He is old enough to realize that a rifle is the single most expensive possession that most men own, and he doesn't even have the courtesy to apologize to the gun's owner for not taking care of it nor does he offer to pay for it or to work to help make up for the loss. The boy deliberately destroys the tavern owner's rifle in a fit of rage even though he gave his word that he would return it. After the Hessians are all dead, the colonel tells the boy to get his gun and reminds him that it is borrowed and that he is responsible for it. Why didn't the Hessian tie both of the boy's hands behind his back? These well-trained, strongly disciplined soldiers then slept without posting a guard. All the Hessian did was to tie a rope around the boy's ankle and his own ankle. The fact that the Hessians just went to sleep with an enemy soldier in the house is completely unbelievable. The Hessians made no attempt to interrogate the boy, so they should have killed him. Any Hessian soldier would certainly not have taken a prisoner unless that prisoner was likely to possess valuable information. The thing that is hardest to believe about this story is that the Hessians did not kill the boy. What was most disappointing about Avi’s story?īoth the abandonment of the boy and the three Hessian soldiers by their respective armies seem a little contrived. It also possesses a tone of being anti-war in general. I think that it sends a some dangerous messages to its adolescent readers, and there are many events that are completely unbelievable. The listening experience was not the problem it was the story itself. What could have made this a 4 or 5-star listening experience for you? Unbelievable events, dangerous ideas, ant-war

Sophia's War by Avi