For most people, the endless fighting in the Middle East isn’t a joking matter. But maybe, as Ryerson professor Gregory Levey’s new book, Shut Up, I’m Talking, seems to suggest, you just had to be there. And Levey was right there in the middle of it, working as a speechwriter for Israel’s mission to the United Nations, and then in the Israeli prime minister’s office under Ariel Sharon, and, on an interim basis, Ehud Olmert, was right there in the middle of it.

The book’s publisher claims Levey’s book is a cross between David Sedaris and Thomas Friedman, so readers might expect a mix of cleverly recounted anecdotes and political analysis, but the book doesn’t really offer quite enough of either.

The first part of the book, which focuses on Levey’s time working at the U.N., is not very amusing. As a result, he has to keep reminding readers that all of this is happening at the U.N., otherwise there’d be nothing particularly remarkable about them at all.

The book picks up when Levey moves to Israel to take a job in the PMO. The office is filled with memorable characters. And while the circumstances would be funny even in a more mundane setting, Levey’s depiction of the peculiarities of life in Israel is one of the strengths of the book. Maybe it’s the heat or maybe it’s the stress of being wedged onto a dusty strip of land surrounded by millions of their worst enemies, but for whatever reason, Israelis are surprisingly (and usually unintentionally) hilarious. Levey’s stories about antagonistic cab drivers and bizarre restaurant service ring true – in one funny example, Levey orders chips and salsa and gets Doritos and ketchup.

Shut Up, I’m Talking ends on a bit of a downer – Sharon takes ill and is replaced by Olmert as Levey plans to leave his job and Israel. But this is one of the most effective parts of the book, successfully melding Levey’s personal story and his zany coworkers with the unfolding political drama. At times it feels as though Levey is trying so hard to be funny that the Friedman portion of the aforementioned equation is ignored in favour of the Sedaris-style gags. More political insight would have improved the book.