|
Benz1966
, July 30, 2013
(view all comments by Benz1966)
I feel duped. I mean, I have a degree in literature, I should be able to identify an unreliable narrator from miles away, right? But the way Yanaghira began The People in the Trees, with those press releases... I mean, it was like I was predestined to take the side of Norton Perina. And you will know what I mean when you begin the book and also deal with the same, overwhelming evidence that is presented.
So The People in the Trees is a multi-layered novel. One layer is beautiful, beautiful scientific detailing of a tribe culture, complete with origin story and mythology. And the best part? It's backed up by some science. There's mystery and intrigue, pain and anguish, heartbreak and strange customs, it's all contained in the first person narrative of Norton Perina, the doctor-turned-anthropologist who is introduced to the "lost" culture along with two other scientists. One of my favorite moments in this book is when Norton describes the "lost" culture (quoted from ARC - may be subject to changes:
And if one looks at that population, one sees that most of those "lost" tribes are actually lost only to the white man: just because civilized society stumbles upon a group of Amazonian people does not mean that those people are unknown to dozens of other, better-documented, neighboring tribes.
Talk about an ego-check. The post-colonial researcher in me ached to read more about this tribe (and, thankfully I can read and research something similar as this is based on a true story).
The other thing I really liked about this book was that it was a fictional book that read like a memoir, complete with editors footnotes. Normally, footnotes annoy the bejeebus out of me but not this time. I found myself caught in pages of footnotes, learning more background information and, in one specific case, angry because I was being denied information. It's such an intricate, beautiful way of writing a book and it made it feel so real that I'm sure it didn't help with my whole issue of not spotting the unreliable narrator.
Finally, the subject matter. I've seen at least one review that treats some of the more sensitive topics in this book with condemnation. I think it's important to understand, going into this book where right off the bat, the researcher is up on some pretty nasty charges, that there are moments that will make you feel uncomfortable. It's also important to understand that, in the field of anthropology, it's important to watch and learn. We are so quick to place our own morals and manner of living on other cultures that sometimes we forget that we do some pretty strange things too. So I'll stop off my soapbox there with that reminder and just restate that this was a very powerful book about a very interesting progression of events. It had me thinking not only of how we tend to trample all over other lesser-known religions and rituals instead of understand and respect the fact that those very things were the essence of life for those people for centuries.
So yeah, this would make a powerful, powerful book club read - but I will also say that it will probably offend most book clubs. It's a mature topic, a mature book, and it really requires a mind set on acquiring knowledge rather than one looking to sensationalize small portions of the book at the expense of the rest of it.
|