Sign in with Facebook
Chrissie's Reviews > Born a Crime: Stories from a South African Childhood
Born a Crime: Stories from a South African Childhood
by
by
Chrissie's review
bookshelves: bio, race, south-africa, 2017-read, audible-uk, religion, returned, relationships, disliked
May 22, 2017
bookshelves: bio, race, south-africa, 2017-read, audible-uk, religion, returned, relationships, disliked
ETA: The more I think about this book after having finished it, the more annoyed I become. I have changed my rating to one star. I did not like this book. What tipped the balance for me is the "Go Hitler" chant. The author's explanation was not adequate and I found the whole episode inappropriately drawn.
******************
I was perpetually annoyed while reading this book. Perhaps this is my own fault. I misunderstood what its central focus was to be. It is less a book about growing up in South Africa than about adolescence, a dysfunctional family and physical abuse. In addition, I did not like the writing style.
The first section of the book does offer a bit on South African history but only in sweeping terms. Apartheid practices are viewed through personal events. We see how race and religion came to shape the author’s life. The book does not follow a strictly chronological order, and I found this at times confusing.
The central portion of the book deals with the author’s adolescence. Here the writing mirrors adolescent emotions. It is filled with swear words and smart aleck expressions. We hear of his problems with acne, dating and not fitting in. Drinking, hip-hop dancing, a disastrous prom night, bootlegging of CDs and DJ parties may interest others, but not me!
I came to understand the author and the strong bond he felt for his mother, but his mother’s behavior is not covered with adequate depth. While her strong religiosity is emphasized, these beliefs do not always fit well with her other life choices. This left me puzzled.
The final events of the book take a very dramatic turn. Ending on this note a reader may feel drawn to express sympathy and compassion. Does the exciting conclusion and the horror and sympathy all readers come to feel influence one’s rating of the book? My rating is based solely on my evaluation of the book and does not reflect the compassion I came to feel for the family.
The humor did not make me laugh, and I found the author’s philosophical generalizations sophomoric.
There is an all too long section on defecation. I found this disgusting. It should have been removed or at least shortened! The conjoining philosophical commentary is ridiculous. It is stated that when we defecate we are all on equal terms. Wow, I am terribly impressed with such remarkable wisdom. I am being sarcastic!
The author reads his own audiobook. The reading is clear and easy to follow. I think by listening to his words one better understand his emotions and what he wishes to convey.
I thought the book would have much more about life in South Africa and less about physical abuse in a dysfunctional family. The dramatic ending may appeal to some. The central portion will most certainly appeal more to young than to mature readers.
******************
I was perpetually annoyed while reading this book. Perhaps this is my own fault. I misunderstood what its central focus was to be. It is less a book about growing up in South Africa than about adolescence, a dysfunctional family and physical abuse. In addition, I did not like the writing style.
The first section of the book does offer a bit on South African history but only in sweeping terms. Apartheid practices are viewed through personal events. We see how race and religion came to shape the author’s life. The book does not follow a strictly chronological order, and I found this at times confusing.
The central portion of the book deals with the author’s adolescence. Here the writing mirrors adolescent emotions. It is filled with swear words and smart aleck expressions. We hear of his problems with acne, dating and not fitting in. Drinking, hip-hop dancing, a disastrous prom night, bootlegging of CDs and DJ parties may interest others, but not me!
I came to understand the author and the strong bond he felt for his mother, but his mother’s behavior is not covered with adequate depth. While her strong religiosity is emphasized, these beliefs do not always fit well with her other life choices. This left me puzzled.
The final events of the book take a very dramatic turn. Ending on this note a reader may feel drawn to express sympathy and compassion. Does the exciting conclusion and the horror and sympathy all readers come to feel influence one’s rating of the book? My rating is based solely on my evaluation of the book and does not reflect the compassion I came to feel for the family.
The humor did not make me laugh, and I found the author’s philosophical generalizations sophomoric.
There is an all too long section on defecation. I found this disgusting. It should have been removed or at least shortened! The conjoining philosophical commentary is ridiculous. It is stated that when we defecate we are all on equal terms. Wow, I am terribly impressed with such remarkable wisdom. I am being sarcastic!
The author reads his own audiobook. The reading is clear and easy to follow. I think by listening to his words one better understand his emotions and what he wishes to convey.
I thought the book would have much more about life in South Africa and less about physical abuse in a dysfunctional family. The dramatic ending may appeal to some. The central portion will most certainly appeal more to young than to mature readers.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Born a Crime.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
January 7, 2017
– Shelved
January 7, 2017
– Shelved as:
wishlist-b
January 7, 2017
– Shelved as:
bio
January 7, 2017
– Shelved as:
race
January 7, 2017
– Shelved as:
south-africa
January 9, 2017
– Shelved as:
to-read
January 17, 2017
– Shelved as:
wishlist-b
January 29, 2017
– Shelved as:
to-read
April 24, 2017
– Shelved as:
wishlist-b
May 17, 2017
– Shelved as:
own-unlistened
May 17, 2017
– Shelved as:
2017-read
May 17, 2017
– Shelved as:
audible-uk
May 21, 2017
–
Started Reading
May 21, 2017
– Shelved as:
religion
May 22, 2017
– Shelved as:
returned
May 22, 2017
– Shelved as:
relationships
May 22, 2017
–
Finished Reading
May 23, 2017
– Shelved as:
disliked
Comments Showing 1-50 of 192 (192 new)
message 1:
by
Manybooks
(new)
-
added it
May 22, 2017 12:23PM
Well, I have this listed as to read, but now I am not so sure.
reply
|
flag
Interesting review. Sorry to read you didn't care for the book. Even though the author and I couldn't be more different, I could relate with him on so many things. I loved the book and it really clicked with me. I think it's a book that you can't analyze too hard because it wasn't meant for that type of reading. He's sharing his experiences as a young man and child in South Africa. It wasn't meant to be a detailed history, but anecdotal because his experience was so unique. Its' obviously not a book for everyone but I'm happy to see you gave it a chance!
Uh, oh. Well I think I might like it, though not some of the details you mentioned, Chrissie. I already knew that it was about his personal experiences and his circumstances and those of his parents. I was planning to approach it as an autobiography. I've heard him talk a bit about it. I'm sorry that it didn't work for you.
Gundula and Hannah and Lisa, and particularly Lisa and Gundula for whom I know your sentiments in reference to antisemitism and Hitler and WW2, I realize after further consideration that one star best represents how I feel toward this book. Please see what I have added up at the top of the review!
Chrissie wrote: "Gundula and Hannah and Lisa, and particularly Lisa and Gundula for whom I know your sentiments in reference to antisemitism and Hitler and WW2, I realize after further consideration that one star b..."I think I will not bother, at least for now (a Go Hitler chant, I can do without).
Gundula, the episode I spoke of is not handled properly! The chant itself should have been used as little as possible, and certainly not several times! There is the possibility that on listening one gets MORE upset than when reading.
Chrissie wrote: "Gundula, the episode I spoke of is not handled properly! The chant itself should have been used as little as possible, and certainly not several times! There is the possibility that on listening on..."Who was using the chant? I know that during apartheid, there were a large number if White South Africans who supported Hitler and Nazi philosophies,
Fans of a dancer called Hitler. The performance was at a Jewish school. I found the way the event was written about, strung together and that which is explained and discussed inadequate.
Chrissie wrote: "Fans of a dancer called Hitler. The performance was at a Jewish school. I found the way the event was written about, strung together and that which is explained and discussed inadequate."I cannot believe that someone would call himself Hitler and that this would even be allowed for a so-called professional name (and the fact that this was performed at a Jewish school is flabbergasting). Was the dancer Jewish himself? But even if that had been the case, I would consider a dancer, I mean any performer, anyone chosing the name of Hitler as problematic at best. Yuck!
I'm sorry you didn't care for it. It was not a deep intellectually written book. I don't think it is meant to think too deeply about it. He is a comedienne and wrote what must work for him.
Manybooks wrote: "Chrissie wrote: "Fans of a dancer called Hitler. The performance was at a Jewish school. I found the way the event was written about, strung together and that which is explained and discussed inade..."The point of that section was how South African parents (particularly black parents) named their children. There was. a lack of education in regards to the terrors of the Holocaust, and the Holocaust was also contrasted with Apartheid in South Africa. It wasn't meant to be out-right anti-Semitic. Did it end up being that way? Yes. But the author explains all of this. There is context.
Hannah wrote: "Manybooks wrote: "Chrissie wrote: "Fans of a dancer called Hitler. The performance was at a Jewish school. I found the way the event was written about, strung together and that which is explained a..."Actually, parents naming their children after Hitler and other such entities is not restricted to South Africa; it is unfortunately a common trend (and is likely one of the reasons why in many European countries, there are actually rules about what name one can name a child, but even that can be and often is an issue as while preventing parents from calling a child a name such as Hitler, Stalin and the like is definitely a good thing, there have also been cases like in for example France and Germany, where parents were prevented from naming children names not deemed French or German enough).
I do think though that parents have a responsibility not to name children (not to saddle their children with) names that could be or that will be controversial or problematic for them. In my opinion, naming a child after Hitler is akin to child abuse.
Manybooks wrote: "Hannah wrote: "Manybooks wrote: "Chrissie wrote: "Fans of a dancer called Hitler. The performance was at a Jewish school. I found the way the event was written about, strung together and that which..."Yes, I know that. The difference is that people in the western countries you named (France and Germany) are very well of the implications of that name. Black parents who grew up in Apartheid South Africa did not. That is the key difference. Of course I don't condone anyone naming their kid Hitler. It's horrible and offensive. However, in this case we need to understand the instance. It is not the same as someone in France or Germany naming their kid that. It's just not. Black South Africans grew up disadvantaged, to say the least, in terms of education and exposure to the Jewish culture, among many other things. It's clear from the author's writing that they didn't understand the implications of the name. It's hard to blame parents who don't have all the information.
And just to clarify, I'm not excusing this kid's parents for naming him Hitler. I am, however, saying that I understand how something like that could happen in this particular situation.
Good review and explanation of why you didn't like it, Chrissie. I obviously enjoyed it a lot more, although I did explain that I had expected a chronological memoir rather than a series of essays, which is what it is. It's funny - I don't remember anything about Hitler or about defecation! You may be right about audio vs the written word. It's possible to turn pages quickly, although I may simply have conveniently forgotten. I was more taken with his strong, unusual mother and the inventive, if dubious (and illegal) ways he managed to make a bit of a living.
I thought his reasoning for why a child would be named Hitler's would make perfect sense. Offensive, yes, but then I read the book, rather than listened to it.
I cannot give you chapter titles b/c I listened to the audiobook and did not note them down. The part about defecation is very early on in the book.
The chant mantra is much further on when he is pirating CDs and DJing. "Go Hitler" was used by the fans of a dancer, called Hitler. Trevor explains that each country has its "bad guys" and that Hitler is demonized in Europe and America, but in Africa he is just "another strong man from the history books." I copied that quote while I was listening. This section disturbed me immensely. I see Hitler as one that we should all despise, everywhere and in all countries.
OK, readers see this differently. It very much disturbed me.
I'm sorry you found part of the book so offensive. As someone who teaches immigrants from areas where education is spotty, I can certainly see how a teenager and his peers would not understand how the modern world views Hitler. I would have to say the majority of my students, who span the globe, have never been taught world history let along the Holocaust. I've had the experience of mentioning Hitler in the context of what I was teaching and had many students frown at me because the name meant little to them. And that reaction would come from students who had consistent formal schooling. Also, Apartheid South Africa did not have an abundance of qualified teachers for the colored schools. So I would challenge anyone who read's Chrissie's review to think about the 'Hitler' episode from another perspective that would put the reader in that historical and cultural background. I love Chrissie's reviews, but Trevor Noah provided a great opportunity to step outside of our cultural norms and view life through the lens of Apartheid. They had their own fish to fry and Hitler was just a name with no meaning attached.
I had this marked "to read" became so annoyed with what I was hearing about the book that I decided not to bother. I'm glad I didn't. I think the things that bothered you would also have bothered me.
I'm not a fan of his to begin with so that factors into my decision not to give him more money. However, I tutor students from Central Asia who also do not have great education. I understand how our cultural norms color what we view as humorous or not. The world over, however, knew who and what Hitler was, including South Afikkans and to make light of it in his, now, was a choice that he deliberately made for a laugh. Today, in this climate. That is why it is so great to have everyone's opinion. I appreciate that Chrissie was bold enough to give this book a bad rating. Not enough people on GRs do that!
Thanks, Chrissie, for the addition to your review and your additional message posts.Well that content is certainly not what I was expecting. If I do read it (library book for me so I wouldn't be directly giving more money) I'm now forewarned.
Thanks, Chrissie. Though this title is so popular, I have had a feeling that it wouldn't appeal to me if I tackled it. Now I know for sure.
Mackey wrote: "I'm not a fan of his to begin with so that factors into my decision not to give him more money. However, I tutor students from Central Asia who also do not have great education. I understand how ou..."Ahh, I still feel I learned some points about Apartheid that I previously was unaware of. Not all the memoir was a laugh and that part came across as another event where cultures clash and therefore the inference that a broader education was lacking. Many of my students are unclear about who Hitler was and the majority of my students parents are illiterate, so they really don't know. I don't want to belabor the point on Chrissie's review, but the only global figures my students know are Bob Marley, Michael Jackson, and maybe Nelson Mandela and Gandhi. They are the more recent past. Unfortunately the younger generation is losing touch with WWII and what happened more than 70 years ago.
I just got my Kindle copy out again to try to figure out why I forgot the Hitler part. It is a long section so I think I'll add it to my own review instead of chew up your air time. :)Incidentally, it's a real name the kids parents gave the kid, not a nickname given by his friends.
At university (University of Waterloo, when I was just starting my Master's), A PhD student from Pakistan kept giving me the Nazi salute and when I finally told him to cease he was surprised and thought he was honouring me. It turned out that in Pakistan, while students had been taught about Hitler, they had generally not been taught about Nazi atrocities and definitely not about the Holocaust (the student was aghast when I enlightened him as he really did not know and had been taught that Hitler was a dictator, but generally benevolent and a great man). And this is likely NOT even all that uncommon in many developing countries.
Manybooks wrote: "At university (University of Waterloo, when I was just starting my Master's), A PhD student from Pakistan kept giving me the Nazi salute and when I finally told him to cease he was surprised and th..."Excellent observation, and is worded much better than what I said in an earlier post. If anything (or one of many things), this part of the book sheds light onto how we should be teaching certain elements (e.g. the Holocaust) better. And to that I'll add Apartheid because I knew some basic information about it before reading this book but it was pitiful. Reading this has made me want to learn more.
My computer connection has been down for than 24 hours. Sorry for not responding sooner. Fran, I really tried to be careful in how I expressed my displeasure. I DO understand how uneducated Africans may reason, but the author did not take this as an opportunity to express the need for better information. He instead reinforced the value of their views. This disturbed me. He definitely did not have to repeat the obnoxious chant the number of times he did. This is his book; he handled the topic as he wished and I found it unsatisfactory.
Gundula, I agree with you about usage of the name Hitler! Saddling a child with the name Hitler is proof of the need for better education.
Mackey, it makes me happy that you tell me you understand my pov. I cannot just be quiet when a book like this becomes so popular. It makes me mad, and I cannot keep my mouth shut.
Lisa, I am sure it will disturb you.
John, glad I could help. My anger grew and grew and finally it exploded.
Pattie, I never implied it was a nickname.
This book should have been used as an opportunity to teach rather than to perpetuate ignorance.
I disliked the language. It was vulgar. I disliked the mix of humor and sophomoric philosophizing. I think he could have emphasized more the mistakes he made. I am not enamored by a guy who copies and sells CDs. On the whole he seems proud of himself, and this irritates me! He displays little contrition and little awareness of the mistakes made.
I also disliked the cinematic and "poor, pity me" ending.
This book did not work for me at all. I am not going too keep my mouth shut just because everyone else loves it. Thanks, Mackey, I feel a bit braver.
Chrissie wrote: "My computer connection has been down for than 24 hours. Sorry for not responding sooner. Fran, I really tried to be careful in how I expressed my displeasure. I DO understand how uneducated Afric..."
Why should you claim to like a book simply because many others do or because it tells an important story? I have certainly hated books most seem to like and vice versa and there is nothing wrong with this. And you hsve certainly shown in detail why the novel does not work for you.
But I also do not generally get mad when books I disliked become popular because I also realise that everyone has different tastes and I also know I have specific likes and dislikes and that some indeed go contrary to the staus quo so to speak.
Laura, I didn't see your message. I do understand how people might think in reference to giving their child the name of Hitler, but in this book Trevor does not take the opportunity to educate or to show the need for consideration of other people's values.
Gundula, sometimes it is just easier to keep your mouth shut. I don't like arguments.I have never and will never claim to like a book I don't like. Or vice versa.
Sometimes you listen to others and question one's own thoughts. Here, the more I think, the angrier I become and the more sure I am of my own views.
Chrissie wrote: "Gundula, sometimes it is just easier to keep your mouth shut. I don't like arguments.I have never and will never claim to like a book I don't like. Or vice versa.
Sometimes you listen to others ..."
I do not think this story would suit me as well.
Charlene, thanks.
Hannah wrote: "Manybooks wrote: "At university (University of Waterloo, when I was just starting my Master's), A PhD student from Pakistan kept giving me the Nazi salute and when I finally told him to cease he wa..."This book could have been used as an implement to educate. The author failed to do this in relation to Hitler. In the episode where Trevor is screaming at the woman who employed him and she is screaming back at him, he supported their right to dance. Not a word of apology. He says nothing to show the inappropriateness of screaming "Go Hitler!" in a Jewish school. There is no discussion of mistakes having been made. This is why I say, "The author's explanation was not adequate and I found the whole episode inappropriately drawn." Now, when writing this book he could have indicated his mistakes and expressed an understanding for the Jewish response. By now he certainly should have realized ho w inappropriate that was. Now, couldn't he say he was sorry?!
I have tried to express my view and answer questions. In the beginning I did not want to reveal to much; I didn't want to reveal spoiler information. It is so tricky explaining properly when you cannot explain everything. I hope I have made my view clear.Of course I accept others may react differently.
I guess the only thing I'd say to your, very valid point, is that apologizing for the things he said or did as a boy aren't what this book is about. He's telling a story from his childhood, the way it happened, he wants the reader to see this warts and all. In this moment he's retelling he has no idea what is going on and no idea what this lady is so offended by so he makes what he thinks is the logical assumption that she must a racist taking offense at the tribal dance moves they're doing. Mostly because, understandbly, he can't figure out what else the problem could be. His friends name is Hitler, and Hitler is a name that doesn't have the same ramifications it does in other countries (and I'm guessing it probably still doesn't). There's literally no reason for him to know what this woman is carrying on about.My point is, he's not offended by the name, no one in his world is, so I don't think he has anything to apologize for. He didn't apologize to this woman then because he had no idea what was even happening and I think he's telling the story to point out the lack of education and the different priorities of the people in his world.
I think he says at one point when he's explaining the Hitler thing is that they, meaning his people, had and have bigger problems than worrying about offending other minority groups or oppressed religions. What was happening to him in that moment was, for him, another example of white people trying to keep him and his friends down.
To me the story is about perception, the way he saw this woman and the way she saw him, the way South African blacks view/ed South African white etc.
The book DOES educate, or at least it educated me, it just doesn't educate about the Holocaust or who Hitler was because that doesn't have anything to do with Trevor's story.
Sara, the book doesn't clear up past mistakes. It doesn't take every opportunity that could be used to teach. Now, with better education and understanding, Trevor still cannot bother to say he's sorry or to even express regret. Fine we can agree to disagree.
Chrissie wrote: "Hannah wrote: "Manybooks wrote: "At university (University of Waterloo, when I was just starting my Master's), A PhD student from Pakistan kept giving me the Nazi salute and when I finally told him..."Good point! If he even now when writing his memoirs does not realise how inapproiate chanting go Hitler at a Jewish school was, he has not learned anything at all.
Sara wrote: "I guess the only thing I'd say to your, very valid point, is that apologizing for the things he said or did as a boy aren't what this book is about. He's telling a story from his childhood, the way..."Even if he is NOT offended by the name Hitler, if he does not understand even now why Jews would be, he is both soneone who has obviously no empathy or little empathy for those who suffered under the Nazis and as such somone I would at best regard askance.
Manybooks wrote: "Chrissie wrote: "Hannah wrote: "Manybooks wrote: "At university (University of Waterloo, when I was just starting my Master's), A PhD student from Pakistan kept giving me the Nazi salute and when I..."I agree. The whole tone of the book gives the same message. He regrets nothing. He just wants us to feel sorry for the injustices committed against him before and after the apartheid. Being mistreated should teach one to feel compassion for others who have suffered. I do not see that here.
Chrissie wrote: "Being mistreated should teach one to feel compassion for others who have suffered."This I agree with 100%.
Chrissie wrote: "Sara, the book doesn't clear up past mistakes. It doesn't take every opportunity that could be used to teach. Now, with better education and understanding, Trevor still cannot bother to say he's so..."Chrissie, that's not what this book was for. Also, I think he realizes the mistakes he made, and to me that was very clear in reading this book. And I think realizing his mistakes were implied. Again, this book wasn't meant to be an apology to any one or any group in particular. Also, I don't know if not regretting things in his life is a bad thing because these events shaped who he is today. Was everything he did/said/was involved in good? No. He knows that and as a reader, I knew that he now knows that - even if at the time he didn't.
It may also help that I was familiar with his work/personality before reading this book. That context seems like it is what makes the difference for people who love the book and hate the book (or at least one of the factors). It's a shame that it came off the way it did for you but I appreciate reading your thoughts.
Hannah wrote: "t may also help that I was familiar with his work/personality before reading this book. That context seems like it is what makes the difference for people who love the book and hate the book (or at least one of the factors)."That's good news for me because I have heard him interviewed about his childhood. The "crime" in the book's title and more.
I always appreciate the honesty of your reviews, Chrissie. You have a gift of putting into words exactly how you feel and why. I wish I could do that as well as you do.
Hannah wrote: "Chrissie wrote: "Sara, the book doesn't clear up past mistakes. It doesn't take every opportunity that could be used to teach. Now, with better education and understanding, Trevor still cannot both..."A book need not be for just one thing!
One should not have to go into a book with previous knowledge to grasp the message conveyed. A book should speak for itself. I am basing my thoughts only on this book. I hope he is different from the impression he conveys here. Furthermore, as I stated in my review I am rating the book, not the man nor his family.
I am glad we can talk about it Hannah and that we both can share why we think as we do.
Kim wrote: "I always appreciate the honesty of your reviews, Chrissie. You have a gift of putting into words exactly how you feel and why. I wish I could do that as well as you do."Kim, thank you. I really press myself to specify what it is that I love or get annoyed with. Doing this can be quite a drain. As I write I help figure out what has gone on in my head. When I see the lines out in front of me I know if I have pinpointed accurately why I react as I do. With this book it was very difficult because the attitude that comes through to me is expressed throughout the entire book. I was very upset. about almost every aspect of this book. Hearing his voice didn't help either.
If I don't write a review the whole reading experience goes down the drain into oblivion.
Chrissie wrote: "Hannah wrote: "Chrissie wrote: "Sara, the book doesn't clear up past mistakes. It doesn't take every opportunity that could be used to teach. Now, with better education and understanding, Trevor st..."I definitely understand that, Chrissie. I can see how people can take away the ideas and feelings from the book as you did.
I agree, I enjoy having book discussions even if are feelings are different. :)
Oh, it is so nice talking about books with polite and kind people. (((Hannah))))No we don't have to think all the same.!
Chrissie wrote: "Oh, it is so nice talking about books with polite and kind people. (((Hannah))))No we don't have to think all the same.!"
And how boring it would be if we all thought the same!
Cheers to discussing politely!
