Scan barcode
amn028's review against another edition
2.0
A bit of struggle to get through this one. It just didn't grab my attention and hold it. The characters weren't as fleshed out as they could have been to keep it more interest.
jaclynm's review against another edition
2.0
This book left no impression on me whatsoever. Maybe it was because Heart of Darkness was also the same, but this just like was so boring.
Rachel and Lota were very bland and one dimensional characters. They had no substance, and their motives were unclear. All the other characters were the same as well.
Kurtz was at least interesting by being an enigma much like her inspiration, but even then, it just felt bland.
Rachel and Lota were very bland and one dimensional characters. They had no substance, and their motives were unclear. All the other characters were the same as well.
Kurtz was at least interesting by being an enigma much like her inspiration, but even then, it just felt bland.
secanno's review
1.0
I really wanted to like this book. I know it's meant to be a retelling of Heart of Darkness, but the story is clearly based on a real place, and I think to avoid causing harm to the people from that place, the author had a responsibility to either use a completely made-up location -- or -- critically engage with the historical context of the place that inspired it.
I work in the Pacific Islands and have spent a fair amount of time in the Marshall Islands, where the US tested their nuclear weapons in Bikini Atoll, including purposely exposing local people on nearby atolls to radiation for experimental purposes. I lived there a few years ago and return for fieldwork semi-regularly. The repeated reference to the Island in this book being used for nuclear testing (and how the local people were displaced for years before being allowed to return, even though the Island was likely still not safe) makes me think that it is based on (or at least was inspired by) the history of the Marshalls (although the French tested nuclear weapons in the South Pacific, also). There are other clear parallels to the Marshalls, too; the heavy dependence on foreign contractors (although this is true in lots of places in the Pacific), and the close ties between the Marshalls and the Empire (in real life, the United States; the Marshalls is a sovereign nation but has close legal ties to the US through the Compacts of Free Association and through the US's ongoing military presence there), and the impacts of sea level rise (in French Polynesia this is less of an issue than it is in the Marshalls, where the highest elevation is <5 m above sea level).
I understand that the author hoped to make this story widely applicable and to make it more of a fable. But, by not describing any of the cultural context of the problems faced by local people, she managed to erase an entire culture who actually experienced these issues in real life (and are still facing the impacts today). And instead of engaging with how the problems faced by Pacific Islanders today are often directly a product of colonialism and its ongoing legacies, she mentions the violence inherent in local communities and how dangerous the island is (which, by the way, is not the case in the real life Marshall Islands, even in the most crowded places it is pretty safe), and talks about how people live in poverty in passing. But there's no engagement with what might have caused those situations and how colonialism led to them, which means it's not entirely clear why Lota is motivated to join the rebels to begin with. By covering the negative aspects of life in the Pacific Islands (again, not all of which are accurate in real life) and not critically examining what created those things, while also erasing any cultural context, the author does not assign any responsibility for colonialism's impacts, further erases the victims of these impacts, and essentially reinforces the problematic narratives that are so prevalent throughout the Pacific.
One thing I can say that seems realistic and relatable from my work in the Pacific Islands is Rachel's apathy. There are certainly many consultants and foreign government officials who are working in the Pacific Islands, who truly care about the people they work with and understand their place in the colonial histories and legacies that continue through today. But, I have met a fair share of Rachels who view their work in the Pacific as "doing the time" so that they can move up the ladder and get a more prestigious position elsewhere.
I recognize that I'm coming from a different place than most readers, because I can recognize the real place and real people behind this mythologized version of colonialism in the Pacific Islands. Without that knowledge, most readers may not necessarily take anything the author is saying as representative of a real place. That said, I think this book does a real disservice to Pacific Islanders, particularly the Marshallese. I hope that folks who read this book will take some time to learn about their stories. This is a great place to start: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3057727-the-consequential-damages-of-nuclear-war?from_search=true&qid=pVlDoA6Xxz&rank=1
I work in the Pacific Islands and have spent a fair amount of time in the Marshall Islands, where the US tested their nuclear weapons in Bikini Atoll, including purposely exposing local people on nearby atolls to radiation for experimental purposes. I lived there a few years ago and return for fieldwork semi-regularly. The repeated reference to the Island in this book being used for nuclear testing (and how the local people were displaced for years before being allowed to return, even though the Island was likely still not safe) makes me think that it is based on (or at least was inspired by) the history of the Marshalls (although the French tested nuclear weapons in the South Pacific, also). There are other clear parallels to the Marshalls, too; the heavy dependence on foreign contractors (although this is true in lots of places in the Pacific), and the close ties between the Marshalls and the Empire (in real life, the United States; the Marshalls is a sovereign nation but has close legal ties to the US through the Compacts of Free Association and through the US's ongoing military presence there), and the impacts of sea level rise (in French Polynesia this is less of an issue than it is in the Marshalls, where the highest elevation is <5 m above sea level).
I understand that the author hoped to make this story widely applicable and to make it more of a fable. But, by not describing any of the cultural context of the problems faced by local people, she managed to erase an entire culture who actually experienced these issues in real life (and are still facing the impacts today). And instead of engaging with how the problems faced by Pacific Islanders today are often directly a product of colonialism and its ongoing legacies, she mentions the violence inherent in local communities and how dangerous the island is (which, by the way, is not the case in the real life Marshall Islands, even in the most crowded places it is pretty safe), and talks about how people live in poverty in passing. But there's no engagement with what might have caused those situations and how colonialism led to them, which means it's not entirely clear why Lota is motivated to join the rebels to begin with. By covering the negative aspects of life in the Pacific Islands (again, not all of which are accurate in real life) and not critically examining what created those things, while also erasing any cultural context, the author does not assign any responsibility for colonialism's impacts, further erases the victims of these impacts, and essentially reinforces the problematic narratives that are so prevalent throughout the Pacific.
One thing I can say that seems realistic and relatable from my work in the Pacific Islands is Rachel's apathy. There are certainly many consultants and foreign government officials who are working in the Pacific Islands, who truly care about the people they work with and understand their place in the colonial histories and legacies that continue through today. But, I have met a fair share of Rachels who view their work in the Pacific as "doing the time" so that they can move up the ladder and get a more prestigious position elsewhere.
I recognize that I'm coming from a different place than most readers, because I can recognize the real place and real people behind this mythologized version of colonialism in the Pacific Islands. Without that knowledge, most readers may not necessarily take anything the author is saying as representative of a real place. That said, I think this book does a real disservice to Pacific Islanders, particularly the Marshallese. I hope that folks who read this book will take some time to learn about their stories. This is a great place to start: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3057727-the-consequential-damages-of-nuclear-war?from_search=true&qid=pVlDoA6Xxz&rank=1
More...