It is 1959 in Jerusalem. Shmuel, a university student with a large heart, weak lungs and an unruly beard, decides to give up his studies when his father’s business collapses. Shmuel couldn’t do military service. He has also just lost his girlfriend to her ex, whom she plans to marry. On top of that, his thesis about Jewish views of Jesus, had come to standstill even before his parents’ funds came to an abrupt halt.

Shmuel has come to some kind of hiatus, a threshold in which he has to decide upon a new path.

He thinks of heading off to a newly built town and becoming a night watchman when an advert seeking a companion catches his eye.

It is in the house of the so-called Arab-lover and traitor, Jehoiachin Abravanel, long since dead, that Shmuel rediscovers a love of his studies, a love that sits Jehoiachin Abravanel and Judas next to each other forcing a revision of what it means to be a traitor at all (there are echoes of the Greek scapegoat and outcast, the visionary whose views may be right but feel threatening).

Who is the old man, Gershom Wald, he has to talk to everyday? And what is his relationship to the beautiful woman of the house, Atalia?

I’m a huge fan of Amos Oz. He often explores emotion and how difficult it is to situate feelings within moral and reasoned landscapes, and he definitely does this in Judas. The history of the Jewish state, what it means to try to live with others rather than in opposition to them (Shmuel is a socialist), all return to an exploration of the beginnings of Christianity and the traitor, Judas – who did he really betray?

This won’t be a book everyone will enjoy. The characters are prone to long monologues in which they propound theories or set out historical events. And yet, the way history and religion blur so beautifully into one young man’s desire, hope, and honest self-reflection, make for very compelling reading if you are that way inclined. Probably if I knew more about the history of Israel, and Oz does seem to be making a political argument calling for a new Jewish outlook on the Israel/Palestine conflict, I would be even more gripped. These questions about how we choose to live with others, whether we should even encourage a sense of nationhood, especially a religious nation state, are deeply relevant questions and Shmuel’s rather naive, well-intentioned and short lived obsessions highlight the problems of facing these questions when young and easily distractible. Emotions, like arguments, aren’t always effective, don’t always have a resolution, but they can be acknowledged and respected. Shmuel, with his headstrong rushing gait, his good and moral intentions, his ponderous nature and his relatively isolated social life, feels like an embodiment of early Israel. But again, this is something someone less ignorant would be better able to express.

In the end it seems that allowing oneself to connect to others is the most important thing and Shmuel slowly comes to realise this need for connection as he lives with Gershom and Atalia.

I do feel somewhat unqualified to comment on Judas, but this is the beauty of fiction. In literature all those complex issues that we are forced to live through everyday, whether we choose to address them or not, can be explained and explored in the way that we live them. Different people will understand far more than me but I can still engage with Schmuel and think about the situation he is in. Judas is an important, if sometimes difficult book, whose strange characters cry out for healing affection.

This is a vastly intellectual read that broached political and religious subjects with a bluntness that provides the reader with no option other than to approach their own beliefs, on the matters discussed, with the same appetite. Whilst these features of the text were shocking in nature and whilst this was certainly insightful of the historical period it covers, I found the actual bones of the story a little, sadly to say, underwhelming.

This is my first read by Amor Oz, who is (although I didn't realise it at the time) a hugely prolific author. I found it hard to get into, and would probably not have believed you at the start if you told me I ended up giving it a well-deserved four stars! Let me explain.

The year is 1959, winter in Jerusalem. Shmuel, a student, has had his life turned upside down. His father's financial issues mean he cannot support him any longer which coincides with his long-term girlfriend leaving him for her previous boyfriend, the 'taciturn hydrologist,' Nesher Sharshevesky. Dismayed and heartbroken, Shmuel leaves the university behind him; his thesis on 'Jewish Views of Jesus' had come to a block anyway. Drowning in self-pity, his intrigue is piqued by a sign put up, asking for a companion 'with modest conversation skills and an interest in history' to a 'seventy-year-old invalid, an educated and widely cultured man. He is able to take care of himself and seeks company, not assistance.' As Shmuel has been a member of a Socialist group, recently disbanded, he fancies himself a good talker and with bed and board included, this job seems right.

Gershom Wald, the invalid, turns out to want someone to argue and debate with or perhaps, more accurately, to listen to his homilies. From his little attic room, Shmuel puzzles over the arrangement of this house. Gerhsom lives with his ex daughter-in-law Atalia, whose husband's death is never spoken of. Neither is her father's, although Shmuel gathers that at one point that they had all shared the house together.

This book has a slow start, and I struggled to get into it. The language can be quite long-winded at times, as well as repetitive: Shmuel's walking is described as:

'His head was thrust forward as if he were butting the air or forcing his way through obstacles, his body bent forward and his legs hurrying so as not to be left behind...'

multiple times (although paraphrased.) I felt like saying 'enough already! We know how he walks!' But this was a minor thing in relation to the novel in its entirety.

Essentially, there are three strands of plot woven cleverly through the book. On a surface level, there is Shmuel's current circumstances, his gradual intoxication of the unreachable, elusive Atalia, and the uncovering of parts of her world. She is a woman not meant for men, and says so boldly. Previous tenants have come and gone, fallen in love with her, and sent away; Wald warns Shmuel about this, but also recognises its inevitability.

We also learn a lot about Jerusalem in the winter of 1959-60, and the years leading up to it: a fascinating history lesson in Ben Gurion and the setting up of Israel as a state. Knowing very little when I went in, I now want to learn more; I always believe that any well-written novel makes the reader want to read further. Wald and Atalia's late father had completely opposing views: Wald believing that Ben Gurion was right and violence was necessary for Jews to reclaim their homeland, whereas Atalia's father, perhaps naively, was adamant that a peaceful settlement could be arranged. When Atalalia's husband died, silence severed the house. Shmuel's job is to partially alleviate this historic silence.

The third strand is where the title of the novel comes into play: Judas. Through their debates, and through Shmuel's musings and his thesis, Judas is central character, but off-stage. Shmuel, himself atheist, poses the proposition that without Judas Christianity would not exist.

'...if there had been no Judas, there might not have been a crucifixion, and had there been no crucifixion there would have been no Christianity.'

What a fascinating concept! - and not one that I have ever considered before. Shmuel begins to believe that Judas Iscariot was in fact the most loyal of Jesus' disciples, believing in him more than he did himself. Did Judas want Jesus to be crucified to prove to the world he was the son of God? Even though Jesus cries that his Father has forsaken him, Judas encourages him to return to Jerusalem.

What a thought-provoking, and thoughtful novel. Oz has a lovely turn of phrase, using different words to pose the same old cliches we often hear, such as the chicken/egg scenario: '...question posed by the rabbis of old: how was the first pair of blacksmith's tongs made?'

There is so much depth to this novel, and I strongly urge anyone to read it. I'll leave you with one line that has stuck with me:

'We [Jews] are all Judas. Even eighty generations later we are all Judas.'

Thank you to NetGalley for the opportunity to read this wonderful novel.

I couldn't warm to this book. The writing is at times quite beautiful and the politics are obviously heartfelt by the author but I could not identify with any universal aspect of any of the characters. I found them irritating and the slow pace allowed me to relish some of the ethereal language but it also allowed me to grow increasingly irritated at the repetition of the mundane. I finished it but I wouldn't read it again and I'm not sure I'd read another Amos Oz...

I was given a copy of the book by Netgalley in return for an honest review.

I am sorry but I found this book quite boring and gave up reading it. Perhaps it was too literary for my tastes.

Judas by Amos Oz is set in Jerusalem in the winter of 1959. Shmuel is an idealistic left wing student who drops out of college and takes a job as a companion to Gershom Ward, an elderly invalided intellectual. As the novel unfolds Shmuel becomes obsessed with Atalia, Gershom's widowed daughter-in-law and her late husband and father.

At one level this is a story of a young man's fascination with an older woman and the gradual unfolding of tangled family relationships. At another level it provides an interesting insight into the debates within the zionist movement before independence in 1948 and the political tensions in the subsequent period, I don't know how historically accurate the book is but Oz provides a thought provoking glimpse of alternative possibilities. A third strand to Judas is Shmuel's stalled PhD thesis on Jewish attitudes to Jesus and the character and role of Judas in Jesus' betrayal. If the Israeli politics and Judas strands are meant to be linked, the connection passed me by.

I found Judas to be a tiresome and unrewarding read, I struggled to empathise with any of the characters, I'd rather read history than search for glimpses in the narrative and by the end I didn't care how the plot finished I just wanted it to be over. This was 2 star material slightly redeemed by the interesting historical bits.

An interesting if polemic view of how modern Israel was formed but a fascinating look at the history of Judas' story.

This is a great book. The words are beautifully chosen and perfectly deployed, especially notable considering its a translated work.

The book offers a portrait of the ugliness of humanity as well as the light and inspiration that makes us good. It's an emotional story and one that will uplift you after reading.

This is the story of three very unusual misfits.This coruscating and mesmerising tale of how a misdirected young man Schmuel Ash, a biblical scholar falls in love with Atalia Abarbanel, the daughter of a deceased Zionist leader. she is in her forties, and is highly sexed, usually has brief affairs with guests, and quickly disposes of them to seek new and exiting sexual encounters. How Schmuel gradually gets snared into a disastrous and unfulfilling romancer, begins to escalate into a more sinister affair. But the old Gershom Ward is the real hero, who is a brilliant scholar and raconteur, who engages in some deep and theological discussions with his latest caregiver, to an escalating surprise ending.
At once an exquisite love story and coming-of-age novel, an allegory for the state of Israel from which it draws its title, Judas is Amos Oz's most powerful novel for a decade. Oz is a highly regarded writer of International standing. His best selling 'A Tale of Love and Darkness' won him the International Literature Prize.
This love story is only one strand of this richly textured novel. In their nightly conversations Schmuel and Weld replay the history of Israel and its formation, informed by the arguments of Atalia's dead father, labeled a traitor for his opposition to the Jewish state. Underlying that story is the story of Judas Iscariot, also labeled a traitor, the subject of Shemuel's sympathies and studies.
Amos Oz, whose dedication to the two-state solution has at times called his loyalty into question, asks whether these men might be betrayed true believers, men whose hearts were broken by bold dreams that failed to come true.
This remarkable and stunning novel will leave you gasping for more. Oz's characters gives them life, making Judas far richer than a novel of ideas. The characters bear the scars of Israel's history, and Oz moves readers to both sympathy and understanding.
This novel is a real marvel in serendipity and pernicious behaviour of the three main characters. It is descriptive writing of the very best you will find out there in the literary field of enormous talent. Oz's description of Jesus's crucifixion, as told by Judas, is a visceral, unforgettable retelling.
This is a novel of deep and tragic consequences, and informs and delights in equal measure. I can assure readers who like thought provoking ideas and life-lessons will definitely hold your attention throughout this riveting and captivating read. But the best part, is the way this story draws you in, hold you tight throughout the enthralling tragic tale, and will linger for months in your minds long after the book is closed.
The extraordinary inventions that Oz reveals at the end about a dead provocateur who's e unsettling legacy haunts the eerie house on Rabbi Elbaz Lane--frames a series of mind-stretching, and heart-tugging, dialogues. This warren of secrets is also a nest of traitors, and a shrine to pain.
"Anyone willing to change," argues the high-principled but shambolic protagonist of Amos Oz's new novel, "will always be considered a traitor by those who cannot change." After almost two dozen books that track changes in both heart and state with untiring strength and subtlety, the Israel master has finally delivered one of the boldest novels ever to arrive in today's fractured and suffering divided society.
The renegade politician Shhealtiel Abravanel is a kind of one-man opposition in the late 1940s. Although a Zionist, Abravanel advocated Jewish-Arab coexistence, detested the "archaic, primitive, murderous delusion" of nationalism, and rejected "the pretentious idea of setting up a separate state for Jews". In other words, a Judas.
A book so steeped in richly flavoured heresies might defeat the reader's digestion. Oz takes care to root this boundary-busting speculation in the dark house of grief and secrecy, in the tragic back-story of a slaughtered son and husband-and in the endearing comedy of maples but hopeful Shmuel, whom Wald affectionately calls "a tortoise that's lost its shell". Nicholas de Lange, Oz's distinguished translator, steers these virtuoso transitions between debate and domesticity with unerring skill. My thanks to the publisher and NetGalley for an ARC-or as I like to write: a PRAC--professional readers advanced copy, in exchange for an unbiased yet honest review.

First, I would like to start my review by commenting the translator of the English edition, Nicholas de Lange. Not even for an instance did I feel that I was reading a translated version. This is so rare and I believe that it really added to my reading experience.
This is the first book by Amos Oz which I read so I genuinely jumped to the opportunity of reading it when I saw it on NetGalley. Its title was another aspect that intrigued me as Judas is a very interesting figure.
Although the plot doesn’t offer much excitement, and at times you feel that not much is going on, you won’t probably even like or sympathise with any of the characters, but still by the end of the book I was convinced that all this was intentional. Amos Oz, as the experienced author he is, I am sure that he knew that this was not the point he wanted to make, and if you manage to keep reading until the end, you will probably understand this as well. Sometimes you speak louder, when you say nothing at all.
However, my favourite parts of the novel are those where Shmuel presents his views on the figure of Judas in juxtaposition with Christianity and the way Jews have been perceived through the ages. It’s a very different perspective from the prevalent Western Christian-oriented one, and I am pretty sure that this rhetoric is not new at all, but still it is very interesting to get in touch with it. It is interesting in so many levels.
The book can be seen as an easy read, in the sense of its reading speed. But the issues it raises, the different discourses and the opposing worldviews are nothing but simple. There are multiple levels in this simplistic story that will keep you thinking about them a long time after you read the book. But be careful, the author won’t provide you with answers. It’s up to you what you will make of it.
This novel worked for me because it introduced me to a different world. We are so wrapped-up in our own sense of reality that we tend to forget (or even worse we fail to realise) that everything is a matter of perspective. Nothing is black or white and the truth is in the eye of the beholder.

Then he went out into the street, which was bathed in a pleasant winter light, a light of pine trees and stones. He was suddenly assailed by a strange, sharp feeling that anything was possible, that what was lost only seemed to be lost, but that in fact nothing was completely lost and what would happen depended only on his audacity. He decided to change there and then. To change his whole life from that moment on. Henceforth he would be calm and bold, a man who knew what he wanted and did everything in his power to achieve it, with no holding back and hesitation.

The above quotation comes roughly one third through ‘Judas,’ and the ‘he‘ in question is the diffident Shmuel. The passage grabbed me when I read it, not only because of the beauty of the language but because of the power and irony of the sentiments. Shmuel is not a man of action. He starts the book a person things happen to (girlfriend leaving, parents losing their money and so becoming unable to support him through his studies) and when he has the above epiphany it’s hard to know if Oz is laughing at the reader. Are we expected to believe that Shmuel will finally act out of character, actually realise ‘what he wanted‘ and make genuine steps towards achieving it? Or is this one more mini-crisis in an already settled life, like Oblomov’s plans to get out of bed or my own optimistic spurts of gym membership?

Main character aside, the novel’s title reminds us that individuals can have epic importance on the course of history. Shmuel’s research, in and out of university, is about Jesus and Judas, focusing heavily on their personalities and biographies; he’s not Christian, but is fascinated by the ideas of love, brotherhood, friendship and betrayal conveyed by these teaching and stories. Thus, while aimlessly wandering round the divided city of Jerusalem (the book is set in the winter of 1959-60) Shmuel is able to bring a significant but very unusual perspective to the decade-old country in which he lives. The State of Israel was founded in 1948 and much of the novel takes place in the grief-filled house once inhabited by the only member of the Zionist executive committee to oppose the creation of the State. Oz’s fictional Shealtiel Abravanel believed that Jews and Arabs should live in peace in a country under international control. There are clear parallels drawn between Abravanel and Judas and, while no easy answers are provided, the book painstakingly explores the idea of betrayal, belief and loyalty in uncomfortably personal detail.

It can be hard at times to see if ‘Judas’ is supposed to be a coming of age story, or a political, philosophical tract. Shmuel included, all the characters are stuck in rigid repetitive routines which can be difficult to engage with, though their intense discussions are well worth reading. With its complex ideas and sensitive view of humanity, this book will be welcomed by fans of Oz’s writing. For newcomers, it is a good introduction to one of Israel’s most famous authors.

This is an intriguingly original work which interweaves the story of Shmuel, a young student who drops out of University in Jerusalem, with his thoughts on Judas Iscariot and his relationship with Jesus. Shmuel's need for accommodation and food necessitates him accepting a job looking after an elderly, disabled scholar who lives with his daughter in law on a quiet street in Jerusalem. Shmuel's duties are simple. He has to sit and keep the old man company for 5 hours each evening. Otherwise his time is his own. Initially Shmuel just mopes about his lost girlfriend and hides away in his attic. But, gradually, he begins to enjoy the company and conversation of the old man whilst also becoming intrigued by the daughter in law. Perhaps because he is stimulated by their company or just because he finds peace in his attic he finds himself re-visiting the subject of his abandoned studies. And this is where we find out more about his interpretation of the Judas/Jesus relationship. To say more about this, or indeed about the relationships that evolve in the household, would be to risk spoiling your enjoyment. But I do commend you to read it.

Shmuel is a character that touched me from the very beginning. A young man whose heart has been recently broken, who has lost his way with his studies and doesn't see what the future holds for him. He reads a notice on the university notice board just after resigning from his studies. This takes him to an address on the outskirts of Jerusalem, to the house of the now deceased Abravanel, his perplexing widowed daughter Atalia, and Gershom Wald, an aged and crippled academic whose son Atalia had married.

This is a book about outsiders. Shmuel, as we later discover from his sister, has never fitted in either to his family or to society as a whole. He is an earnest young man, believing in a communist revolution but who is, by his own later admission, simply 'a cafe revolutionary'. He goes to live in Abravanel's house where he is given lodgings in return for spending every evening listening to and debating with old Wald. He is fascinated by Atalia with whom he quickly falls in love, even though she's more than 20 years older than him.

It transpires that Abravanel had been ostracized for his views on Israel as an independent state. He had disagreed with its creation and with partition, believing that it could only lead to perpetual war with the Arabs. He had argued that the Jews should share the land with the Arabs with whom they would eventually live in peace. His views are Oz's views and they lead to many interesting discussions in the book between Wald and Shmuel and Shmuel and Atalia.

Atalia is a deeply unhappy woman who, according to Wald, takes advantage of the young men she employs to care for Wald, not discouraging them to fall in love with her and then letting them leave at a time of her choosing. She is also an outsider, made so by her unloving father and his views, and by her bitterness at the early death of her husband and the means by which he died. She lives a shadowy life, much of it solitary.

Throughout, Shmuel continues to work on his university thesis about Judas whom he does not believe betrayed Jesus. <spoiler>He argues that as a wealthy man who owned a lot of property in Jerusalem, he would not have been interested in bribes, far less of 30 pieces of silver which was not worth very much. He also argues that there would have been no need to identify Jesus to the Romans given his very public entry into the city days before and the overturning of the moneylenders' stalls in the temple. He believes he was the only one of the apostles who really loved Jesus and who truly believed he was the son of God. His devastation at his death led him to hang himself. Judas was the outsider amongst the apostles due to his wealth and, we assume, education. Most of the others were poor fishermen from Galilee.</spoiler>

I found this a very moving book but mainly my enjoyment came from how much I learned about the founding of the State of Israel. I'm also interested in theories about the life of Jesus and found Shmuel's argument quite plausible. 4 not 5 stars because the ending seemed a little trite to me, although in fairness it's difficult to think how else the story could have ended.

Finally, a respectful message for Amos Oz. Women of 45 rarely, in my experience, have even 'faintly wrinkled hands' and they certainly don't have liver spots. It's clear from the outset that Atalia is a very attractive 'older' woman. To bless her with features belonging to a woman 10 years older is downright silly (unless women in Israel age more quickly than elsewhere).

With thanks to NetGalley and RandomHouse UK for an ARC.

This for me was a challenging book. At heart I am a Zionist and therefore the subject and the timing and setting of the novel intrigued me. The prose is magnificent and the characters complicated. Worth the effort

Judas is a thoughtful and complex coming-of-age novel set in Jerusalem in 1959-60. Shmuel is an idealistic student whose life seems to be at a dead end. When he sees a mysterious handwritten note on a campus noticeboard, he takes a job as the companion to an elderly invalid in a different part of the city. As well as arguing with and listening to the old man, he must share the house with a strange older woman who soon fascinates him, though she appears less intrigued by Shmuel. What follows is a narrative about conflict, conversation, religion, treason, and love, as Shmuel tries to find his way forward in life and processes the thoughts and lives of his two new companions.

Amos Oz combines youthful uncertainty and idealism with big questions of political and religious divide and debate. Shmuel’s curiosity about Gershom Wald, the old man, and Atalia, the mysterious woman, seems to battle with his abandoned intellectual curiosity in the figure of Judas and of Jewish views of Jesus, with information about these areas taking up different chapters. He is an interesting central character, the kind of protagonist who falls into a situation through being lost and melancholy and then leaves it somehow transformed. Conflict in Israel is central to the novel, but so is unrequited love and desire, and attempts to understand different viewpoints and how this may change ideas about treason for example. The narrative follows a classic plot of lost student obsessing over various things and battling desire and mystery, but it is the insightful musings, conversation, and detail that give the novel its spark.

Wow!

I feel unworthy to have read such a beautifully composed work of art.

I feel humbled by the crafting of the words, the intricacy of the subject matter.

I feel ashamed that my own knowledge of the biblical stories that surround Jesus is lacking as is my geographical knowledge of the disputed land in Palestine.

I want to have the quickness of wit and understanding to be able to have a conversational spar with Gershom Wald.

Schmuel Ash, the wild haired, wild bearded, scholar with a penchant for stories about Judas and a walking stick with a fox head is a most unlikely hero and yet I was cheering for him. Hoping he found happiness. Longing for him to settle in life.

What a strange story! A young man at a cross roads in his life finds himself sharing a house with a crippled geriatric who is as sharp as a tac and a mysterious woman. But that is only half of the tale. The supporting stories of Jesus, Judas and the Israeli disputes add the depth and thought provoking side to the book.

The first person telling of a particular chapter in the book is stunning in its placement and execution.

Judas is a book that must be read with a clear head and focus to appreciate its warmth.

This is an immense undertaking superbly carried out. The author portrays the uncertainty and diffidence of Jerusalem very convincingly. The main character is more odd than the story needs him to be but that is incidental. The real beauty of the book lies in the rendition of historical research and that creates the main interest.

Judas by Amos Oz is one of the shortlisted novels for this year's Man Booker Prize.

The novel is about a young man called Shmeul. An aethiest and a student he is planning to write a paper about Jewish views on Jesus. During this time his girlfriend Yardena leaves him for her ex boyfriend and he quits school to go and work for a reclusive old man as his companion, and continue work on his paper.

The story alternates between Shmuel's life in his new home and the paper he is writing. I found it an extremely interesting novel which discussed different religions that despite GCSE RE I wasn't aware of. For example I had no idea that Jewish people do not believe that Jesus was the son of God. Shmuel's paper covers an interesting topic, exploring the character of Judas Iscariot and his motivation for Jesus' crucifixion.

Shmuel is a melancholy character, he finds happiness in nothing, hates loneliness but also doesn't enjoy himself in company. As his sister writes to him, he talks, lectures but doesn't have conversations.

I can completely understand why this novel has been shortlisted for the prize. Amos Oz writes to an extremely high quality. His writing is captivating. Although the novel's pace is slow the subject matter is so interesting that it holds your attention nevertheless.

It is undoubtably a thought provoking and melancholy novel, bringing together issues of war, politics and religion narrated by the story of a young man still trying to find himself and what he would like to do with his life.