Welcome to Reader vs. Reader. Two librarians who have read the same book will discuss it critically. They may agree, agree on certain points, or completely disagree. RvR will challenge your reading comfort zone and dig deeply into the text to find potential problems or subtle brilliance. And maybe both.
In January, Andrea and Pam both read Internment by Samira Ahmed
[book-info]
The Quick Reactions:
Snippet of our conversation (Warning: spoilers everywhere!):
Pam: Once I got past 50% in the book I was like ahhh, this is what I was looking for! But yeah, it’s so melodramatic and a lot of the beginning was painfully obvious. I felt like I was being beaten over the head with political opinions. Which is, obviously, the author’s prerogative. But I also wonder how well it will stand up in time and how teens who don’t pay a ton of attention to politics will react to it
Books like 1984 or even, heck, Hunger Games are now fairly classic because while the government is Bad and Evil, it’s also generic enough that anyone in any time period can apply it to their experience.
Andrea: The politics didn’t bother me? I agree they could be a bit in your face, but today’s politics are. And I don’t know that teens can avoid the most obvious things. The school shoots and even a lot of racial vidoes. They’re in your face things. And sadly, this is part of our history now as well? I feel like Trumps effects will be felt for a long time to come.
Pam: I almost wish she had just said Trump instead of “the President.” That felt very coy. I would have liked that a lot better, actually, if he had been named
Andrea: I agree, but I can see why she didn’t? Since this is still fiction? And history often repeats itself, so there’s a high liklihood we’ll be in the same political climate again
Pam: True. What did you think of Jake?
Andrea: Jake is my biggest IDK point. I think I would have preferred he went into the station as a point of resistance rather than “OMG, this is wrong” type thing. I’m not sure she would have been able to do anything she did without help from the inside, but their relationship the whole book felt off to me? And I don’t know if I like the implications that he did it for love either.
Pam: Agree! I mean, on one hand, she has to have help to smuggle out the blog posts, talk to David, etc. BUT it still felt kind of white-savior-y to me? Like “Look! not all white people are bad! This white boy can be good! and so is his white friend!” Thinking about it now, if Jake had been Black with a similar backstory (military family, raised by dad, originally in National Guard, weirdly forced into this new military group) I would have been much more sympathetic to him as a character. But then again I am assuming that all of the guards were white?
Andrea: Yes! I think he was a needed character for sure, but I’m just not sure I like how it was all carried out. I do get the point of “not everyone is bad” but I’m not sure it worked here. And again, it may be the whole “I’m not really evil! I’ve seen the error in my ways” type of thing. If he had been a double agent from the start I think I would have fully loved him. (Minus the love thing)
Pam: YES. I was hoping he would turn out to be a double agent. And then having him die at the end was very much a martyr thing
Andrea: Yeah, we don’t know anything about the guards. So the general assumption/default does kind of go to white.
Pam: I am curious to see what the author’s note says in the final copy
Andrea: Same! It must be in the printed ARCs because I noticed someone mentioned it on goodreads.
Pam: Oh rats!
Andrea: Yeah, they said it was spot on, which makes me even more curious
Pam: Oooooh. I know that often when I’ve been iffy on a book, the author’s note on why they did such-and-such a thing really helps me feel more positive about it.
Andrea: Yeah, it would be interesting to see if that would change my final verdict at all.
One more than about Jake as well, can we talk about his demise was so over the top? I think maybe that’s what been bothering me so much. So much of it became about him?
Pam: Yes! Laila was all “No! No! Jake, no!”and weeping over his body. He’s going to be remembered as the boy who saved her.
Andrea: And again, I do feel like he was important to the story, but it wasn’t about him. And too much of it became about him? She was always worried if he was okay. More so than I feel like anyone else. And I suppose that could just that a lot of teenager’s have such a narrow focus at times, but it was most certainly the most off thing about the book for me.
Pam: Yeah. She talks a lot about how she loves David, and there is a loooot of kissing involved when he shows up, but she’s much more concerned about Jake.
Andrea: And I’m not sure if that’s because she knew David was safe? After all, he was on the outside.
Pam: I’m just not sure. Jake threw the book off for me so much.
Andrea: Nods. What did you think of the director? I saw several reveiwers imply that he was kind of cartoonish/over the top and I do agree.
Pam: Yep. I couldn’t take him seriously. His lips were always purple, he was fat and evil (of course he was) …
Andrea: Yeah, he always had that “my face shows I’m angry” type look. He needed a more under the radar/sly evilness.
Pam: I kept thinking of various cartoon villains and how their faces would be literally red or purple when they were mad.
Andrea: Very much so. I think he kind of falls in line of Jake. There was a lot of potential, but it didn’t quite manifest in a good way
I will says she generally did well in the world building/explaining why this was happening. There was a solid and believable reason unlike a certain other book.
Pam: Um, yeah. I have tried very hard to erase that from my memory. At least no one had made up names. Made up by white ladies.
Andrea: Ugh, yes. And I do agree the protesting only goes so far when you have guns/military actively silencing you. But that people were still fighting, just not in her area.
Pam: I really liked how the hijabi girls were presented as being brave and a source of strength for Laila. That might help some teens to see their choice differently.
Andrea: I agree. I also really like how she hit on the racial division within the religion.
Pam: We saw a lot more of that as the book progressed, and that’s when I really started to enjoy it.
Andrea: Agree. I wish she would have focused a bit more on that.
Pam: I was surprised/slightly disbelieving that the blog posts and their protests changed public opinion so quickly. Obviously people were going along with the internment in the first place. I liked how the teens did nonviolent protests and gave credit to those who came before them.
It does boggle my mind a bit that the fasting would case the director to go that bananas right away
Andrea: I was thinking about that as well, but I wonder if there was more protesting than she knew about? Once they were in the camp, they were basically cut off. And look how fast things go viral! Last weekend was a perfect example.
And agree, but I do think that was more about looking good and having things run smoothly.
Pam: True. If there had been wider protests, I wish we would have seen that/learned about it at the end. We (as readers) don’t even get to say “goodbye” to Ayesha. There are Laila’s hopes for what should happen in the future, but I’d like to know more about the events that occured while she was cut off
Andrea: Agree, but that is the issue with this type of narrative since it first person.
Pam: Yes. So we feel as cut off as she is.
Andrea: Right. It’s hard to add in that extra perspective. I do think she did try, but first person keeps the world close to home.
Pam: Basically, I just wanted more page time given to badass Muslim girls of all colors being brave and badass
Andrea: Agree! But overall, I still think it’s a good book that teens should check out.
Teen Services Underground 
