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?
Dear Mr. Young,
ReplyDeleteJoe, Addison, Carson, and I want to thank you for taking your time and helping us with our blog.
Blog #1
In the beginning chapters of the novel, Refugee, Josef, Isabel, Mahmoud all have to choose to be visible or invisible due to situations occurring in their homelands at specific times. These choices could be positive and negative at the same time.
For starters, Josef chose to be both visible and invisible. On page four, Alan Gratz explicitly stated, “‘No!’ Josef cried. He had to do something. He leaped to his feet, and tried to pull him off. Two more men jerked Josef away from him as he fought against them.” This textual evidence backs up our claim by showing that by choosing to be visible to the Brownshirts, it almost resulted in him being sent away to a concentration camp. One can infer that if this happened, he would be separated from his family. Logic tells us that if Josef were sent to a concentration camp, he would more than likely die in the camp. His choice to be visible in this situation was negative because the brownshirts threatened to come back and take Josef. But, we understand that sometimes people need to be visible in order for change to happen. Not only did Josef choose to be visible, and this put him in a dangerous situation, but he also chose to be invisible; this was negative too. On page eighteen, Alan Gratz explicitly stated, “The bright yellow Star of David armbands the Landaus wore were like magical talismans that made them disappear.” The Star of David armbands were a symbol of invisibility forced upon them by Hitler. On page thirty-five Gratz stated, “Josef slipped back into his compartment, still shaking, and collapsed into his bench. He stayed there the rest of the trip, his armband securely in place and as visible as possible. He didn’t even leave to go to the bathroom.” This textual evidence backs up our claim by proving that Josef made the decision to become invisible by putting his armband back on. We can infer that Josef is accepting that he cannot make a change at this point in time, so it may be easier for him to continue his invisibility. To us, it is so depressing to think that people had to choose this in order to live their lives.
Even further, Isabel dealt with invisibility until it proved deadly. Then, her strength came out and at this point in the novel, she made a change that helped her family. Therefore, choice of visibility was positive. On page seven, Gratz explicitly stated, “The cat was hungry, just like everyone else in Cuba, and its belly quickly won out over its fear.” On page Gratz also stated, “But nobody was going to eat this cat.” This textual evidence backs up our claim by proving that Isabel was going to protect the cat and in essence protect herself and her family. Joe, Cassidy, Addie, and I can guess that Gratz is pointing out to his readers that “Desperate times call for desperate measures.” This is probably why Isabel fights for her father and finds a way to help her family and others to leave Cuba. Again, Isabel’s visibility makes change.
DeleteOn the other hand, Mahmoud chooses invisibility at this point in the novel; otherwise, if he chose to be visible, he could be physically hurt or even killed. On page twelve, Gratz explicitly stated, “MAHMOUD BISHARA WAS INVISIBLE, AND that’s exactly how he wanted it. Being invisible was how he survived.” Also on page twelve, Gratz explicitly stated, “But Mahmoud did everything he could to hide his size and his face, to stay under the radar.” These pieces of textual evidence back up our claim by explaining why Mahmoud did as he did so he could live another day. We can infer that the situation even in Syria today causes people do the same as Mahmoud. This is probably exactly how Assad wants it. If the people do not fight back, Assad keeps his power. But, if they fight back, he could lose his power so that is why Assad leads by fear; it works. We know this because people continue to be invisible. What do you think? Could we be correct?
Thanks for reading our response. Joe, Addison, Carson, and I look forward to reading your response also.
I really didn’t know much about the book till I started to read it. I think it is pretty cool how Alan Gratz has made one book into three different but similar stories, and from different time periods.
DeleteMaking yourself invisible can be good and not so good depending on your situation and what you are trying to accomplish. In Josef’s case, he wore an armband that made him blend in with all the other Jews. This invisibility while it may seem negative was actually a positive for him. When he was caught after taking it off to buy a paper and candy, that out come could have been much worse than being sent back to the Jewish car. There was also the time in school that the teacher was using him to explain the difference between Jews and Germans. That broke his invisibility with his classmates and caused him to get beat up.
It seemed to me to make extra money in Cuba it was going to have to come from tourists. Isabel has to be seen and heard playing her trumpet, not invisible to make some money from the the tourists.
As for Mahmoud, I believe that he tried to make himself invisible because he thought if he was the middles and bullets flying around in his war tore city would help save him.
I enjoyed reading your thoughts on this question and hope you will enjoy reading mine. I look forward to the next question. Hope you are liking the book so far. I have to admit, I like it more than I thought I would!
Thank you for your response. We look forward to blog 2.
ReplyDeleteBlog 2
ReplyDeleteThroughout the novel, Gratz wrote about the interactions with Josef, Isabel, and Mahmoud. Gratz included the interactions to show that there are people who are willing to help those in need. In other words, there are people who may show compassion and try to help others in dire situations. In Josef’s situation, Josef pulled a stunt by taking his bracelet off and going into German section of the train to see if anyone would realize if he was a Jew. When he was pulling the money out of his pocket, his bracelet fell out, and he was caught by someone in the Hitler Youth. Instead of punishing Josef, he only gave him a warning and told him to keep his bracelet on and go back to his seat. On page thirty-four, Gratz explicitly states, “What were you thinking? the boy whispered. Josef couldn’t speak. The boy thrust the armband at Joesf’s chest. ‘Put that on. And don’t ever do that again’, the Hitler Youth told Josef. ‘Do you understand?’” So, to us, that says that just because someone was with the Hitler Youth did not mean he/she agreed with Hitler and his rule of law.
With Isabel, the family arrived in the Bahamas, and the tourists there were very nice and helped. They gave them directions, medicine, and some food for all of them. On page 177, Gratz explicitly stated, “Before they could get the engine restarted, one of the tourists tossed down a bottle of water to Señora Castillo. Soon the rest of the tourists were hurrying back and forth to the café, buying bottles of water and bags of chips and tossing them into everyone’s hands on the boat”. It shows that there are people who have empathy and are willing to help those in need especially when they are aware of the problem. With Mahmoud, he and his family luckily found Nasseer who would help them. On page 127, Gratz explicitly stated, “‘You take a boat to Greece? Tonight?’ Mr, Nasseer asked. ‘Maybe’, Mahmoud’s father said. ‘If it’s there. I will take you to it’, Mr. Nasseer said, and if it is not there, you can come back and stay with me.’” He also tells them that he was a refugee himself so he knows what it is like for them and is willing to help them because he knows what it is like to be in their situation.
So, one point in time, Josef, Mahmoud, and Isabel all found someone who was willing to help them and their family. This shows that the ones who were willing to quietly help them and those who had empathy for them, made all the difference. Those who helped put themselves in others’ shoes and realized the difficulty in their lives.
Hello. I hope everyone is still enjoying this book and blog.
DeleteI enjoyed reading your answer to this question. I could tell you put a lot of time and effort into answering it. I think your summery or conclusion is right on the money about helping. There are many reasons people help each other, and everyone needs help at some point. Some help because they are obligated. Maybe like a parent or teacher helping a child. In each of the interactions we were to look at, I think the people or groups had different reasons for helping. The reason for Josef’s help came due to compassion. Just like you said in your answer, he might not have agreed with the rules he had to enforce.
Supportive help definitely came to the Castillo family. They had more supplies when they were leaving the Bahamas then when they left Cuba.
Mr. Nasser helped because he was understanding in their need to flee Syria. He understood because he himself had to flee Palestine.
What ever the reason, it is always important to help people when you can, sometime it may be you that needs help.
Blog 3
ReplyDeleteIn the novel, Refugee, by Alan Gratz, he explicitly stated on page 214, “They only see us when we do something they don’t want us to do.” Gratz is pointing out that the tourists did not like what they saw especially when it affected their lives. The tourists wanted to sightsee, but instead they saw a sight they did not want to see. Their presence infringed on their plans. 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 evidence backs up our claim by proving that these particular tourists judged the refugees without even understanding what happened to them. They possibly saw them as a lower class who do not share similar religious beliefs. It is interesting to us how the tourists in the Bahamas treated Isabel and the families when they witnessed their struggle. These people helped because they felt sympathy and gave compassion. Here, only an assumption was made, and it was pure hatred. Gratz is most likely telling us to always try to understand another person’s plight before making a judgement. Do not make assumptions and try to be tolerant of other peoples’ beliefs. What are your thoughts?
Thank you for your response. We look forward to your response on blog tres.
ReplyDeleteHello all. This is a tough question to try and answer. I think I might see it a different way than you have. I don’t think there was hatred by the vacationers. If you read the last paragraph on page 214, Mahmoud even says that, “ Syrians were everywhere in the streets and hotels and markets…”. I would say it might be more frustration and some anxiety than hatred. Frustration because their country was changing and not by any of the Greek citizens doing. The citizens were probably not asked if they minded parking lots be turned into tent cities, or even if they minded having their country being used as a path for a parade of refugees. We can also assume many other things that might happen when big groups of people are “just passing through”. Things that make people anxious. Mahmoud’s story take place in 2015. I remember hearing and watching news stories of terrorists using these refugee caravans as a means navigate through different countries. Perhaps the people on the ferry sounded disgusted to Mahmoud, because they did’t know everyone’s intentions. You can call it hatred or bigotry, it just might be fear of not knowing.
ReplyDeleteAs for the tourists in the Bahamas helping Isabel’s family, it is a lot easier to help the folks in the one small boat. If there were 10 boats an hour coming ashore, I don’t think they would have been as welcoming.
In the end, I’m really not sure what point Gratz is trying to make. I guess that means that my take away and his point are not the same.
Thank you for taking time to respond to us.
ReplyDeleteThat's the beauty of reading a novel. We can read the same novel and have different opinions and interpretations. We are glad to see another's perspective.
We look forward to blog 4.
Blog 4
ReplyDeleteIn the novel, Refugee, by Alan Gratz, he explicitly stated on page 277, “I see it now Chabela. All of it. The past, the present, the future. All my life, I kept waiting for things to get better. For the bright promise of mañana. But a funny thing happened while I was waiting for the world to change, Chabela: It didn’t. Because I didn’t change it. I’m not going to make the same mistake twice. Take care of your mother and baby brother for me.” Lito is referring back to when he was a police officer on the MS St. Louis. The people had always asked when they would arrive, and they would always be told, “mañana”. Now, Lito realized he and his family were the ones being lied to. He saw history repeating and wanted to change it from happening again; Lito wanted to make it right. He regretted not helping those people and changing what had happened. Lito wanted to save his family and help them reach Florida without being caught and taken back to Cuba by the Coast Guard. Lito saw that “hindsight is 20/20” and he saw what happened on the St. Louis was about to happen again. Lito immediately knew what had to be done. He needed to distract the Coast Guard from their raft. If he did not distract the Coast Guard, then his family may not make it to the United States of America. To help his family out, he jumped off of the raft to distract the Coast Guard. When he jumped off, they would have to save him before they went after his family's boat. Basically, Lito sacrificed himself in order to save his family.
Thank you for reading our blog.
We look forward to your response!