, but we don't have the right to attack civilians."
The author seems to suggest that with education people will naturally come to understand as well as act for peace and justice. But even "peace" and "justice" are relative concepts (the devil always being in the details!) and this novel's/parable's conclusion comes off as a gross oversimplification.
Unfortunately I can't overlook the novel's literary shortcomings, and that is a shame, because there is potential here.
The main problem, in my opinion, is the uneven structure of the novel. Two-thirds of the narrative is set in a time past, and the last segment of the present doesn't adequately balance or complement the first section.
The first two thirds did try my patience. I was reading on and on trying to get to some "substance"; a deeper meaning of it all seemed to elude me. Moral and existential issues were touched upon, but not fully developed.
In the latter part of the novel, the narrative is by contrast rushed and almost summarily presented, with insufficient background explication or character development. For me it ends with a fizzle rather than a bang.
In the first part the slow exposition gives the reader a sense of the crushing routine of the injustices, but because the later "Jerusalem" segment is brief, by comparison, the reader doesn't necessarily connect all the dots from racial segregation in the southern US to the human rights violations that Palestinians must endure in their current stateless & citizenshipless existence. (Here's my main objection of the novel's premise: This analogy is not a good one, historically and politically speaking.)
As for the narrative's expository style, Jerusalem Spring reads like a transcript from court proceedings rather than a novel. The dialogue most of the time resembles an interrogation instead of a conversation between two characters. Admittedly, there is a power imbalance between the warden and his prisoners, so this is a plausible effect. But I'm not sure that this was the author's intention, at least not for the whole length of the novel. Even the scenes between Scott and his wife came off as formal, despite the words of endearment peppering their sentences.
Maybe there's too much dialogue and not enough exposition. At some point I even wondered if Jerusalem Spring wasn't a novel in the conventional sense; instead, that it was meant as a quasi-religious parable, or a philosophical text implementing the "Socratic method" to lead the reader to a specific (moral) conclusion. This could explain the moralistic tone that another reader found overbearing.
Personally, I didn't find the tone to be that moralistic or didactic overall. In fact, I sensed there was an attempt by the author to avoid making outright statements, especially on the Palestinian issue. The few exceptions being the neutral tone of "education is the way" and the political correctness of "we have the right to resist, but we don't have the right to attack civilians."
The author seems to suggest that with education people will naturally come to understand as well as act for peace and justice. But even "peace" and "justice" are relative concepts (the devil always being in the details!) and this novel's/parable's conclusion comes off as a gross oversimplification.
August 13, 2014
While I can't say that Jerusalem Spring by Fares Aoun was the best novel I have ever read, it certainly wasn't the worst. The story draws on parallels between two different times in history, both with similarities between each other although they take place around the world from each other.
The story follows Scott as he attempts to balance his home life with his job as a prison warden in the deep south in the 1960's. Scott struggles with his personal feelings towards current events, while still trying to keep the peace amongst his employees and the inmates. Halfway through the book (or 2/3 of the way through) the setting switches, to modern Jerusalem. While the characters are the same; the story is different, leaving the characters to deal with different challenges that are still reminiscent of the difficulties they faced before.
I liked some of the characters in this book and didn't like others. The main character, Scott, and his wife, Sarah, i found that I didn't really like very much. It might have just been that I wasn't able to relate well with them but I found their characters unlikable and awkward. Some of the other characters, such as Joe, I found that I greatly enjoyed reading about. To me those characters that had a good backstory were much more interesting.
The writing in this book was decent. I can't say that this is the clearest book that I've ever read, as I found myself confused as to what was going on numerous times throughout the story, but this book is definitely one that presents a clear and important message to the reader. The author does a good job of drawing connections between the two time periods and locations in a way that the reader is unable to miss or glaze past.
I would recommend this book to those interested in current events and books that tie past events to the current.
The story follows Scott as he attempts to balance his home life with his job as a prison warden in the deep south in the 1960's. Scott struggles with his personal feelings towards current events, while still trying to keep the peace amongst his employees and the inmates. Halfway through the book (or 2/3 of the way through) the setting switches, to modern Jerusalem. While the characters are the same; the story is different, leaving the characters to deal with different challenges that are still reminiscent of the difficulties they faced before.
I liked some of the characters in this book and didn't like others. The main character, Scott, and his wife, Sarah, i found that I didn't really like very much. It might have just been that I wasn't able to relate well with them but I found their characters unlikable and awkward. Some of the other characters, such as Joe, I found that I greatly enjoyed reading about. To me those characters that had a good backstory were much more interesting.
The writing in this book was decent. I can't say that this is the clearest book that I've ever read, as I found myself confused as to what was going on numerous times throughout the story, but this book is definitely one that presents a clear and important message to the reader. The author does a good job of drawing connections between the two time periods and locations in a way that the reader is unable to miss or glaze past.
I would recommend this book to those interested in current events and books that tie past events to the current.
May 9, 2011
I won this book through first-reads. The plot to this book was really good. I enjoyed the story but got lost when the author switched from the 1960s to present time. While the 2nd part of the story took place in a different time and place everything aside from two names was the same. The storyline didn't change a bit which just came across as slightly odd. It was nice in the way that I was able to see how the first part more than likely ended but still slightly confusing over all. I would recommend the book though, it was a good story.
September 24, 2025
It's a no for me
December 22, 2011
Jerusalem Spring by Fares Aoun is a very different novel, one that is difficult to categorize. It combines those jailed because of the issue of segregation of the South in the 1960s with today’s Palestinian/Israeli issues. It also shows a friendship between two very different people (the warden Scott and the inmate Joe). The first half is all 1960s…when two men enter a jail compound for no other reason than the color of their skin, and a mentor who helps the man (known only as 12) adjust, and possibly to escape. It ends with the younger man (known only as 13) becoming involved with the religious group in the jail.
Flash forward to Part II, Jerusalem today! There are the walled-off Palestinians, their guards, and the man-in-charge, Scott, and Yusef (Joe). There are the same characters in this section, and the same unlikely friendship exists. Even 12, who is now known as Mustafa, and 13 exist, and the scene plays out similarly, and continuing from where it left off in Part 1…that is, 13 is involved in religious fervor that ultimately affects them all.
Is the first part a dream of Part 2, or is it coincidence that all the characters echo the events of the first part? It is never clear, and I guess leaves it up to the reader to decide; however, it seems to this reader that the novel is trying to get the world to take notice of Palestinian issues such as being walled-in and away from land that was owned previously as well as recognize the fact that peace can be achieved between very different people.
The dialogue is a bit stilted between characters especially between the characters of Sarah, Scott’s wife, and himself, between Scott and Joe despite their friendship, but overall, it’s not a bad first novel although it may less a novel than a cautionary tale.
Flash forward to Part II, Jerusalem today! There are the walled-off Palestinians, their guards, and the man-in-charge, Scott, and Yusef (Joe). There are the same characters in this section, and the same unlikely friendship exists. Even 12, who is now known as Mustafa, and 13 exist, and the scene plays out similarly, and continuing from where it left off in Part 1…that is, 13 is involved in religious fervor that ultimately affects them all.
Is the first part a dream of Part 2, or is it coincidence that all the characters echo the events of the first part? It is never clear, and I guess leaves it up to the reader to decide; however, it seems to this reader that the novel is trying to get the world to take notice of Palestinian issues such as being walled-in and away from land that was owned previously as well as recognize the fact that peace can be achieved between very different people.
The dialogue is a bit stilted between characters especially between the characters of Sarah, Scott’s wife, and himself, between Scott and Joe despite their friendship, but overall, it’s not a bad first novel although it may less a novel than a cautionary tale.
July 27, 2014
Aoun creates characters that are complex and sympathetic. Exploring racism and friendship through the dichotomy of the 1950s in the southern U.S. (Section I) compared to the ongoing tension in Palestine and Israel (Section II) was thought-provoking. Section II did fall a little flat overall and was slightly predictable, but the message was lovely.
February 18, 2012
An interesting title for the book which evokes a feeling of hope. There was certainly a glimpse of hope in the battle to overcome the discrimation of the civil rights era from the actions and thoughts of Scott and Joe.
June 15, 2011
worse book ever
August 9, 2016
I received this book on a bookring -- it is waiting to be read.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews