A book of stereotypes and inconsistencies
It could have made a good book, this story of the descendants of the crypto-Jews in New Mexico. Not knowing much about this specific subject, I can’t say if this a fake or a real story, the author herself says p.319 that it is debated; while she relied on the work of Stanley M. Hordes, the former New Mexico State Historian, academic scholars of higher renown than Mr. Hordes have denounced it as a mere reconstruction of a mythical past without much grounding. On the other hand, since I have done quite a bit of research on the Inquisition, and since one of my ancestors was a Portuguese Jew who moved to Bordeaux, I felt very interested when I heard about this book, and read the praise about it in various newspapers, the more so because I had already read a couple of good books by Mary Morris.
To say I was disappointed is an understatement. Not that it is not well written, as is usually the case with her, not that the plot is uninteresting, although the trick of alternating chapters between the 15/16th centuries and the 20th century is just that, a trick, somewhat banal and overdone. But it is a book full of stereotypes. Historical stereotypes, first and foremost. There is no attempt to try to understand the history of those years in Spain and Portugal, to replace the Inquisition in its historical, social and economic context. The chapter on the House of Mendes (ch.23) could have mentioned why the Mendes had a privileged status, why they were protected by the Pope and by the King of Portugal, why some of the Portuguese and Spanish Jews were key members of the power elite of these countries, why the Portuguese court was ambivalent and even resisted the Inquisition. But Ms. Morris has a binary view of history: the good guys and the bad guys. The Jews are good guys, the Christians are bad guys, period. There is not a single positive non-Jew character in this book; Bernadine could have been one, but in the end, she betrays her mistress. This is not an historical book, it is a tale for children. Not a word (except a few lines in ch.3) about the persecution of the Muslims and the crypto-Muslims, which was worse than the persecution of the Jews: they were more numerous, less useful, and perceived as more threatening. But this is not Ms. Morris’ story, and probably not the story that the readers she targets want to hear. When she mentions (p.320) that Richard Zimler’s The Last Kabbalist of Lisbon (not a bad mystery novel, but certainly not an accurate historical book) was one of her main sources, one can immediately understand that her research was not very serious. There is no denying that the Inquisition killed many Jews, but this is not a reason for bending history for whatever purpose.
In addition to these historical stereotypes, the modern characters are also stereotypes. Why is it necessary for Rachel's mother to be a Holocaust survivor or Miguel to drive a low-rider? Why did Miguel's mother have to be a rape victim? The connection with astronomy is strained and does not make much sense. The description of Morocco (ch.10 & p.141) is right out of a tourist guide, with all the typical orientalist clichés. Although I know that country fairly well, I have no idea who the ”Berber dancers of Fes” are (p.77), except maybe a show in a touristy restaurant, and I am shocked to read that Tangiers, which was founded by the Phoenicians, is a city of “desert nomads” (p.83), another (American?) stereotype.
After these shocking stereotypes, the numerous inconsistencies in the book appear almost minor: a disease that affects only Jews (p.238), really? the hoax about DNA identification of Iberian Jews (p.313)? Dr. Eduardo Torres is from Cordoba (p.238) or from Girona (p.262)/Gerona (p.15), two cities 1000kms apart? Why is Federico de Torres named Federico Cordero de Torres (p.15), bearing the name of Inez? On p.219, Sofia did not make love with Alejandro, but on p.239 she is not a virgin anymore: how come? Sofia’s sons saw her and their father taken away by the Inquisition as crypto-Jews (p.265/266), but Sofia decided not to tell them that they were of Jewish descent (p.282): were they stupid?
The story of Elena is full of inconsistencies. When Elena gave birth to Miguel, MG, Roberto’s wife, was also close to delivery (p. 308), but Roberto got MG pregnant and married her only when Elena was already away in New York (p.56) dancing with the New York City Ballet (or is it The American Ballet Theater p.308?): does it make sense? Elena went to New York when she was 17 (p.144) for one year and stayed: it was on the scholarship from the School of American Ballet (p.229) (elsewhere named American Ballet Extension School, p.56), right? But six weeks after giving birth to Miguel, she was already dancing with the American Ballet Theatre itself (p.308): a quick promotion? Or did she go to NYC just after being raped (p.229)? But, wait, she spent a summer in New York when she was 14 (P.144): wasn’t it already on a dancing scholarship? This is all very confusing.
And, by the way, it’s pain au chocolat, not pan (p.188).
Obviously, the writer, her editor and her reviewers don’t care much about details. And they love stereotypes. What a pity! It could have been a good book…