At the age of 5, Malika Oufkir, eldest daughter of General Oufkir, was adopted by King Muhammad V of Morocco and sent to live in the palace as part of the royal court. There she led a life of unimaginable privilege and luxury alongside the king's own daughter. King Hassan II ascended the throne following Muhammad V's death, and in 1972 General Oufkir was found guilty of treason after staging a coup against the new regime, and was summarily executed. Immediately afterward, Malika, her mother, and her five siblings were arrested and imprisoned, despite having no prior knowledge of the coup attempt.
They were first held in an abandoned fort, where they ate moderately well and were allowed to keep some of their fine clothing and books. Conditions steadily deteriorated, and the family was eventually transferred to a remote desert prison, where they suffered a decade of solitary confinement, torture, starvation, and the complete absence of sunlight. Oufkir's horrifying descriptions of the conditions are mesmerizing, particularly when contrasted with her earlier life in the royal court, and many graphic images will long haunt readers. Finally, teetering on the edge of madness and aware that they had been left to die, Oufkir and her siblings managed to tunnel out using their bare hands and teaspoons, only to be caught days later. Her account of their final flight to freedom makes for breathtaking reading. Stolen Lives is a remarkable book of unfathomable deprivation and the power of the human will to survive.
After reading STOLEN LIVES, I was able to grasp (as much as is possible) what it must have been like for Oufkir and her family to live in the horrific prison conditions they did, but I wasn't able to grasp how long "20 years" of captivity is. So, I went back to the book. It's 294 pages long, which is approximately 10,800 lines of text (if every page is full). If I divide the text into .7 line segments and read one segment a day, it will take me 7300 days, or 20 years, to read the whole book. That is an excruciatingly long time, longer than I'd care to imagine.
writes,
I am very disappointed in some of the reviews that I have read about this book; thank goodness they are the minority. Yes, I agree that it was poorly edited, and the story that was being relayed really could have been told better. It disturbs me that some of the reviewers almost appeared to attack the author. This lady is not an author/writer; she's no Stephen King or Dan Brown. Those authors have the advantage of fiction on their respective sides. Malika Oufkir had no such advantage. She is a survivor who had to actually live the hell that she describes in her book.
Imagine being a political prisoner - your only crime being that you were related to someone who either did something terrible against the country or "allegedly" did so - you are living in conditions of squalor. Your captors want you to die, but don't want to necessarily pull the trigger. You are starved, not allowed outside, not allowed to see or feel the sun, and deprived of the most basic information such as the date and time. You watch your sister pick the rat droppings from pieces of stale bread before "happily" consuming it. You watch your three-year old brother's life as a political prisoner. That's what you lived for most of two decades. Finally, years after being released, you get the courage to tell your story so that the world has a chance to know what you have been through, and that political imprisonment is not the cake walk or country club behind bars that it has been touted through the years. For months, you fight through the tears and the recollections of the circumstances and events that above all, you mostly want to forget. Then, proud that you were able to clear that final hurdle, you read the book reviews on Amazon only to find that one reader finds the book "difficult to believe" and even "boring." The nerve of some people to sit in their air conditioned homes with their refrigerator and freezer full, to sit at their computer with access to the world, to not be able to look past the flaws of the book to see the real story. If this was fiction, I could see the criticism, but given the storyline and the simple fact that it was fact, I simply cannot justify attacking the author about the quality of the book. Her experience has forever changed her and her reaction to life itself.
Bottom line - this was a riveting story that could have been a riveting book. I give the story itself 5+ stars. I hope Ms. Oufkir and her family are proud that they survived such an incredulous nightmare. I was left wanting more information, but I personally feel fortunate to have received what information I got; Ms. Oufkir didn't have to put her ordeal in writing. The editing gets one star. The editor and publisher failed Ms. Oufkir and should be ashamed that her story was not given the very best attention to detail. It almost seems as though the book was rushed to go to print, and Ms. Oufkir's story suffered the consequences. And that is a real travesty.
writes,
Because of her father's treachery in attempting to assassinate the king of Morocco, Malika, her mother, her siblings and two family friends are imprisoned in the desert. For years they live in tiny cells infested with bugs and mice who battle them for their near-starvation rations. Finally they make a desperate move to tunnel out of their prison and alert the international news media of their imprisonment, which puts sufficient pressure on the king to free them.
Malika's life wasn't always so bad, though. In fact, when she was five, the king adopted her to live in the palace as a companion to his daughter. Although she missed her family and felt trapped in her life as royalty, Malika was well fed and well brought up and had all of the luxuries life could hand out to a child. This makes her subsequent imprisonment all the more shocking, especially as it is at the hands of her adopted family.
I found this book a bit scattered. The author would state in passing something she would then address later, which gave me the feeling of a great deal of jumping around. She also tries a bit too hard to make a connection between life in the palace and life in prison, which I thought was more than a small stretch. Although the author argues that she was never really "free" to do what she wanted while living with the royals, what child ever is free to do what he or she wants? There were few incidents of her being treated cruelly while growing up, and she wanted for nothing, yet she tried to paint herself as a poor sad little child. This tended to make me feel less sorry for her, rather than more.
The part of the book dealing with the family's prison life was horrifying almost beyond belief, yet was dealt with in such a casual tone of voice that I found it hard to get as outraged and sad as I felt I should have been. Something about the tone of the book just didn't strike the right note with me.
