I enjoyed parts of this book and it did keep my attention. The problem I had was the back and forth between the two characters I felt that neither of them were truly fleshed out in the short amount of space with the book. I felt there was a little something missing from the book to really push it over the edge.

On an imaginary island in the Pacific, a rebellion takes place; the goal of the rebels is to overthrow the island’s occupying power identified as the Empire and to capture Ø Com’s outer station, the location of the Empire’s entire wireless operations.

The points of view of two women are given. Lota is a young revolutionary who has come under the spell of Kurtz, an older woman who leads the rebels. Rachel is the First Secretary of the Empire’s embassy on the island. Lota describes events from the inside of the rebel group as she takes part in the insurgency. Rachel, who is looking forward to her last day of work at the embassy before she returns to the Capital to join her husband and their daughter who fled the island after escalating racial tensions, is taken captive.

In many ways this book is a modern retelling of Heart of Darkness. Like Conrad’s novel, it examines the hypocrisy of imperialism. “The island was an independent nation, but everyone knew that all the real decisions were made by the capital - and . . . by Ø.” There are suggestions of “the Empire’s involvement in the forced rendition of illegally held prisoners.” Kurtz maintains that on the island, there is “’a top-secret heavily guarded black site, home to roughly sixty-five of the Empire’s most-wanted terrorist suspects, political prisoners, and other detainees.”

The style of the novel I found to be tedious. The constant use of the em dash becomes annoying: Rachel felt – as she had so often that fall – backed into a corner” and “It was useless to think about any of this now. She’d had no other choice at the time – or she’d felt that way, which amounted to the same thing. If she’d changed her mind and made a fuss – pressed for an immediate reassignment – she’d have looked impulsive, even unstable, difficult to please” and “She moved – following Baby Jane this time – toward the embassy doors. If she couldn’t feel as she had this morning – as if she’d entered, or was just about to enter, the future itself – she might at least, she thought, focus on the here and now.” Parentheses are also overused: “Here she was (the lump stuck; Lota blinked back a swell of hot tears), surrounded by history” and “That was the thing with intelligence, though, she reminded herself (drawing mostly from what she’d learned from TV)” and “The same relief she’d felt just a moment ago as she (Yes!) had given in, too, allowing – no, inviting – the past to simply slip away.”

Some sections of the book are difficult to follow: “Lota gripped the seatback tighter. Yes, she thought. What was any revolution, therefore, but this? Yes, this. Despite her personal doubts and misgivings. The revolution – the future – was this. Was Kurtz drumming her hand on the dash. Was the sound of her voice as it beat out the time. Was – Yes! This island. This air. Was yes this water. This dirt, this van, this rutted road.”

No one seems to know what anyone feels: “A wave – first of horror and then of intense desire – passed over her. And then (because she was suddenly unsure which feeling was which, or if the two feelings were actually one) she was hit by a still more powerful wave of confusion” and “Rachel watched as the woman’s expression changed slowly, betraying – What? Confusion, certainly. Anger. Fear. And . . . something else. A sort of (or was this only a projection?) instinctive, physical relief.”

This book just didn’t do anything for me; I just found myself wondering how much more I had to read to reach the end. Perhaps I was just not in the right frame of mind for the book or perhaps it’s just too esoteric for me.

Note: I received a digital galley from the publisher via NetGalley.

I wish I would have had a copy of Johanna Skibsrud’s "Island" 30 years ago when I was studying "Heart of Darkness" in British Literature class at university. If I did, I would have had the patience to read all the way through Joseph Conrad’s story of moral corruption. (20 years later I gave it another go, and you’d be pleased to note I read it in its entirety and appreciated its brilliance.).
Skibsrud’s reimagining of Heart of Darkness is a timely novel in the age of “us” and “them”, a mentality that seems exacerbated by the current political situation. This novel forces us to contemplate our role in the various structure that form our identity, be it political, historical or political. It reminds us that governments can be built on precarious scaffolds that strive more towards power than people.
The story is told from the point of view of two characters that exist on opposite ends of the pollical spectrum, Lota, a young revolutionary, and Racheal a “first secretary” of the foreign service working at the “Empires” embassy. Both women struggle in their respective realities using memories of their past in an effort to make sense of their present.
Island is a novel I would seriously consider using in my classroom. Not only does it fit perfectly with the curricular themes of “identity”, “nationalism”, and “globalization” it also is worthy of literary study.
Island comes out
https://inkandspine.com