In the beginning chapters of the novel, Refugee, Alan Gratz introduces his characters, Josef, Isabel, and Mahmoud, as well as their current situations in their homelands at specific time periods. Gratz specifically writes about Mahmoud blending in as a cloak of invisibility to help him survive his situation. He writes about Josef and those who wear the yellow Star of David armbands as being invisible and how the Cubans were unseen, forgotten and starving. How could it be positive and how could it be negative to be invisible in these situations?
Throughout the novel, Gratz writes about interactions between the Hitler Youth and Josef, Mr. Nasser and the Bishara family, and the Fernandez family, the Castillo family, and the tourists at the Bahamas. Why did Gratz include these interactions?
ReplyDeleteDear Mr. Thompson,
Thank you for working with us. Shawn, Kris, and I appreciate it.
Blog #1
Invisibility can be positive, but it can be negative too. It just depends on the situation. When reading about the three characters, Kris, Shawn, and I understand they had to make the best decision possible for the situations they were in.
For starters, Mahmoud was invisible, and that was how he survived; therefore, it was a positive to be invisible at this time. In the novel, Refugee, by Alan Gratz, he explicitly stated on page twelve, “If you really looked at Mahmoud, got a glimpse under the hoodie he kept pulled down over his face you would see a twelve- year-old boy with a long strong nose, thick black eyebrows, and short curled black hair”. This textual evidence backs up our claim by proving that Mahmoud wanted to stay under the radar. Gratz also wrote on page seventeen, “Head down, hoodie up, eyes on the ground. The trick was to stay invisible. Blend in. Disappear.” This textual evidence proves beyond a doubt that if Mahmoud stayed invisible it helped him to survive. For Josef, it was a positive to be invisible too. Josef could just hide his armband in his pocket to sneak around better like he did in the German train car; it was a moment he could be treated with respect. Gratz explicitly stated on page twenty-two, “He laughed, and Josef smiled. Here they were, talking like two regular people, but Josef hadn’t forgotten he was Jewish.” Shawn, Kris, and I can infer that if Josef could be invisible he would less likely be captured by the Nazis; therefore, invisibility kept Josef safer. Our best guess is that if Josef was arrested because of this offense, he would have been beaten or killed.
On the other hand, being invisible in situations like Mahoud’s could be considered a negative because Mahmoud had to be sneaky and stay out of trouble. Because of this, the two boys are not living a full life; it is like half a life. Gratz explicitly stated on page seventeen, “Mahmoud stayed in the classroom all day, never going to the bathroom or the playground. Khalid never answered another question in class, not even when the teacher called on him directly.” One can infer that Mahmoud and Khalid felt lonely and hiding all the time created a sense of never belonging. To us, this is a horrible existence, and we understand how lucky we are to be in America.
Overall, Kris, Shawn, and I believe that most people try to make the best decisions they can with whatever situation they are in. Some may choose to be invisible; some may choose to be visible. Gratz is probably trying to point this out with Josef, Isabel, and Mahmoud.
Shawn, Kris, and I look forward to your response.
Hello Group 10! Thank you for the welcome, and I look forward to working with you as well.
ReplyDeleteYou did a nice job with your response, and the evidence you used definitely helped support your ideas. The topic of invisibility is certainly important to understand in the situations of Josef, Isabel, and Mahmoud, and you are correct that people need to make the best decisions they can with the specific situations they are in. Mahmoud, for example, had to choose invisibility in order to survive, but choosing invisibility when the results may be less severe, do you think changes need to be made? Consider Mahmoud and Khalid. On page seventeen, Gratz wrote about their choice of invisibility in the classroom. What do you think about this? Could this choice have long term effects? In the example you gave for Josef, if he was sneaking around, was the invisibility truly positive? What do you think Gratz is trying to point out to you? I also noticed you did not mention Isabel. Remember. Her invisibility was not her decision. Although she faced physical abuse for speaking out and possible starvation, were there any other effects of her invisibility?
Here are some other things I want you to consider. Gratz does a nice job explaining the plights of Mahmoud, Josef, and Isabel in their homelands at specific time periods. Compare it to your situation. Can you? Why or why not?
I look forward to reading your responses.
Thank you for responding. Here are the answers to your questions:
ReplyDeleteDo you think changes need to be made? Yes, changes need to be made especially when it affects his education and his life in general.
What do you think about invisibility in the classroom? All students, at some point, choose invisibility because they do not want to be noticed. Some may be worried about being called on because they do not know the answer or they may not be prepared for class. Some are embarrassed so they hide.
Could this choice have long term effects? Yes, it affects your confidence and it impacts learning.
If he was sneaking around, was the invisibility truly positive? It depends. Josef was able to blend in and be safe. He was treated like another German. But, we understand that sneakiness can be considered suspicious and therefore negative.
What do you think Gratz is trying to point out to? It is okay to be invisible sometimes if it will protect your life.
Although she faced physical abuse for speaking out and possible starvation, were there any other effects of her invisibility? Isabel was forced to be invisible. She did not live the life she wanted to live.
Compare it to your situation. Can you? Why or why not? The only thing we can compare is invisibility. Other than that, at this point, we don’t worry about starvation or being kicked out of our home.
Blog 2
ReplyDeleteThank you for taking time out of your day to read blog 2.
Shawn, Kris, and I appreciate you working with us. The three of us decided to put our own ideas into separate paragraphs.
Shawn thinks that Alan Gratz had a purpose for adding the interactions of each character. Gratz’s purpose was to show his readers that there are people out there who are willing to help others during desperate times. On page thirty-four, Gratz explicitly stated, “‘What were you thinking?’ the boy whispered. Josef didn’t speak. The boy thrusted the armband at Josef’s chest. ‘Put that on. And don’t ever do that again.’’’ This textual evidence backs up my claim by proving that even people who joined the Hitler Youth may not have agreed with Hitler. Some had to be invisible in order to survive. But, even when invisible, some tried to help quietly. These actions, even small, made a huge difference. That is what Gratz is trying to point out. For Mahmoud’s part, Shawn thinks Gratz put the interaction between Mahmoud and Mr. Nasseer in the novel to show readers that people who can relate can make a big difference. On page 127, Gratz explicitly stated, “‘My house is too small for all of you but I have a little car dealership and you can stay in the office.’” This textual evidence proves that there are people who are willing to help especially in dark times. Gratz wants us to know that too.
Kris believes Gratz included these interactions because it links all main characters together by them running into poor situations or people and these interactions end up helping them. For instance, Josef runs into a Hitler Youth officer expecting to be taken away. The officer takes him back to the Jewish train car without hurting him. Mahmoud, on the other hand, tries to stop ongoing cars to find someone to help his family with a place to sleep. Eventually, he stops someone, Mr. Nasseer. He is a refugee who has lived in Turkey for sixty-seven years and he has a car dealership where the family can live. On the way to the dealership, Mahmoud’s father receives a text from the smugglers saying the boat is ready. This interaction ends up helping Mahmoud’s family by getting a ride to the boat. Gratz is telling us that this particular interaction is unique because Nasseer could empathize. He could understand what the Bishara family was going through. So, people who empathize can make differences too.
Kat believes Gratz added the interaction between Mr. Nasseer and the Bishara family showed that people who can relate to someone’s situation can make a big difference too. On page 127, Gratz stated, “‘I am a refugee too, from Palestine.’” This shows that people who have suffered can relate to those who presently suffer. Gratz wants people to know that empathy can propel people to act in a positive way.
What do you think about these interactions?
Hello Group 10!
ReplyDeleteI like how each of you explained your ideas in separate paragraphs, and the evidence you used certainly helped prove your take on the question.
Shawn, nice work and I especially like how you focus on the author’s purpose. Understanding an author’s purpose can definitely help the reader make connections and learn about himself/herself. Gratz has an important message to his readers, and I can tell you get it. I am proud of you.
Kris, I like how you are thinking, and I suspect you understand that the three stories will eventually intersect. Tell me. Do you think the three stories connect at this point or do they parallel? I look forward to your response.
Kat, I cannot tell you how proud I am that you wrote about empathy. It tells me you truly understand the situation and the message Gratz is making to his readers. When people can empathize, it shows compassion and that is what is needed in this world today. Yes, Gratz is telling the story of three children in different situations and different times, but the story is about so much more. I think you understand that.
P.S. You all are doing a great job, and this blog is exceptional. But, don’t tell Mrs. Thompson what I said about the blog being exceptional. (She’ll brag, and I’ll never hear the end of it.)
Blog 2 Response
ReplyDeleteMr. Thompson,
Thank you for the response to blog 2. Kris believes that the three stories connect because of their similarities. In all three stories, horrible things happened and someone was there to give each character hope. I know that the stories will intersect, but at this time they connect because of the similar events.
Blog #3
ReplyDeleteGratz is saying that refugees are invisible until it affects someone’s life negatively. Then, the refugees are visible. On page 214, Gratz explicitly stated, “This wasn’t what the tourists had paid for. They were supposed to be on holiday, seeing ancient ruins and beautiful Greek beaches, not stepping over filthy, praying refugees.” This textual evidence backs up our claim by proving that these tourists judged a book by its cover. The tourists looked at their clothes and the condition they were in. They associated being dirty with being poor and made a judgement. The tourists also did not like that Mahmoud was praying where the tourists wanted to see what they paid for. They had no tolerance for others, and it shows nothing but hatred in their heart. In the end, Gratz is telling readers that people need to learn about other peoples’ situations before making a decision. Walk a mile. Do not judge others. Just remember. Anyone can end up a refugee and no one would want anyone judging without understanding the situation. What do you think?
Hello Again, Group 10. There is no arguing with the points you made. In fact, you are spot on. I'm proud of your message, and I am pleased you understand the author's point.
ReplyDeleteIt is scary how people make decisions about others without understanding the hows and whys. Something else to think about...unfortunately,this is a common occurrence around the world everyday where people judge before understanding. It doesn't even have to do with a refugee status. Everybody everywhere should walk a mile. And, I also hope it makes all students think about how this relates to school and how students treat each other.
Thank you for your response.
ReplyDeleteBlog #4
ReplyDeleteThank you for reading and responding to our blog #3
On page two-hundred and seventy six in Refugee, Lito was inferring to the St. Louis when he was a cop. Lito said, “We sent them back to Europe and Hitler and the Holocaust. Back to their deaths. How many of them died because we turned them away? Because I was just doing my job?” Lito wanted to help the Jews on the boat but sent them back to Europe anyway. Lito realized that his family was going through the same thing all the Jewish people were going through, becoming refugees, so close to their destination, and the possibility of being sent back to their homeland. Lito saw history was repeating itself and decided to jump in the ocean and use himself as a distraction to keep it from repeating. Lito said, “‘I'm not going to make the same mistake twice.’” Lito is trying to say, “‘Don't let the past become your future’”. To help them get to the United States, Lito jumps off the boat and deals with the Coast Guard so they can have more time to get to land.
Hello Group 10. Once again...I agree with you. The lesson Gratz is making is so important, and I can tell you three understand it. Most of us try to make the best decision possible based on our time, place, and circumstances. Some decisions work well and some do not. Unfortunately, for the decisions that do not work so well can leave you with regrets. But, what do you do with those regrets is important for your future. As far as I'm concerned, regrets can "make you" or "break you". Do you think Lito's regrets "made him" or "broke him"?
ReplyDeleteDear Mr. Thompson,
ReplyDeleteThanks for responding to our blog.
Kris, Kat, and I have different opinions on the question.
Shawn: I think Lito’s regrets broke him because he stared off in the distance multiple times and kept repeating mañana to himself. Lito had two choices with his feeling of regret. He could have not done anything or he could have tried to correct it. Lito’s moral character compelled him to correct his mistake from the St. Louis. I personally believe that when most people have regrets, they try to fix them.
Kris and Kat: We think Lito’s regrets made him kinder than he already was because he sacrificed himself so his family had a chance at survival. He felt that he did not give Josef and his family a chance so he tried to correct that by giving his family that chance. He gave his family mañana.