My dad has been trying to get me to read this book for a couple of years now so that I could better understand the Arab situation. I have resisted in part because I only started really reading books for fun again last year, and in part because I am pretty apolitical. I don't like to generalize about groups of people so I was worried about this book.The Haj is about a leader of a village in Palestine, Haj Ibrahim, and the formation of the Israeli state. It deals with the political forces combining both for and against Israel, the Palestinians' relationships with the Jews that come to their land, and the family of Haj Ibrahim, told from the perspective of Ishmael, Ibrahim's youngest son.
There were a few things I struggled with in this book. It was an offender in one of my main literary pet peeves - the offense of too-much-historical-detail. To be fair, this is an epic about the history of Palestine and Israel, and I knew that going into it. It was hard to keep track of some of the rulers, and the intentions of the different countries, but part of that was definitely because several of the countries kept changing their intentions. I knew absolutely nothing about Palestine or Israel going into this read, so part of my problem was probably my complete lack of context.
I also didn't like the one-sidedness. On my guard as I was for prejudice, at the beginning it seemed that Uris was pretty much an Arab hater. He describes in detail the inferior conditions of the village of Tabah. Haj Ibrahim's family is the only family to live in a house. Haj Ibrahim has two chairs, and one is only for revered visitors. The men are weak and run from battle. On the other hand, the Jews come up with new systems to make the desert inhabitable. They have high quality schools and courageous squads of
specially trained soldiers. I don't know how much of this is true, and how much is not, but I would imagine at least the conditions are accurate.As we get to know the characters, especially the members of the Haj's family, however, we do get a sympathetic side to the Palestinians. Other Middle Eastern nations are trying to crowd them out of their villages, with no intention to protect them or fulfill the promises they make. Ishmael wants to protect the women in his family and goes to great lengths to protect them. However, in the end, even the most likable characters fall into self destruction because, as spoken by Dr. Mudhil, one of Ishmael's mentors, "Hate is our overpowering legacy and we have regenerated ourselves by hatred from decade to decade, generation to generation, century to century. [...] We cannot stop ourselves." (522-23)
I don't think that all Muslims or all Middle Easterners are full of hatred as an overpowering legacy, although it seems there are definitely some out there (such as... those who attacked America on 9/11). Like I said, I am not very politically aware and the TV in my house gets turned on less than once a week, so I don't always know what is going on in the world. Note to self: become more aware of current events. However, I do know from my lovely Civ 1 class that while Christianity was still in the Dark Ages, the Muslims were translating the Greek philosophers and building palaces. So when did this transition take place? And why? Did something change? Anyway, kind of going off on a tangent, but I found myself wondering about this quite a bit.
This book was one of the most graphic and disturbing books I have ever read. The forms of torture employed by various governments was absolutely horrifying. There was also one ruler in particular who was so corrupt and disgusting, living in a world of drugs and orgies (please no spam... haha). I haven't figured out if he was a real character or not. I didn't enjoy the negative events, but it was interesting read about the corruption in these so-called leaders, making life-altering decisions for millions of people.
The character that I found most interesting was Nada, Ishmael's sister. She was essentially the embodiment of that ever-popular theme in Middle Eastern fiction - a marginalized woman desperate to make her own decisions and live her own life. She was a very likable character - smart, beautiful, braver than many of the men in her family, and full of life. She goes on a rant toward the end of the book that finally makes Ishmael, the bowed to man of the family, realize her position:
I remember once in Tabah I saw a little Jewish girl waiting for the bus on the highway with her parents. She carried a doll and she showed it to me. It was very pretty, but it could do nothing but open and shut its eyes and cry when it was hit on the back. I am that doll. [...] I have been molded into a lump that is not supposed to have feelings. My emotions have been controlled and enslaved from the time I was a little girl - shame... slap.. forbidden... slap... shame, shame, shame. Even my body is not my own. (479-480)"I think I am going to be ashamed," Ishmael responds, finally understanding his sister for the first time. The characters are the redeeming point of the book. They are often strong and noble, although they are doomed to evil because they are Arabs (I hope you are catching my sarcasm).
This book was an interesting read, but it was hard to take completely seriously because the author seemed so biased. I do not doubt that many of the things he is saying are true, but because he seemed to be so one-sided it was difficult to take seriously. The book was very dark and negative, which is why it took me so long to read - I couldn't read straight up death and war during the Christmas season, so I interspersed the book with some seasonal books. I don't know that I'd recommend this book, although I didn't hate it. I'll probably try reading Leon Uris at least one more time, but this book was not for me.
Accessibility/readability: A bit confusing at times due to the many rulers and historical figures.
Aesthetics/literary merit: 2. I didn't think this book was very well-written. Nada's quote is a good example of what much of the rest of the book was like.
Plot: 3.5 It was interesting and told an important story. Although it did get bogged down with historical detail, they were necessary to the story.
Characters: 3. They were interesting and likable, but often one-sided.
Personal response: 2.5 It had its good qualities, but many things bothered me about this book.
Overall: 2.75
PS: Read this for the Middle East Challenge. Find more reviews here.
