This is an older book penned by Updike. Strangely enough, I had never come across it before. And I can sort of fathom the reason. It's not that the book is bad per se. It's just rather "mediocre". When you consider the other remarkable works that Updike has produced, this particular one is somewhat underwhelming.

I must admit that Updike did a decent job of depicting Ahmad's thoughts and emotions prior to his decisions. He didn't reduce them to something trivial just to conform to our often overly simplistic notions about how a person turns into a terrorist. However, for me, that alone wasn't sufficient to elevate the book beyond a 3-star rating.

Perhaps if I had come to this book without the high expectations set by Updike's previous masterpieces, I might have had a more favorable opinion. But as it stands, it just doesn't quite measure up.

The second attempt in a month - the second DNF (Did Not Finish) at page twenty. Let's put it this way: with John Updike, it seems, I just don't click. Apparently, the biological clocks don't sync. What remains completely unchanged, bearing in mind that he has already passed away.

Okay, let's put the dark wooden bookshelf into the corner - the book didn't grip me, the style turned out to be outdated and unappealing, so it's a DNF, a 1* and we calmly forget about it.

Perhaps it's just not the right time or the right mindset for me to appreciate the works of this particular author. Maybe in the future, with a different perspective or a more open heart, I'll give it another try and discover the hidden gems within those pages. But for now, it's time to move on and explore other literary treasures that await.

How is this guy so successful? It's truly baffling.

This book is absolute crap. We have a young, utterly stereotypical Muslim kid whose only redeeming feature seems to be that he has an Irish mother. And, of course, Updike feels the need to describe her hair and temper every three pages.

The story then goes on to show how this kid is seduced into a terrorist cell, which is a tired and overused trope.

Adding to the mix are the stereotypical, completely unbelievable Black high-school aged reluctant prostitutes. Their characters are so one-dimensional and lack any real depth or authenticity.

And let's not forget the stereotypical, completely unbelievable sympathetic and apparently telepathic English teachers. It all just feels so forced and unconvincing.

Overall, this book fails to deliver on any level and is a prime example of lazy writing and poor character development.

John Updike, the author of novels such as Centaur (1963) and The Witches of Eastwick (1984), presents a contemporary theme in Terrorist. He explores the ongoing confrontation between the Arab world and the Jewish world, with the American territory as the battleground. Moreover, the main character clearly differentiates between Christians, representatives of Islam, and other people, seeing them as the enemies of Allah.

Updike portrays a disoriented character, a young Muslim man with an absent Egyptian father and an Irish mother. Unable to find himself in the so-called values of American society, Ahmad devotes himself entirely to the study of the Quran and the teachings of Muhammad, being drawn into a blind game invoked by Jihad.

This work reflects on the complex issues of cultural conflict and religious extremism. It makes readers think about the consequences of such divisions and the need for better understanding and dialogue among different cultures and religions.

Source: Replica 9/11, anytime… – SemneBune http://semnebune.ro/2012/replica-911-...

It was an arduous task for me to complete this novel. The reason behind this was that Updike seemingly had no clue about what he was discussing throughout his work. His portrayal of Islam was founded on a "stereotypical" kind of Muslim. He misused and misinterpreted a religion followed by billions of people.

Let's specifically talk about his use of "El hotama" which is from the Muslims' Holy book, "El qoran", and other words from the quran. I noticed how inaccurately he translated its words and also how he omitted the first section of "El hotama". It was truly disturbing.

However, I still hope to read more of Updike's works. This is because I feel that perhaps this particular novel wasn't the most appropriate one to begin with. Maybe there are other works of his that will offer a more accurate and in-depth exploration of different cultures and religions. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and see if there are better literary gems waiting for me to discover.

I don't think I can truly offer a judgment on whether it is an accurate portrayal of a would-be terrorist. However, I did really relish this depiction of an alienated teen. Using the British term, one could say he is "socially excluded." After all, aren't many teens in a similar state?

Many years ago, I read one or two of the Rabbit books. I didn't find them overly captivating unless the reader happened to be like Rabbit himself. Ahmad, on the other hand, is a far more relatable character. I also liked the distinct New Jersey flavor of it all.

Yet, I can't quite determine if the choice of naming Tylenol for the minor African-American character is excessive. It keeps bothering me and nags at the back of my mind.

Overall, despite some uncertainties, I found this work to be an interesting exploration of a particular type of teen experience.

Can one give up one's life for an ideal? How can one's convictions become stronger than the instinct of survival, the desire for a future? Ahmad is an eighteen-year-old in a high school in New Jersey, and he is Muslim by choice, not by the education he received. His father has abandoned him, and the Western customs of his mother are as reproachable to him as those of his schoolmates dedicated to immorality. Indoctrinated by the imam of the Quranic school he attends, who fills his mind with ideas of violence and oppression, he follows the projects that the imam chooses for him until he approaches suicide missions. In reality, no matter how religious and perfectionist Ahmad is, he is not very convincing as a would-be terrorist: his motives never emerge, as if they elude Updike first - and it is not improbable. More profound is the school counselor who follows Ahmad step by step (and has an adulterous relationship with his mother): resigned to his own life with his overweight wife and a series of students passing in front of him, he is more credible, more convincing; however, he becomes almost omnipotent and omniscient at the end, and it is an exaggeration.

I was an extremely big Updike fan during my twenties and thirties. Now, thirty years later, I had to read "Terrorist" for a book group and was really looking forward to it. However, I am completely flabbergasted that this is the same author whom I adored. Granted, I can't remember all the plots of the books from that long ago, but I do recall him being clever, witty, and having great insight into the American psyche and libido.

"The Terrorist" is so ordinary that it seems like a first novel. Clearly, the subject is new to him, and Updike did research for this novel, but the people are embarrassing stereotypes.

The setting is New Jersey, just outside NYC, of course. And then there is Ahmad, the loner only child of an Egyptian father who leaves when he is 3 and a very liberal, non-religious, red-headed Irish mother who seems a bit loose. There is also Jack Levy, Ahmad's anxiety-ridden Jewish guidance counselor, and his Lutheran wife Beth, who I suppose is to represent the fat American in a jogging suit who spends her day on the La-Z-Boy chair watching soap operas and can't stop eating cookies.

Joryleen Grant is Ahmad's black gospel-singer-turned-prostitute schoolmate whom Ahmad has a mad crush on, and her bullying boyfriend and sometimes john, called "Tylenol". Shaikh Rashid is the local Yemeni cleric and a substitute father figure who teaches religion to the devout Ahmad. He encourages Ahmad to learn to drive a truck after graduation rather than go to college. Charlie Chebab is a cynical Lebanese American who is the brother figure who teaches Ahmad how to drive a truck among other things. Hermione is Beth Levy's sister who works for Homeland Security in DC.

You can pretty much figure out the plot from the characters. There is no introspection or internal struggle. Aside from the scenes inside the baptist church, this has been a major disappointment.

So, in the academic program I'm enrolled in at my high school, during Senior Year, you get to pick a topic for a substantial essay, known as the ~*Extended Essay*~. Apparently, it's a rather significant undertaking. Or something like that.... Anyhow, I decided to write an analytical paper on this particular novel. My research question is: "How do Updike's Western prejudices influence his portrayal of the main Muslim character, Ahmad?" Of course, since my rough draft was completed in a complete rush, I haven't really written out my ideas in the way I'd prefer yet, but I have my thoughts generally formulated.

To start with, Updike is an outstanding prose writer. His originality of expression is undoubtedly what has earned him such literary acclaim. This is the only book of his that I've read, but he is truly, truly talented. There were moments in this novel when I'd read a description and have to set the book aside for a while because it was so excellent. It needed time to sink in. And to be honest, I'm probably one of those readers who cares a bit more about the style of writing and the prose itself than the plot. That's really the only reason the book received 4 stars.

However, aside from that, I had some serious issues with this novel. Firstly, the only trait Ahmad seems to possess is his piety. There were a few instances where he experienced lust or doubt, but even those emotions could be traced back to his religion. There was absolutely no other dimension to Ahmad other than the fact that he was a Muslim and, eventually, a terrorist. The secondary characters, such as Mr. Levy and even his overweight wife Beth, had more character development than Ahmad. Updike did a poor job of humanizing Ahmad's story and constructing a complete plot line围绕 his life. (Oh, and also: can someone explain to me how Ahmad became so fundamentalist when he's lived with only his liberal, free-spirited mother since the age of 6? That doesn't make any sense, and it wasn't explained.)

The dialogue was clumsy and unrealistic. The dialogue read like his prose. I loathe it when writers do this. The characters all speak in the same way as the writer writes. So, there were a few drawbacks there.

The ending was rather disappointing. It was fairly predictable. The plot was kind of mediocre. As far as a terrorism book goes, I have no doubt that someone could have told a far more engaging story than Updike.

Truly, the one main attraction of this book is Updike's descriptions and his use of language. If you appreciate that enough to endure the 300 pages of mediocre storytelling, then it's worth a read.

I’ve heard a great deal about John Updike, mainly about how outstanding a writer and storyteller he is. However, I might have begun with the wrong work in this case. While I do admit that he is extremely talented in creating vivid word pictures, the actual story failed to captivate me.

I appreciated the contrast between Ahmad and Jack. Both were dissatisfied and yearned for a more meaningful life. Nevertheless, I didn't like the way every religious person was presented as a caricature. The Christians were depicted as clumsy buffoons, the Jewish as nominal Jews, and the Muslims as radical or on the verge of being radical. This caricaturization propelled the story, which was the main reason I couldn't fully engage with it.

I will probably give Updike another chance because I can recognize his talent. This book seemed as if he had an idea, perhaps even a good one, but ran out of time with the publisher. But if you're looking to start reading John Updike, then this is not the place to begin.

This took me a little longer to read than expected.

However, I needed breaks as it was quite heavy.

The writing is SO well-done. It's beautiful prose that draws you in.

Ahmad has been constantly on my mind ever since I started reading this.

This story really had a hold on me and captured my attention from beginning to end.

The detailed descriptions and the emotions portrayed made it a truly engaging read.

I found myself completely immersed in the world that the author has created.

It's one of those stories that you can't put down once you start.

The characters are vivid and the plot is full of twists and turns that keep you guessing.

I'm really glad I took the time to read this and would highly recommend it to others.

Oh John, oh John.

You completely disregarded the concept of "write what you know." What you are truly familiar with and can describe beautifully are WASP middle-aged men belonging to a particular socio-economic group. However, what you lack knowledge about are African-Americans and Muslims.

You should never have strayed from your own familiar territory.

This book is simply充斥着令人震惊的刻板印象 that it makes me cringe. Gack.

It seems as if you ventured into unfamiliar waters without proper understanding or research, resulting in a work that is marred by these inaccurate and offensive generalizations.

Perhaps if you had stayed within the confines of what you knew best, this book could have been a more genuine and engaging piece of literature.

As it stands now, it serves as a cautionary tale about the importance of knowing your subject matter before attempting to write about it.