Staying True

   A few days ago in class we were talking about the characters in the play King Lear, and if we liked Cordelia. Now personally I like her because she took a stand for what she thought was right and didn't just go with what was the safest way. Some people in the class had a different view, they just wanted her to say she loved her dad like her sisters did; and then everything would have been fine for her. They think she should have just gone with the flow, and with those who had power over her. Then Ms. Romyn said something that made me think immediately to Sarah's Key. She said that if we were all to go along with everything even if you think it is not right or true, then should we have gone along with Hitler? This brought me back to my book and past discussions about the Holocaust. When I was younger someone in a class brought up the question why didn't the Jewish people just change their religion so they wouldn't get killed? Now this was obviously asked from a very naive sense, but it brings me back to what Ms. Romyn said. Why didn't they just go along with Hitler? Sarah and her family all wore the yellow star, and she was told to be proud of her religion. Why should they have to change their way of life and who they are for one person in power? If Sarah and her family did change their religion, which I assume is not as easy as it sounds, then they would have been loosing who they really are. Cordelia was not going to loose who she was just so she could get land, she stayed true to who she was. And so did Sarah's family, even though they knew that it could land them in trouble. We all shouldn't just go with what is deemed to be the best way. If we did then no one would have stood up to Hitler, and schools may still be segregated, our lives as we know it would be completely different. Everyone should stay true to who we are and what we believe.

He Closed his Eyes

Edouard Tezac, Julia's father in law was alive during the Vel d'hv round up, and the way he describes the people of Paris is something that I found interesting. He says
           "He had closed his eyes, like so many other Parisians, during that terrible year of 1942. He had closed his eyes the day of the roundup, when he had seen all those people being driven away, packed in the buses, taken God knows where. He hadn't even asked why the apartment was empty, what had happened to the family's belongings. He had acted like any other Parisian family, eager to move into a bigger, better place. He had closed his eyes". (pg. 163)
 He closed is eyes. I find this a great way to explain how the people must have felt at the time. Ignoring all the people in pain and what was going on around them, so just closing their eyes. I find this quote symbolizes something, but i'm not 100 % sure yet. So I'll keep looking into this and thinking of more meaning for this, I'll just keep on reading.

This is one of my favourite quotes so far!

Worst Fear Come True

 Sarah has made it back home but her worst fear has come true. Her brother is dead, and at this point I felt like I wanted to cry. I was hoping so bad that the family living there (Julia's father in law's family) would have found him and helped him. But before I read this part, like Sarah inside I really knew the truth that he was dead. Personally if I was the family living in the house, I would have moved. Knowing that a young boy had died there and you had seen his body would have been too much for me. An innocent family, like mine, taken by force to their deaths. This was a family who once lived in that apartment. I couldn't live there knowing all this, the pain and thoughts would have been too much. I don't know how people during that time could have blocked out all this from their minds. Not even just blocking out families who once lived where they did, but watching and being a witness to innocent families being taken to their deaths, blocking all this from their minds.

"The Girl" has a name!

  Through out the beginning of the book the main character is referred to as "the girl". So this had me confused, why keep one of the main characters name a secret. The one who is referred to as "the girl" is the little girl who goes through the Vel d'hiv roundup with her family in 1942. She remained nameless until page 118 when she is hiding at a farmer’s house; here she tells them that her name is Sirka! This was surprising because I was expecting her to say Sarah, because the title Sarah's Key made me think that was her name. So I thought that maybe Sirka was a Jewish name that could also mean Sarah or something. Then on page 132 she tells us her name is SARAH! FINALLY! Sirka is her baby name, but now she is referred to as Sarah, Sarah Starzynski. This was so exciting to finally have a name for her! But why no name at the beginning? I think it could possibly be because to have a name is to have an identity. Having an identity, especially in her situation can give more vulnerability. She didn't want Sarah to be vulnerable; she wanted her to be portrayed as a stronger, braver character. Being a vulnerable person in her situation is very dangerous, and once she felt she was out of danger she was ok with being more vulnerable. And by telling them her baby name first allowed her to have time to gain more trust with Jules and Genevieve. Once she saw that they were there to help she felt safer and was ok with being herself and more vulnerable. "The girl" has a name!

Critical Article summary #3

Writing Backward: Modern Models in Historical Fiction

  This article written by Anne Scott MacLeod is about criticisms of today’s versions of Historical Fiction. It focuses mainly on books and how they portrayed history, but they were not accurate.  She opens up stating that "Historical fiction should be good fiction and good history", but now a day’s people are focusing more on fiction then accuracy of the history. The books have been lacking in accuracy especially in children’s historical fiction; they are putting today modern views on the past. Characters are being portrayed as having more modern views an example she stresses is female characters. Female characters are always being portrayed as feminists who go against the grain and views of their society; they are always fighting for more freedom or just have more freedom. But the truth is in many stories, the time period and setting makes this all in accurate. Most women would not stand up for this because of the consequences, and most societies would not tolerate this. Authors are not focusing on the truths about those past societies and everyday life; the real working life, or hardships that many would have faced are being muddled. The historical truths are being cut out of the story to make it more intriguing; yet the books are still being passed as historical fiction. Ms. Scott MacLeod used books such as Sarah Plain and Tall, True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle, and  Catherine, Called Birdie all as examples to show how authors are manipulating historical fiction as it is more fiction then history. She wants authors to know that people of the past had different views of the world and everyday life; they were not just us 100 yeas ago. They approached the world differently and authors should have these differences between our world and theirs clear in their novel. Ms. Scott MacLeod closes saying; "To wash these differences out of historical fictions is not only a denial of historical truth, but a failure of imagination and understanding that is as important to the present as to the past". She truly believes that the past is as important as the future.