The Lemon Tree: An Arab, a Jew, and the Heart of the Mi… (2024)

Excellent, well-written portrait of the multiple changes that have occured in the area of the Middle East known as Palestine, Israel, both to Arabs and Jews who both want to live on the same land in the same homes. History of the area from both perspectives is provided for the years leading to the declaration of Israeli independence in 1948 which changed the dynamics of the entire Middle East for all the years since.

The story is told from the perspectives of an Israel woman, Dalia, and an Arab man, Bashir, both of whom have ties to the same house formerly in Arab Palestine but, since 1948, in Jewish Israel. It is a true story of the wars, the individual happy moments of working toward peace or at least progress.

Highly recommended to anyone who wishes to learn more about the background for today's events.

Just finished this book and it is a fantastic read and a great insight into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, For anyone interested in understanding the conflict that is going on I think this is a great book to start with. However I did find parts of the book tedious and that is why I gave it four stars instead of 5 although when finished I was so glad I stayed with it as I feel that I now have a better understanding of the conflict. I had previously completed Mornings in Jenin which I enjoyed very much and feel thatMornings in Jeninis the book I would recommend to a friend and know she would not be disappointed. While The Lemon Tree is one I would definatly suggest for someone who interested in the politics of the conflict.

I found the book to be very promising in the beginning. It seeks to present a very comprehensive overview of the conflict in the Middle East, presenting both sides of the conflict through the personal experience of two people: a Palestinian Arab and an Israeli Jew.

However the book gets somewhat bogged down through an overly repetitive style. I feel that parts, that go on for pages and pages, could be much more forcefully presented in a page or two. Unlike the book - "I Shall Not Hate" - written by a Palestinian doctor, which I felt to be compelling from beginning to end - I found myself plowing through much of the text in "The Lemon Tree". The writer also apparently felt that coming back time and time again to the same point, albeit through slightly different approaches, would reinforce much of what he wanted to bring across, but this approach didn't work for me.

I congratulate Sandy for taking on a very difficult task, and revealing many things that needed to be revealed, but I found the literary quality lacking.

This book bothers me because it tries to put both sides of the story on an even playing field. The facts are presented in such a way to try and balance the equation. But it’s not a balanced equation. There is neither outrage expressed when the Arabs rebelled nor disgust at some of the horrible actions they took. Nor is there outrage when the Irgun blew up the Hotel David and 80 people died. Without the emotion, the historical facts have no context. It is impossible to understand the “facts on the ground” in Israel and Palestine, even today, without feeling the emotion behind them. I feel like the author is trying to rationalize the conflict so we can look at it logically. But would you ask the Jews to reflect upon the Holocaust logically? No. Nor should we. Just as we cannot ask the Palestinians to negotiate their situation rationally, forgetting the intense emotions that created the conflict in the first place.

I also cringed at a few of the statements made. In Chapter 10, the author writes that Dalia says, "Israel did not choose to have the Palestinians, and the Palestinians did not choose to have Israelis." I couldn't disagree more. Israel DID absolutely choose to create itself out of Palestine. In Chapter 13, Dalia says, "…it's so clear to me that you and your people are holding the key to our true freedom." She also states that she "could" say the opposite is true. This statement, to me, reveals how warped the Israeli thinking can be. Israel is holding all Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza (and to a lesser extent, those in Israel) prisoner. Many times, literally. Palestinians are held hostage to the Israeli economy. Their children's education depends on the charity of others and the will of Israel to let educational materials through. (Palestinian students were unable to take their SATs earlier this October because Israel would not release the tests; these students' college applications are now at risk.) Palestinians have lost freedom of movement even within the West Bank due to the "security" wall. Overall, it felt like the author made the Israeli protagonist look like the reasonable voice and the Palestinian intractable.

Lastly, in the Source Notes, Ch. 8, Michail Fanous, the author notes that the infamous "push them into the sea" comment has been researched and is believed by "numerous Arab sources" never to have been uttered. It was called "a remarkably successful piece of disinformation." I am disappointed that this was relegated to the Source Notes and not an integral part of the book. The amount of disinformation propagated by Israel needs to be called attention to; this book would have been an excellent place to accomplish that.

While I am grateful to see that this book has been published and people are reading it, discovering there is more to the story than they read in American media or learned in school, there is much more to the story. I hope that the readers of "The Lemon Tree" consider it only a starting point to learn more about this conflict and what they can do to help resolve it.

Tolan brings to life the history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict through the story of Dalia, whose family immigrated to Israel from Bulgaria after the Holocaust and Bashir, a Palestinian whose family was forced to leave the home Dalia's family settled in. They forge a friendship in spite of their different perspectives. This is an illuminating, very readable book and was great to discuss with my son during our buddy read.

This is an exposition of the Israel-Palestine conflict via the stories of two people, Dalia, a Jewish woman whose family immigrated when she was a baby in 1948 and Bashir, a Palestinian Arab whose family was driven out and became refugees. Dalia's family live in what had been Bashir's family's home. The lemon tree grew in the yard. The book uses their stories to tell the story of the conflict. The book does a good job of showing the personal experiences and views of all concerned. With this kind of book (another example of which is The Warmth of Other Suns: The Epic Story of America's Great Migration) there is more emphasis on those personal experiences and rather less on explication. But there is enough to give the picture.

I think it would be called a "revisionist" book. That is, it doesn't tell the story of Israel in a mythic, heroic manner, but contains all the warts--i.e, not all the Arabs fled of their own accord in 1948 but some were driven out; bad treatment on the part of Israel happened. Torture has occurred. Some may see that as delegitimizing the state of Israel, but to me it means that, like other countries, Israel hasn't had an immaculate conception. (In my opinion, it is not criticism of Israel that is the problem, but the problem consists in removing it from time and history and holding it up as the paradigmatic evil.)

The book does have sections dedicated to politics, and it does describe the various narratives as narratives (rather than holding up a particular narrative as "truth" and "fact"). In that sense, the book is fair and even-keeled.

Here is an aspect of the book that may be considered not fair: In all the discussion of people's homes, right-of-return, etc., the book never mentions that not all the Arab population owned their land. Look at this Wikipedia entry on Absentee Landlords, specifically the third section, on absentee landowners in Palestine before 1948: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absentee.... In 1858 the Ottoman Empire made the people on the land register ownership in a new manner, as individuals. That caused problems because it interfered with traditional communal patterns of land ownership, and because the people on the land didn't want to register ownership; doing so would result in taxation and conscription. Several decades later there were secular land reforms that allowed the oppressed Jews of the Ottoman Empire to own land individually, which led to religious resentment by Muslims on the land. At any rate, land became increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, particularly in the hands of absentee landowners of the Ottoman Empire. The people on the land were reduced to tenant farmers. In that way, resentment--and Arab nationalism--began to arise prior to the Zionist movement and prior to increased Jewish immigration. While Bashir's family had been prominent in their village and may have owned their land, many others would not have, and if they felt they should and didn't, there would have been issues that already existed and that were not instigated by Jewish immigration or the establishment of the state of Israel. I saw no reference to any of that in the book.

Also because of the concentrated focus on two individuals' stories in Israel and Palestine, the fact that other such issues have existed and do exist in other countries is not a consideration. Obviously it is a story of a particular place. I only think it is a problem because it is a place that is such a loaded issue for so many people. The author might have given at least some introductory context in terms of other areas of the world that have suffered partition or are undergoing influx or clashes of different ethnic groups.

Finally, it may be an unfortunate portrayal that the Israeli was capable of considering compromise while the Arab was intractable in his position. Since the book is based on actual events, that could not be helped, but is one of the drawbacks of focusing on the stories of these two people. At the same time, making their stories central brings history down to earth and makes it real.

3/11/13: I've decided to add my following comment to the body of the review as an addendum:
In my review, I stated, "...the fact that other such issues have existed and do exist in other countries is not a consideration. Obviously it is a story of a particular place. I only think it is a problem because it is a place that is such a loaded issue for so many people. The author might have given at least some introductory context in terms of other areas of the world....

It seems to me that books I'm reading or have read may provide some of that context, or maybe everything I'm reading these days is ~related~. Although those connections aren't really part of my review, maybe I can assemble them here, for future reference. Or maybe add them to the review.

I recently read Neither Wolf nor Dog: On Forgotten Roads with an Indian Elder, on what happened to American Indians in the 1800s and particularly the late 1800s, after the Civil War. They, like the indigenous Arabs in Palestine, lacked a tradition of land ownership that lined up with emerging social and economic realities that would come to be dominant.

Listening for the Heartbeat of God: A Celtic Spirtuality focuses overall on the suppression of Celtic spirituality by Rome, but a corollary has to do with the suppression of a people and way of life. Eventually economics coalesced with religious factors when sheep became more profitable than tenant farmers. In Scotland, 1792 was called "The Year of the Sheep." The large landowners got rid of their tenants to free the land for grazing. People were driven out; they coped poorly with sudden urbanization or forced emigration to Canada as paupers; people starved or died of disease in the consequent social uprooting and upheaval. The church did not help. The parish ministers were often the tools of the rich. Looking down on the people's religion made it easier to mistreat them. As I write, I'm wondering if these events weren't part of the ongoing dissolution of the feudal system.

I read an excerpt from a Palestinian Arab appeal of 1946 in which the Arab Office submitted appeals to the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry. Part of their complaint was that the Jewish immigrants had greater knowledge and skills with modern economic techniques, leading them to economic mastery of the area. The appeal asked not only for the rights of the indigenous inhabitants but also for the preservation of the traditional character of the country.

Here is a Facebook "note" I wrote after listening to The Modern Scholar - Odyssey Of The West III (3) The Medieval World:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/jan-se...
Here we see the impact of religio-economic factors writ large.

In The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet, Japan in 1800 had taken extreme measures to prevent the encroachment of Christianity. They had not let the Dutch enter the country beyond a special holding/trading area, and now that the English had gained control of the seas, they were treated the same. (Addendum: A friend just read the book God's Smuggler, about a man whose call was to smuggle bibles across closed borders.)

I read in the paper the other day about how it is against the law to spread Christianity in Libya, and doubtless in many other countries.

Why is that, unless we are not really speaking about the spread of a religious faith only, but about that religion as a cultural spearhead by means of which new ways may pierce a traditional society and, clearing all before it, conquer.

This reminds me of that joke to the effect that before the coming of the missionaries, the natives had the land and the colonialists had the bible. Afterward, the natives had the bible and the colonialists the land.

A few years ago I had the experience of sitting in a very liberal Protestant church that wears its anti-Israel colors proudly and in accompaniment preaches not a little anti-Judaism. Sitting there I witnessed their applause and delight as they were being told of the spread of Christianity in China.

It seems we "pays our money and takes our chances" with the political groups in which we find ourselves, but we often know not what we do.

It is easy to sympathize with the group that is suffering from change in this world--when they are us or our "client groups." When we are the winners and are perceiving ourselves as vindicated, it is another matter. Right and wrong are so difficult to establish. As I wrote on my review of Neither Wolf nor Dog, I don't think this Western culture that we have is the epitome of evil. But for those who do, I don't think another small culture can be made the scapegoat for it all. At the very least, that poses some serious theological questions--particularly for those who are of the conviction that price has already been paid.

Catching up…

Even though this book was written in 2006 and also read about the same time, it is interesting to note that it was also donated to my Little Free Library Shed recently. Obviously, what is happening presently in Gaza and Israel, means that this is a conflict that still resonates with people.

Since the book was recently donated, it gave me an opportunity to re-visit the book again and bring my review to Goodreads.

Premise: In 1967, nearly 20 years after his family was forced to leave their home, Palestinian Bahsir al-Khairi was able to finally return. Thus began his friendship with an Israeli woman named Dalia Eshkenazi. This is their true story, which was first told in a 1998 radio documentary on NPR’s Fresh Air.

Now, through extensive research, the author gives readers the experience of the house, the lemon tree in the title, the families, and the complex history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

What is particularly interesting is the symbol of the lemon tree, which I won’t spoil here – that is an experience for readers to explore on their own.

The story is rich in detail and research and beautifully portrayed. And considering we are still in conflict all these years later, the word that comes to mind over and over in this readers mind is…

Hope. For an end to conflict. To live in peace with security and dignity.

This book is a marvellously thorough description of the formation of Israel, and the resulting Arab-Israeli conflict.

The story follows two families – the Khairis and the Eshkenazis. The Khairis were Arabs from al-Ramla, forced by the Israelis to leave their house and their town in July 1948, as refugees. The Eshkenazis were Jews from Bulgaria, who immigrated to Israel after the Second World War. They were sent to al-Ramla for settlement, and ended up living in what used to be the Khairis’ house – a house with a lemon tree ....relating to the title of the book.

Whilst the story of this house, and the friendship between Bashir Khairi and Dalia Eshkenazi formed a small part of the book, I think the title is misleading. The overwhelming impetus of the book deals with general Arab-Israeli relations. The uprisings, the retaliations, the wars, the imprisoning of vast numbers of people, the influx of Jews, the displacement of Arabs, the setting up of gorilla factions, the major leaders on both side of the divide, the sentiments of ordinary people on the ground, the passionate desire for homelands, the positioning of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, the colonising, the efforts to broker peace, the peace makers, the war mongers.....everything is described with great clarity, and there is a major effort on the part of the author to achieve a fair and balanced description of events. I think he does a wonderful job. Not only that, but what the author achieves through his ongoing following of the Arab family of Khairi and Jewish family of Eshkenazi is a personal perspective on these themes and events.

I learnt an incredible amount from this book – and would highly recommend it to anyone wanting to get an overview of the history of Palestine and Israel from the time of the British occupation to the beginning of the twenty-first century. I felt it really got to the heart of what was going on.

Well-written non-fiction that sheds light on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in the Middle East. It highlights two families connected by one home in the current Israeli town of Ramla. The Khairis, a Palestinian family, built the house in 1936, and planted a lemon tree in the yard. They were exiled in the wake of the violence during the 1948 war. The eldest son, Bashir, vowed to return one day, to reclaim their home. The Eshkenazis, a family of Bulgarian Jews, arrived in newly established Israel, and moved into the home with the lemon tree. Their only child, Dalia, was only a year old at the time.

The book opens with the meeting of Dalia and Bashir after the Six-Day War. Bashir returns briefly to al-Ramla, seeking to see his old home. He meets Dalia, and she invites him in. Tolan has written a history of the Middle East based around the unlikely friendship between Bashir and Dalia. He interweaves their personal stories with documentation found in his research. He includes direct quotes from interviews, primary sources, and declassified materials. This alternation between micro and macro is effective in conveying the multiple Arab and Israeli perspectives, such that the reader can put himself or herself in their shoes.

The book spans the historical panorama, including such topics as the political conferences, the leaders of various movements, important locations, the involvements of Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt, and differing governmental policies that changed over time. I read the version that includes an epilogue, which provides an update as of 2020. Tolan’s book helps facilitate understanding of the complex issues in the Middle East and will appeal to those who want to learn more about the history of the region and the outlook for an eventual peaceful resolution.

A very slanted take on the struggle where the only people who get a voice are a Palestinian terrorist, an Israeli peacenik, and the leftist academic author. Every poor decision by an Arab leader is justified and every choice by an Israeli leader is stated flatly in the most damning way. Tolan delves deep into accounts to cherry-pick the most favorable items for Palestine and skims over complicated events to highlight the darkest side of the Israelis.

The conflict is a bad situation; I feel for the people living in camps with little control over their lives. There are refugees in every war and it's sad. But only blaming Israel over-simplifies a complex problem. Israelis have to be a hard people to exist surrounded by so many nations who want them destroyed.

The problem is not so much with Tolan though, it's impossible to write unbiased on this subject. Readers are best served by reading at least two books on the conflict, one biased on each side. For the Israeli side I'd recommend O Jerusalem, written by two journalists one American and one French. It's very similar to this book in that the authors do make an attempt at unbiased writing, but it clearly favors the Israeli side of the story.

This is the true story of Dalia, a Bulgarian Jew, and Bashir, a Palestinian Arab. Both were uprooted from their homes for different, but related reasons; one was uprooted because of the Holocaust in Europe and the other because of the founding of the state of Israel which resulted from the heinous acts committed against Jews during the Holocaust. It must be mentioned here that the Arabs of Palestine supported Hitler and his Holocaust. They had a common enemy: Jews and Great Britain.
Both people claimed the same land, Israel, only known by that name since 1948, when it was given to the Jews by a United Nations declaration. However, since the ownership of that land is now and has always been disputed, war is never-ending and fear is a constant companion for all sides considered.
Dalia and Bashir meet in 1967, when Bashir knocks on the door of her home only months after the Arab defeat in the 6-day war, just one of a series of violent acts toward the newly formed country since its inception. He asks to see the place he used to call his home, and she graciously grants that wish to him and his two friends who illegally traveled into Israel from their place of exile in the Arab territory. Over the ensuing years, they both become what I shall call frenemies, since they are both driven by different motives and goals, but both also inspiring a feeling of friendship for each other and a concern for each other’s plight. Their needs and solutions pit them squarely in a fight against each other on the playing field that is Israel.
Dalia seeks a solution that will require sacrifice by all parties involved, because she believes it could bring peace to the Middle East. Bashir seeks a solution in which Jews are driven out of their country and sent back to the place they came from. He will not tolerate any compromise regarding the land or the Jews who recently emigrated to his country.
Through their friendship, Dalia learns how her family acquired their home and how Bashir unfairly lost his when Israel commandeered it and forced the community he lived in to flee. She is sympathetic, but realizes that there is nothing she can do about it. She cannot return the home to him, she cannot even sell it to him. It is a brutal mark on Israel’s history, but the Arabs wanted to drive them out, and the newly formed Israel saw no other way to guarantee its survival other than to kill or be killed. Israelis chose survival as cruel as its implementation required.
Bashir, unwilling to compromise in any way, wants only to regain the self respect his family lost which requires them to be able to return to their home, no strings attached. In conjunction, he wants the Jews to return to their homes, not understanding that they often had no home to return to because of the Holocaust. They were not wanted anywhere. Bashir, like the Israelis, believed that any means would justify the end of achieving the right of return. Although he has never admitted it, he was arrested many times for participating in acts of violence and terrorism in Israel. Unlike Dalia, who, to be fair, does have the upper hand as an Israeli, he does not want to work through peaceful means.
The book dwells largely on the different paths each of them follow to find a solution. Dalia eventually creates a school for Arab children in their mutual former home, and Bashir becomes an Arab Freedom Fighter, involved with many violent groups and spending many years of his life in Israeli prisons for the cause of a one-state solution to the Middle East controversy..
Dalia finds it hard to understand how someone she cares about, and supposedly someone who cares about her, can want the annihilation of her people. Yet Israel is also carrying out deeds of brutality, torture and murder, as they invade lands preemptively to protect their territory and their settlers. She finds it hard to justify or understand either behavior.
While Dalia is shown in a sympathetic light, and Bashir is depicted as someone who is the product of years of Israeli abuse, there is little true causation presented that connects the deeds of each enemy toward each other. Therefore, The brutality of Israeli actions often appear to be occurring in a vacuum rather than in reaction to Arab provocation. Israel would probably not exist today had they not taken swift action against their enemies, even preemptively. Did the means justify the ends? Since the Arabs were intransigent and would not accept Israel’s right to exist, after the state was created, I, personally, believe they did.
Dalia appears to be naïve and more than just a little idealistic. Bashir is grounded in his belief that he has the right to return to his family’s land. He beieves in achieving this goal by any means possible. His children are taught that Israel is the cause of all their problems, rather than their refusal to accept Israel’s right to exist. They do not own their responsibility for some of the brutality inflicted upon their people, and they feel no guilt for causing so many unnecessary deaths No matter how hard she tries, Dalia cannot crack his stubborn façade. She believes that in friendship, if they both give up something, if they sacrifice equally, they can compromise and live together, and that this can be applied to the greater land around them, encompassing Arabs and Israelis. She, however, does understand that the right of return would negate Israel’s existence as a Jewish state.
The book’s message is over simplified. Bashir really cares more for his Palestine than he does for Dalia. His connection to terrorist behavior could as easily kill her as well as other innocent and unknown Israelis or innocent Palestinians who lives in Israel. To him, Jews are interlopers who have no right to be there and must be driven out by any means. It is a view similar to the Israeli Jew about the Arabs, sadly.
The author often referred to Bashir’s belief about a resolution guaranteeing the right of return, but this resolution does not actually exist, and the author does not clarify this point, but rather allows the reader to believe what Bashir believes. It is the interpretation of that resolution by Bashir which is incorrect and the author should present it that way. http://www.mythsandfacts.org/conflict...
The groups that Bashir supports do not recognize Israel’s history or its right to exist in what they believe is only “their land”. When Jordan controlled the holy sites, Jews and Christians were forbidden access to certain places, even though the UN resolution required it. When Israel controlled them, Jerusalem was unified and religious sites were open to all.
http://www.yale.edu/accords/jerusalem...
Throughout the Jewish history, they have been attacked just because they were Jews and were different. After a long history of exile and abuse, the Israelis are a bit paranoid, and with good reason. They are a tiny country in the midst of a huge Arab population that will not recognize their right to exist. There is not one Arab country truly willing to give Palestinian refugees sanctuary in their country, on a long term basis, with equal rights and freedoms, yet that is what the Arabs demand from the Jews they attacked the moment the state of Israel was declared.
Many Jews, like me, always believed that all reactions or hostilities, engaged in by Israel, were provoked. In reality, not all were, I learned. I discovered I know a lot about the Holocaust, but not as much about the birth and development of Israel. However, I do know that Israel reacted in its defense, to protect the country from annihilation by an enemy that did not recognize its right to exist, that thought they could wipe the people and the country from the map with impunity and suffer no consequences. When they were forced to pay for their violence, they rebelled and questioned why they were being treated so cruelly when they only, rightfully, wanted their land back.
The problem is this; it was no longer their land. Intransigence will prevent any peace. Both sides have to move to a middle ground, but Israel has no choice, if it wishes to maintain its Jewish identity, but to behave they way it did and will have to continue to do so. Those that do not understand this will wish to doom Israel to extinction. They may even hope for it, as their ultimate goal.
In the Middle East, as in other developed nations, assassinations have become more and more prevalent, as has terrorism. It is necessary to fight hard and early to survive. If two friends could not come to a single cohesive conclusion about how they could live together in peace, how can two separate peoples who desire the same country to call their own, find a pathway to peace?
Dalia could not understand how Bashir could plot to murder Israelis when she could become his victim, and yet, Bashir has become a victim of Israel’s prison system, perhaps not always fairly treated. Because time has passed since the book was published, the fluid situation in Israel has changed and it is now even more threatened by newly formed terrorist groups, by other Arab nations who have experienced the Arab Spring and by an Iran that will possibly soon acquire nuclear weapons. Who knows if there is even a plausible way out? I certainly don’t. However, the truth must be written, not for bleeding hearts, but for the real world with beating hearts for one man’s poison will become another man’s meat on another day.

A book about the Israeli Palestinian conflict.
I am really not sure what to write about it. It opened my eyes and gave me a perspective of the conflict that I have not seen (or maybe chose not to see). I won't say that it changed my perspective completely but it did raise allot of questions about the history of my country and the role of the Palestinians. Or to be more precise the role of the Zionist movement in the situation of the Palestinians.
The book tells the story of the friendship that was established between a Palestinian who was forced out of his house as a child in 1948 and the Israeli woman, who as a child, settled in his house (with her parents) after the 1948 war. A friendship that started in 1967, after the six day war when Bashir, the Palestinian, knocked on the door of the house that he could not visit for 19 years, and met Dalia, a young woman at the time.
While the story of the friendship is optimistic and shows that Israelis and Palestinians can somehow have a dialog, it emphasizes the giant gap between the people.
I would like to say that after reading this book, I have better hope for peace between Israel and the Palestinians but that is not the case.
The book just emphasized to me how deep the gap is and how complex the solution is.
The book does not put my country and its actions in a very positive light. I do not have the historical knowledge to contradict what is written in this book. Every story can be told in various ways and this one paints the Israelis in unflattering colors.

I have just finished this book, and found it to be one of the most complelling books I have ever read.

An intriguing historical account of the Palestinian/Arab - Israeli conflict through the stories of the lives of two families who are connected through having resided in the same home (the Arab family built it and was later "displaced;" -- most violently. A Jewish family from Bulgaria comes to live there, newly arrived in Israel after World War II. A Lemon Tree grows in the back yard.

In 1967, a young Palestiniam man knocks on the door -- hoping to see the home he fled from with his family, as a young boy. A young Jewish woman, on her college vacation, is home alone -- and opens the door.

The cballenge of this book -- is that it revolves around two extraordinary individuals who choose to care and hear each other stories, and maintain a deep and respectful friendship spanning decades despite deep political differences - that go to the very core of their beings -- differences that each conscientiously acts upon through their lives.

It is a book a would recommend that you read -- but also that I would ask you to read. I feel we have a responsiblity to know these stories.

I

As the reader delves further into the story, they begin to experience the weariness of the people impacted by the events in the story, whether it be the Palestinian refugees or the Holocaust survivors, a weariness over the atrocities experienced by the Jews in Europe, over the displacement of millions of Palestinian refugees, the weariness over the constant, never-ending cycle of violence has blighted the Levantine, a whirlpool of death and destruction which has submerged the lives of millions, remnants of which occasionally float-up, like the story of Bashir and Dalia depicted in 'The Lemon Tree'.

Dalia is a Bulgarian Jew whose family flees to Israel after the Second World War and who moves into a beautiful house with a lemon tree. She doesn't really question why the previous occupiers would choose to leave their home, instead choosing the believe the lies perpetuated by the Israeli government about the Arab owners fleeing their homes in an act of cowardice, until she meets Bashir, the son of the previous occupant. In many ways Bashir and Dalia act as mirror images of each other; both are driven by a humanistic drive for justice, both are unafraid to challenge prevailing notions of right and wrong, both are courageous in the truest sense of the word in their pursuit of the truth. However, they are hopelessly divided by the wall of privilege which exists between them both figuratively and, later, literally. Bashir and his family have had their homes, livelihood, humanity and freedom taken away from them, whereas Daisy occupies the privileged position in Israel of being both a Jew and White. Bashir is trapped in a constant cycle of incarceration and exile, whereas Daisy is free to pursue whichever path she chooses in life.

Yet, despite this, Bashir and Dalia represent hope; a hope that these differences can be overcome by honest dialogue, by compromise and by the three a's which Dalia references: acknowledgement, apology and amends. Yet all three need to be done in a sincere and meaningful way. Although the lemon tree which once stood in the courtyard of the Khairi family home has long withered, perhaps there is hope that a tree of justice and peace can grow from the pain and suffering experienced by both Jews and Arabs over the last century and peace can be achieved between Israelis and Palestinians.

Now I know why wolves would rather eat through their own legs than stay in a trap. Awwwwwful. First, Tolan reads the book himself, and he has a bad case of NPR voice. Do not operate vehicles or heavy machinery while listening to this book. Second, the contents. Tolan mixes history of the "Palestine" crisis writ large with history writ small in the lives of two individuals, one a Jew and the other an Arab. Their stories could have been summarized on a post-it note with room to spare. The book gets incredibly repetitive very early on. ("How can our people get along? This is my home! But it was once your home! Did I mention that it was once my home? But previously yours? And then mine?"). I strongly urge more contructive uses of your time rather than listening to this thing. Perhaps knocking over liquor stores or developing an addiction to monkey p*rnography. Sweet Granny Moses, I should have chucked this out the window midway through Disc 1.

For anyone interested in the history of Palestine, this is an absolutely gripping book, a profoundly insightful consideration of the birth of Israel in 1948 and the Arab / Israeli conflict before and since. The carefully documented history describes an Arab family forced to leave a home they built (and the lemon tree they planted in the back yard) when Jewish immigrants move into the country. The Jewish family loves the home and builds their own memories there. When the son of the Arab family returns to visit the home of his childhood, he gets to know the daughter of the Jewish family. They develop an unusual friendship in spite of ideological and political differences; mutual respect develops and they challenge preconceptions and learn from each other. In this context, the agonizing history of Israel and Palestine unfolds, and both Zionism and Palestianian homeland claims are defended. This is the first book I've read that really allowed me to consider BOTH sides of the issue, and feel sympathy for the Arab position.

I tend not to read books about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict because observers’ rational sense of fairness and entitlement invariably seems to go into suspense on this topic. We read this book years ago when I belonged to a reading group that specialised in Middle Eastern literature. Unusually, this particular story manages a humanist and almost beautiful angle on the topic: a displaced (in the 1948 Palestine war) Palestinian man returns to his former family home in what is now (1967) Israel. There he meets the daughter of the Jewish immigrant family who now lives in his house and they become friends as the story unfolds…

I loved/hated this book. The Washington Post nailed it tagging it "an extraordinary book...A sweeping history of the Palestinian-Israeli conundrum...highly readable and evocative."

Thank you, Laurie Williamson, my Tuscaloosa/Boone doctora hermana, for recommending it. Thank you, Fulbright Scholarships for awarding her one in Lebanon increasing her curiosity of the area and her front-line understandings.

Thank you, Sandy Tolan, for all your research, your passion and your ability to write this book, this story of Bashir and Dalia and their unusual friendship as bitter and sweet, as alive and wasted as the lemon tree in their backyard.

I think of you, Ettie, my fiesty Jewish friend, and you, Haifa, my passionate Palestinian/Jordanian friend, and of your friendship and ours. I think of my misunderstandings and frustrations with what for me seems to be way too much support of Israel by my own country, politically and financially. I definitely feel more informed and more wishful and still confused, frustrated and disempowered having read this book. What's that advocacy of something called "Blessed Unrest"? Not sure this is that but it is definitely something bigger than me and this book is a baby step toward at least being a better informed citizen of the world.

I agree with the person who says required reading for anyone who lives in this world.

The Lemon Tree is the history of modern day Palestine and Israel. It is written in a Palestinian voice by an individual who was displaced from his home as a child but who I think remains fairly balanced in his viewpoint and presentation.

The book is also about an uncanny friendship between this Palestinain and his dear friend who was the child of a family that relocated to Israel after WWII to find a new freedom.

For once I feel I understand both sides from a human vs. a political point of view.

At Congregation B’nai Brit, there’s a book club called Israel Between the Pages with the goal of “reading books on and from Israel”. With that in mind, the group attempts to read books with “a full spectrum of voices from the region” and determined that “it was important to read a book from a Palestinian perspective”. Therefore, The Lemon Tree was selected.

The premise for the book is promising. In short, the book tracks the parallel experiences of an Arab family and a Jewish family that lived in the same house (although not at the same time) through the founding of Israel and into the modern day (2006). I was excited to read the book and approached it with an open mind.

Initially, the chapters swap from one family to the other, chapter by chapter (similar to Dan Ephron’s Killing a King), until the two families meet at which point their narrative becomes intertwined. With that narrative shift, the book also moves away from offering very personal stories about individuals’ experiences to attempting to capture the broader and very convoluted struggle of Arabs and Jews in Israel.

I found the first few chapters to be very interesting and enjoyable to read. In particular, the stories of the Jewish families’ pilgrimage from Bulgaria to Israel fascinated me since I feel that this is a period that’s often summarized briefly with a statement such as, “and then the Jews moved to Israel.” It was great to get into the nitty gritty of the exodus, such as the Anti-Semitic laws that had to be changed in order to permit Jews to leave the country, the debates between neighbors on whether to remain loyal to the only country they’ve ever known or to the promise of a country that will protect them, and the logistics and financing of getting a huge chunk of a country’s Jewish population from one place to another.

However, as I read further in the book, I grew increasingly frustrated with Tolan’s biased representation of events and his overly sympathetic approach to portraying the Palestinians’ plight. The portrayal of information was so unilateral at times that following the completion of later chapters I would need to pace around and vent. There are hints of a unilateral perspective that I dismissed from the initial chapters when Tolan presents the Jewish settlers as overly aggressive in their pursuit of capturing Israel. This is a narrative that’s much different from the one presented by Matti Friedman in Spies of No Country where the existence and survival of the Jewish people in Israel seemed like a true existential question from 1945 to 1947.

The moment that truly drew my ire, though, and which also marked the point when I turned on Tolan was in the chapter “Explosion.” In this chapter Bashir Khairi, who acts as the main representative of the Arab family in the story, is arrested and jailed for aiding in the bombing of a Jewish supermarket in Jerusalem. This is a crime to which Khairi never admits. This is a fact that the book continues to remind the reader, as though by speaking the words of his innocence he will somehow become innocent. Meanwhile, elsewhere in the book, Khairi seems unsympathetic to the Jewish plight, expresses an aggressive stance towards Arabs’ right of return, and affiliates with the leaders of Palestinian terrorist groups. But, no, the book will never let you forget that he never confessed to the bombing at the supermarket and that he is therefore innocent.

From this point, I started to think more critically about what I had read and also become more critical of everything I was reading going forward. Why is it that the Six Day War received a full chapter in which Tolan harked on how aggressive Israel had acted in the lead-up to their attack while the Yom Kippur War which was initiated by Egypt and which represented a devastating blow to Israel received just a brief paragraph mention? Why is it that the prime ministers of Israel are portrayed as war mongers and associated directly with acts of war while Arafat manages to appear throughout this whole book without once being mentioned in conjunction with an attack he coordinated against Israeli civilians?

It’s not difficult to pull up humiliating moments from a country’s history, but to do so without proper context only serves to propagate a false representation of the facts, which are…

...that the Palestinians’ struggle is not solely due to Israel, but is also very much the result of actions carried out by Arab countries. The Palestinian people and their territories have been leveraged as pawns by neighboring Arab countries such as Jordan (which annexed the West Bank up until the 1980s), Syria, Lebanon (which for 40 years now has denied Palestinian refugees living in their country citizenship, work opportunities, or even basic dignity), and Egypt for the purpose of progressing those countries’ agendas.

...that the United Nations, by propagating refugee status to the descendants of the 1948 Palestinian refugees, has prevented them from finding a permanent foothold in the world. Instead of resettling them as they would any other group of refugees, they have perpetuated their misery through generations.

...that Palestinian leadership has continued to fail their people by looking to the past for reconciliation and consolations. In 1948 (Israeli Independence), they wanted the terms of 1917 (Balfour Declaration). In 1967 (Six Day War), they wanted the terms of 1948. In 1995 (Oslo Accords), they wanted the terms of 1967. They fail to grasp that in those intervening years, Israel is growing and adapting -- that it is no longer the weak and disorganized nation it used to be. Nevertheless, they still think that they can treat it as such.

...that even a seemingly sympathetic person such as Bashir Khairi, who managed to find common ground and develop a friendship with an Israeli woman, is unable to empathize with who she is and what she wants. That he still expects her to leave Israel and go back to Bulgaria so that he and his people can move into all of Israel. It bewilders me that there can be so many people in Israel fighting for the rights of people like Bashir to live in Palestine while there seem to be no Palestinians fighting for the right of Israelis to remain in Israel.

...that the actions of extremists on the side of Israel are not equivalent to state-sanctioned terrorism funded by Palestinian groups. The extremists in Israel face jail time for the actions they commit while those from Palestine reap state-funded rewards based on the amount of damage they are able to inflict.

Ultimately, I was disappointed by this book’s representation of the conflict.

I suppose it succeeded in eliciting a reaction from me, but I would never recommend it to anyone without providing additional resources as balance for its unilateral perspective.

Utterly heartbreaking and impossibly beautiful work of narrative non-fiction, The Lemon Tree by Sandy Tolan is an extraordinary, harrowing account as seen through the eyes of a Jew (Dalia) and an Arab (Bashir) in perhaps the most unstable and fragile place in the world today. To read this book is to understand, if not total but at least quiet enough, Palestine and Israel as they exist today. It stunned me how myriad of events that unfolded from 1948 up to the present tragedies created deep divide for these people. I had no idea what the root cause of these struggles after struggles until after reading this book. Yet for all the horrors, despair and vengeance, The Lemon Tree always offers the glimmering thread of hope and what truly lies beneath the rubble: an openhearted, generous, gregarious people who aspire for peace and prosperity. If you read only one book this semester, make it this one.

When it comes to the details and complicated history of the Israeli/Palestine conflict, I am admittedly shamefully ignorant. I was always aware of the conflict in a general sense of course, but I never took the time to really research it beyond what I heard on the news or remembered learning in school (which was very little).

Not that this book qualifies as research, of course, but it was a good starting point, and I found it quite informative and eye opening.

I read some reviews of the book both on GR and elsewhere, and some people felt the author left out some important facts and leaned too heavily towards one side. Not being well-read on the subject, it's difficult for me to discern just how unbiased the author really was. But, to me, it felt as though he presented the history in a manner that showed equal compassion to both Israel and Palestine. I feel I came away with a much better understanding of each perspective, and just how deeply rooted that perspective is in each culture's history.

I'm going to be a bit lame here and cut and paste the book description from its back cover, as I think it does a better job at a synopsis than I could do myself:

"In 1967, not long after the Six Day War, three young Arabs ventured into the town of Ramla, in Jewish Israel. They were on a pilgrimage to see their separate childhood homes, from which their families had been driven out nearly twenty years before during the Israeli war for independence. Only one was welcomed: Bashir Al-Khayri was greeted at the door by a young woman named Dalia.

This act of kindness in the face of years of animosity and warfare is the starting point for a remarkable true story of two families, one Arab, one Jewish; an unlikely friendship that encompasses the entire modern history of Israelis and Palestinians and that holds in its framework a hope for true peace and reconciliation for the region."

A difficult read in terms of subject matter, but also an important one.
Recommended.

This is the story of Dalia and Bashir. Dalia lives in the house where the lemon tree grows in the backyard. Back in the day when Israel was just formed, Bashir's family was kicked to the curb and thrown out of their house, since they were no longer allowed to live in the new Israel. They all lived in tents and stuff. Their lives sucked.

Dalia and the Jewish people of the new Israel just walked through the streets and got to claim whatever house they wanted back in the day. Dahlia's family really liked Bashir's house and best of all they didn't have to pay a dime. Bashir and his family was not so happy about that. One day Bashir decides to go back and visit Dalia in the house and they become friends of sorts.

Now Bashir and the Palestinians bomb the crap out of the Israelies because they are pissed off. And the people of Israel start bombing back. We as Americans take the Jews side because, lets face it, they have good delis.

I think this book has boring dialog. Do people really talk that way? Maybe Dalia and Bashir should just chill out and become a bit more fun. The history in this book was so dry and boring! But history presented in a textbook format has always bored me to tears.

I did learn more about the whole situation and honestly think both sides are ridiculous. Life is unfair. Why do they both seem to think they will find some justice? It is about compromise at this point.

But I have always been surprised at how OK most people are that the Palestinians were just thrown out of their houses and country for some new country to essentially start up. That situation was pretty damn disgraceful to me but they need to move on at this point. Bashir needs to accept things and have peace. Hello, Native Americans are opening casinos laughing at white Americans as they hand over their money. Do something creative like that Bashir and stop your crazy terrorism!

What a wreck of a situation...the book will do some explaining. If you can tolerate lots of straightforward history, this may be the book for you.

"Arpa eken hiçbir zaman buğday biçemez. Ve nefret eken de hiçbir zaman sevgi biçemez."
4,5/5⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Limon Ağacı'nı tam anlamıyla bir roman olarak bekliyordum ama meğerse daha ziyade bir şehrin tarihçesini okurken buldum kendimi. İlk başta bu durum beni biraz rahatsız etti çünkü kitabın ana başlığı olan Bir Arap, Bir Yahudi ve Ortadoğu'nun Kalbi cümlesinden sonra soluksuz okuyacağım bir hikaye bekliyordum. Kitabın türüne önce pek alışamasam da daha sonrasında aslında Beşir ve Dalia'nın aslında gerçek yaşam hikayelerine değinildiğini görünce ve aslında Kudüs'ün İsrail halkı tarafından kuşatılması hakkında en baştan sona detaylı bilgiye sahip olmadığımı fark edince kitabı tamamen farklı bir havayla merakla okumaya başladım. Bir tarafta yaşadığı topraklar Yahudiler tarafından işgal edilen ve babasının kendi elleriyle inşa ettiği evinden sürünen Filistinli Arap Beşir, diğer yandan ailesi Nazi katliamından kaçmış olan İsrailli Dalia'nın hikayesinin kesişmesini okuyoruz. Aslında kitapta ikisinin birbirine nefretlik düşman olmaları gerekirken seneler boyunca süren iyimserlikle dolu dostluklarını hayran olarak okudum. Kitap bana gerçekten bilgi olarak çok fazla şey kattı. Yazar muazzam bir araştırmayla kitabı okurlara sunuyor. Yahudilerin bu kuşatma sürecinde Filistlinlerle olan kavgasına dair her adıma dair detaylı bilgiler veriyor. Bu bilgileri de kendime kattığım için Dalia ve Beşir haricindeki kısımları da büyük ilgiyle okudum. Kitap gerçekten tek kelimeyle harikaydı. Kesinlikle okumanızı öneririm. Umarım benzer tarzdan kitaplarla daha sık karşılaşıp okurum..

The centuries long conflict between the Jewish and Arab people and of the Israeli/Palestine conflict has dominated headlines for years and many books - fiction and non-fiction - many of which are slanted to one side or the other, have been written on this topic. This book, however, tells a true story and seems to honestly give the story as it unfolds without leaning heavily toward one side of the conflict.

It is told in the voices of Dalia, an Israeli, and Bashir, an Arab, who have both lived in the same home with the same lemon tree growing in their yard. They forge a most unlikely friendship even though wars are raging and violence is prominent throughout the area. Given the background in their lives of violence, mistrust and misunderstanding, this friendship is pretty amazing.

This epic tale of truth goes though the history of the area, the declaration of Israel as a recognized nation to the expulsion of Arabs from their homes on to multiple wars with each side claiming justified action. Yet Dalia and Bashir's true life friendship does portray some measure of hope for an eventual resolution and it shows the conflict from a more personal viewpoint on both sides.

I highly recommend this book for those interested in a deeper understanding of this conflict and these two groups of people both vying for ownership and sovereignty of the same land.

The Lemon Tree is a very fascinating read. While it contains a well-documented and thoroughly researched set of facts, it is also a very personal account of two people who have spent years agreeing to disagree. My poor description fails to do justice to their epic story. It is through their lives author Sandy Tolan puts under the microscope the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. I’ve only understood this part of history through the snippets of newspaper articles and fast-paced sound bites purported to be news coverage. While this is only one book, Tolan’s extensive bibliography is sure to point readers towards their own research.

Fairly meticulously researched. What is refreshing in this madness is that Tolan tells the story through the eyes of real people and lets the reader decide what to think - of course the subjectivity is present in Tolan's choice of which stories to tell, but he makes a very brave and thorough attempt to be as unbiased as possible.

Worth reading unless you cannot put aside your own prejudices about this topic.

I like reading books thatteach me about different people's points of view. Nothing of todays problems are black or white - there are always two sides.

A very moving account of a friendship between two young men that illuminates the Israeli - Palestinian conflict. I read this in 2007 or 2008 and have never forgotten it.

If you want a thorough, fair, and genuinely unbiased text about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the middle east, specifically at it's flashpoint over Israel, this book is EXACTLY what you are looking for. Normally, I reserve 5 stars only for those books that I would definitely read again. Well, I'm not sure I'd really read this one again because it is so dense (good be a VERY good textbook for a class on the middle east), but it was soooooo good that I couldn't in good faith deny it that 5th star.
The documentary begins in the early 1900's and goes up to post 9/11. I LOVED that Tolan a) put a human face on the conflict by making the documentary through the perspective of 2 very real and viable families and b) that he does not cast judgment or point blame for any history, merely states the facts as they happened and c) is painstakingly thorough with quotes and research on the politics of the area. I was amazed to discover how many truths I took for granted when perhaps the situation wasn't as clearly black/white aggressor/victim as I thought.

Full of history and detail, which I ADORE in this kind of genre. I am intrigued by the authenticity created by the author's documentary techniques. He/she (is Sandy male or female?) never assumes or creates a person's feelings or thoughts arbitrarily. Only if there is a written documentation that they felt a certain way about something will that be part of the story. Creates a very frank and honest telling of a very complicated and EXTREMELY biased socio-political situation. I loved it!

Oh, and just to clarify, this book is not the same as the film coming out. That one is fiction, this is documentary.