There was something so wrong about this book. Reading it was like some sort of slow, pervy foreplay to the final #shockingnotshocking pages. I think I hated this book. I hated it but was simultaneously impressed with it.
Spoiler territory below (You be the judge though because it's similar to Lars Von Trier's end-of-the-world film Melancholia, where the opening scene is ...the end of the world. Similarly, all that is "revealed" in Yanagihara's story is written in her first few pages).
Newspaper clippings mark the beginning of The People In the Trees and promise a story of intrigue, adventure and high drama. We learn the following: A scientist, Dr. Norton Perina, embarks on a journey to the remote desert island Ivu'ivu and uncovers a lost tribe that doesn't appear to age. While there, Perina discovers the secret of extending a human lifespan: a rare turtle's blood. Back in America, Perina rises to fame when he publishes his studies, but ultimately, faces 1) disapproval from his colleagues who say he has ruined the island (and a species), and 2) criticism from the scientific community due detrimental side effects of ingesting the blood. Perina returns to the island multiple times over the years--racked with guilt, to make amends, to find peace, you name it--each time, adopting more of the island's children--up to 40. ...one of which ultimately accuses him of sexual abuse.
...This is all covered in the first few pages via the clippings. The actual narrative is in the form of Perina's memoirs, edited by Perina's colleague, Dr. Kubodera (it's clear from the onset that Kubodera is one of Perina's few remaining friends, most of whom desert him once the assault charges are publicized). Kubodera, being the non-judgmental chap he is, volunteers to review Perina's memoirs while he's killing time in the slammer. He also takes the liberty of adding footnotes to Perina's story where he deems necessary. As the novel progresses, the footnotes become more and more significant, where--in Kubodera's methodical, systematic prose--he glosses over a suicide, what becomes of the natives of the island... It's all very fitting that the last few pages of the novel are a footnote.
Despite the initial strong hook, I was ultimately disappointed by how dull certain sections were once I was actually in them: When Perina is in medical school, I couldn't wait for him to get to Ivu'ivu, when we get to the island, I couldn't wait for him to discover the people, when he discovers the people, I couldn't wait for him to discover the turtles. And so on and so on.
Then there's the subject matter. The story is really fucking challenging in terms of content! What is Yanagihara ultimately even trying to say? There are themes of colonialism, superiority, abuse, justification, the neverending quest, inaccessibility. But in the end, it's literally a story about rape. The rape of a people, the rape of a land, the rape of nature. The ugliness and assertiveness of man. The consequences.
I can't just crap all over Yanagihara's book. This is the lady that gifted us A Little Life. Her prose dazzle. When we make it to the jungle, it's a menacing, claustrophobic landscape: I walked fifteen minutes to the west of the camp and then took a right at a particularly vicious-looking orchid, whose urinous blooms spat out two long, spiraling stamens the color of fresh blood. The narration--removed, exact, straightforward--is spot on for a scientist's memoirs, and impressed me all the more due to its 180 degree divergence from A Little Life.
Some might say that Perina (and Kubodera) were unreliable narrators, but I disagree. One has all the information needed from the get-go to see who both characters are. I liken Perina to Patricia Highsmith's Tom Ripley in The Talented Mr. Ripley--you just bloody know something's off.
A challenging read: at times due to style, but 100 percent in terms of subject matter.