Two good but contrasting novels set in one of my favourite historical periods, the often overlooked British Mandate for Palestine. The Red Balcony, by the British/Jewish Jonathan Wilson is based on the unsolved murder of the prominent Jewish leader Haim Arlosoroff, a close aide of future Prime Minister Ben Gurion. The author skilfully blends fact with fiction, telling the story through the eyes of a fictional 'innocent abroad', Ivor Castle, a Britsh Jew who is employed as an assistant to the defense counsel in the trial of two men accused of the murder. He soon finds himself out of his depth, a pawn in others’ game.
Taut and fast-paced, the book presents a vivid depiction of the fraught and often chaotic Mandate period. Wilson was helped by coming across a book published only weeks after the end of the trial of the men accused of the murder, containing all the speeches and almost every aspect of the trial. This helped ensure a historical accuracy which was enhanced by his decision not to put words into the mouths of the historical characters, using only the speeches from the book.
The Parisian, too, provides a realistic and colourful portrait of the Mandate but, unlike The Red Balcony, it's a long book, reminiscent of a 19th or early 20th century novel - a slow read, a book to be wallowed in, but probably not for everyone. There are numerous digressions which have nothing to do with the main story but are mostly entertaining in their own right - a more commercially minded author would have saved some for follow-up novels. There are also regular untranslated uses of arabic and french phrases that some might find irritating - they add authentic colour to the story rather than contain anything vital to the plot.
The Parisian tells the story of Midhat Kamel, an Arab from Nablus who is sent to France for education during WW1 before returning to Nablus. Midhat is loosely based on Hammad’s own great-grandfather. The historical sweep covers a much longer period than The Red Balcony, including the Nebi Musa riots of 1920 - a key turning point of the book - and the start of the Great Arab Revolt in 1936 - that was the Arab name for it, today it would be called a Palestinian Intifada - and it's this aspect of the book that mainly impresses me: it's more accurate than several purported history books that I've read. Hammad achieved this by doing her own research, visiting the British government's Mandate archives, Israel's pre-state archives and, because the Arabs kept no records, interviewing Palestinians in the West Bank, either people who were there or their descendants.
A consistent pleasure of the book is its detailed evocation of this post-Ottoman world, a world in which Syria and Palestine do not represent entirely distinct places or identities. The result is a novel which, while it tells the story from the Arab point of view, humanises all sides and provides a nuanced portrait of the Mandate period. It's for that reason I would recommend it to anyone who likes historical fiction and doesn't mind a long read.