I once had a colleague who spoke in allusions and footnotes. Huang’s Inseparable suffers from the same disease. He pontificates on the following while following the relatively simple story of Chang and Eng: Alexis de Tocqueville, Dickens, Nat Turner, Drunken Indians, the great awakening, Amerind diaspora, yankee peddlers, Charles Willson Peale, Black Hawk, the history of phrenology, Twain, Walker Evans, Poe, Melville, Whitman, Jane Austen, Victor Hugo, John Harvey Kellogg. Then as Ron Popeil would say, “There’s more! the Oneida Community, Northern abolitionist newspapers, Violet and Daisy Hilton, Sally Heming, Twain again , Barnum, Ambrose Bierce –oh and so many more in this repetitious poorly written work. His writing makes one cringe with “So unique” and “not inconceivable.” Plus his use of idioms reads like a text book written for non-speakers.
I have always been interested in Chang and Eng’s stories since I grew up as their neighbors, separated by about 100 years. Basically, they were exploited, settled down, exploited themselves, lived fairly normal lives, and died. But Huang tries to display all of the nineteenth century and its various philosophical bases and biases. He looks upon himself as a modern de Tocqueville. But unlike that wise Frenchman who observed, Huang needs to explain America by what he has learned in books. And he won’t even let poor Andy Griffith alone. (Too much of the book is concerned with the author and Mt. Airy and the fictional town of Mayberry.)
Remember that clarinet song “Stranger on the Shore” by Aker Bilt? Huang is that same stranger on the shore trying to tell it all to us. And failing.