The Sorrow and the Terror

[1] In May 1987, Terry Glavin of the Vancouver Sun said that The Sorrow and the Terror was only one of two books on the subject, with the other The Death of Air India Flight 182 by Salim Jiwa.

[3] Other persons who spoke with Mukherjee and Blaise included Sikhs of both political orientations (in regards to whether they were in favor of Khalistan, a proposed separate state out of current India) as well as doctors, engineers, journalists, lawyers, and scholars.

[3] Glavin wrote that The Sorrow and the Terror "appears to have borrowed [research materials] heavily from" The Death of Air India Flight 182.

[7] In regards to the theory behind who committed the bombing, he said "Much of the evidence proffered in ascribing blame is regrettably based on shallow research often yielding little more than conjecture and allegation, and yet to call these accusations spurious would be unfair for the truth must lie there somewhere beneath the avalanche of facts surrounding the incident.

[7] Zuhair Kashmeri of The Globe and Mail wrote that one reading "exquisitely penned chapters about the victims is like encountering tombstones during a walk through the woods, the inscriptions moving one to tears.

"[6] Drolet argued that the "book's saving graces" are the "personal reminiscences by some of the parents" and the "moving account" of the Irish assistance of the AI182 families.

"[11] Frank Jones, a columnist of the Toronto Star accused the book of "tarring all Sikhs with the same brush" and "Hindu chauvinism"; he added that it was not appropriate to blame Canadian government policies because they would not have affected the political conflict in the Punjab.

"[10] Charlie Smith of The Georgia Straight argued that this conclusion differed from that of the documentary Air India 182, which said that there were Sikh victims along with Hindu ones.

[2] Susan Semenak of The Montreal Gazette wrote that the book "is strongest when it helps us see through the eyes" of family members of the deceased.

"[11] Semenak said that the book held the whole of Canada's Sikh population responsible for the attack and stating that all of them were "abusive, marginal lumberjacks and truckers" while it depicted Hindus as ""model" citizens, professionals, bureaucrats and entrepreneurs"; Semenak further argued that "the book rapidly loses its remaining credibility when authors take on Canadian multiculturalism policies".