Tuesday, August 11, 2020

Book Review: Between Shades of Gray

One afternoon on my reading chair a book magically showed up.  Na Clann have been cleaning out their rooms so I assumed it was from one of them.  It appeared to be a young adult book - quick read, I assumed.

I could not have been more wrong.


The book is starts in Lithuania, 1941, just after the Soviet Annexation of all of the Baltic States.  It follows Lina, a 15 year old girl, her 10 year old brother Jonas, and her Mother and Father who are taken by the Soviets.  Her father is separated from the family and while he is sent to prison, the rest of family is sent off to a work camp:  first in Siberia for a year, then even further North to the Arctic Circle.

The book is lyrically written as a series of short chapters with small flashbacks to the past of Lina's life, both growing up and in the summer right before the occupation, when she was supposed to enroll in a school of art.  The author prose is so well written you can feel the cold of Siberia, the hunger, the blows and comments of the Soviet soldiers.

20 million were killed as part of Stalin's purges, including those who were sent to the work camps who were not Russian political enemies but enemies to the Soviet regime none the less (the Germans that lived along the Volga river also fell into this category).  We do not hear much about them today or scarcely remember them in the West, but I suspect the wounds are terribly raw in those re-established Baltic states following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

I would argue that the book is important for two reasons.  The first is that, simply it is a well written book and a good story, something which I have found in scarce supply of late.  The second is that it is a telling conviction of the authoritarian state and what happens when people who see anyone different as a threat to their power - something that is more than relevant in our modern culture.

A third point - one that is important from my point of view - is that I think the book could be used as a bridge for discussion with those who perhaps might not otherwise be willing to engage in such conversations.  If it lead to such evil consequences in the past, how could it be any different now? 

5 comments:

  1. I used to think we could have bridges when we discussed contentious subjects. I used to think I could change minds if I just phrased my words the right way, and presented my facts better. I can tell you right now... you won’t change any minds. Not with the kind of people we have today. Look at them: they throw paint at old ladies. They beat housewives to death for saying “all lives matter”. They burn, loot, and murder and it’s entertainment for them. They could waddle over to a computer and look up the evils of their beliefs for themselves. But they won’t even do that. And you would ask them to read a book?
    Sorry, I shouldn’t be so negative. It sounds like something I might read, though... I will see if an electronic version is available...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hard to not be so negative now.

      Delete
    2. It is friggin crazy out there right now, Linda. This crap is going to get out of control, and we will all regret it if it continues.

      Delete
    3. Glen, it certainly does not give one cause for hope, does it? Everything you say is true - to some extent it feels as if there a sort of unwillingness to even educate themselves.

      Do read it if you get the chance. It is rather well written.

      Delete
    4. Linda, it is. If this world was all we had, how hard it would be.

      Delete

Comments are welcome (and necessary, for good conversation). If you could take the time to be kind and not practice profanity, it would be appreciated. Thanks for posting!