I wasn't sure what to expect when I started reading this but I can say for certain I wasn't convinced
The story is told from two POVs. One is from the zookeeper Abu Laith and the other is from Hakam, whose only purpose seems to be to be used as a window for the reader to see the war in that area. The start is slow so I feel a bit disjointed reading these two narratives together. I mean, why Hakam? Why couldn't we get this information from Abu Laith's POV? Perhaps I'm missing something
But the reason I'm not convinced is that the book is tagged as nonfiction but reads as a historical fiction story. I don't know where this information is coming from and if it's reliable since there are no visible foot/endnotes and the author doesn't reference outside sources even though large chunks of Hakam's POV are history facts (it seems)
The story is told from two POVs. One is from the zookeeper Abu Laith and the other is from Hakam, whose only purpose seems to be to be used as a window for the reader to see the war in that area. The start is slow so I feel a bit disjointed reading these two narratives together. I mean, why Hakam? Why couldn't we get this information from Abu Laith's POV? Perhaps I'm missing something
But the reason I'm not convinced is that the book is tagged as nonfiction but reads as a historical fiction story. I don't know where this information is coming from and if it's reliable since there are no visible foot/endnotes and the author doesn't reference outside sources even though large chunks of Hakam's POV are history facts (it seems)