Why do you think the author chose to take on the points of view of women on both sides of the war?

In this book, Munaweera takes on the point of views of both a Sinhala woman and a Tamil woman. Why do you think she made this decision? What does it mean to try and express both points of view when the subject is a civil war?

What happened in Sri Lanka continues to occur over and over in history. Having the viewpoint of both sides makes both sides real. And it points out their liknesses which are actually more than their differences. We often think women are the more caring gender and having women representing both sides of the conflict makes it more powerful.

I loved that all of the stories are coming from women. I think that it gives a perspective that is so often ignored. The need to keep on keeping on when just surviving, getting food, staying sane and stable in spite of what is happening, and making your children feel safe and loved is an often overlooked job during a time of turmoil. These women, both young and old, were strong and determined and doing so much that is usually unseen and unrecognized.

Not knowing much about Sri Lanka, I really loved reading both sides. I felt that I gained a better perspective on what occurred than if I had only one side

The author created a powerful book by presenting two different women. Unequivocally, suicide bombers (really a misnomer-- they are homicide bombers) are not to be tolerated. But this martyr's journey to arrive at her final destination is more understandable by the reader.

There are at least two sides to every story. The story is richer because it is told by two characters who experience the same war differently. The story would not have been as powerful if we had only had the point of view of one of these women.

I think the author wanted to write about the war, and she needed to show both sides to give an accurate account of what happened.

In so many conflicts women tend to be the largest group of victims and the least powerful. It was interesting to read about these women and how they lived and coped with their country being torn apart. They were different and yet so much alike.

Wonderful approach, and gave the reader such a wide range of viewpoints.

As with any story there are always two sides. This books showed that even with war there are two completely opposite points of view. Each side holds strong that they are in the right and this book allowed us to see that each side had their share of sorrow and validity.

I loved the fact that the author used points of views from two different women who experienced this war from opposing sides. It gives a very unique perspective when related by women, and it allows the reader to see war as each side experienced it. Both sides had what they considered valid reasons for fighting, and each side experienced its share of family upheaval, great sadness, and horrific atrocities.

In 2014 this question seems unnecessary. I believe that women all over the world are starting to wonder if the pattern of incessant warfare between countries and the loss of lives /limbs could be lessened or ended if women were in charge.

I particularly liked how balanced the book was. The author seemed to go out of her way to show that both sides committed atrocities, both were in the wrong, and innocents on both sides were killed or injured.

War is no longer thought of as something experienced by men, yet many novels dwell on that. Munaweera does an excellent job of bringing us into war through the lives of women, those who try to keep life as it has always been, those who decide that they must keep their families safe by leaving, those who refuse to leave but work to keep their country from being destroyed by remaining and those who realize that they cannot sit back but must become soldiers who ruthlessly help make change. She puts us into the mind sets of all these women and in so doing brings us into the chaos that war causes as well as the struggle to maintain as normal a lifestyle as is possible.

I think presenting the war from two points of view was a creative way to provide the whole picture. The fact that this was done from two womens views was even better because we seldom see war through a woman's eyes.

Both were complimentary and contrasting. Two very different women yet caught in the throws of cultural divide. One directly involved, one involved directly from aboard. This was well executed and added powerful emotional pull. Dichotomy of war in all its nakedness. Brilliant.