A Door in the Earth by Amy Waldman

 

I am always supporting the idea of journalists writing fiction. Especially when they approach topics of high political and social relevance. In some cases, they have the information and the practical skills allowing to reflect through fiction the worries and debates of our times.

Parveen, an anthropology anthropology student of Afghan origin, is returning as a volunteer at a women´s clinic tracing the footsteps of an American memoir. Still innerly mourning the death of her mother, she is enthusiastically trying to see with her own eyes how good intentions can make a difference in a part of the world unjustly accused of being a hotbed for terrorist and underdevelopment.

However, Parveen will be faced with a different, dramatic reality, as she is confronting the assumptions from the book. Soon, she will discover that almost everything is a work of fiction, and her dilemma is at what extent exposing the truth may actually fuel the stereotypes about Afghanistan. After all, the book changed the hearts of many people and denying its affirmations may have effects on the representations of local communities. It is the truth worth assuming in this case?

A Door in the Earth by Amy Waldman reads as a modern intellectual coming-of-age following a predictable logic. All the (many) characters in the story do play a role in the revelation, from Waheed, her host and the husband of the women who died in childbirth, in the honor of whom the women´s clinic was created by the author of the memoir. 

The dilemma of the characters, as well as the geopolitical context is related in an informed way. I do have some objections regarding the course of action - my main one is why Parveen didn´t try to contact the author directly and reclaim her findings, instead of just getting in touch with her teacher with the same aim, who shared publicly her worries. Also, in this case, it seemed that the author did not exist as a real character, except being an author.

What I really appreciated about the book though was the intellectual outline of the story, as well as the empathic yet non-hysterical approach to it. A journalist may know how to tackle with grace such sensitive topics.

Rating: 3.5 stars