Sea People: The Puzzle of Polynesia

Two conclusions: 1) this is a very distracted book, and 2) I kinda hate this book. The book starts out well, with stories of how the Polynesian islands were "discovered", thereby showing how difficult it is to travel there and how geographical obstacles limit the "story" that can be told of its migration. But I noticed it begins to go downhill around the time I remarked on a certain line. The author is discussing Jacob Roggeveen, a Dutch explorer. She writes of his annoying syntax: " a sign perhaps of how difficult it was for him even to think." What is the intent, and who is the intended audience, of this sentence? We are not familiar with Roggeveen's personal writing and thoughts. Roggeveen's peculiar way of thinking is not important to the story (he disappears from the book). This, plain and simple, is the author being snippy, and frankly insulting, for no reason. That's fine, personal style is quite important to non-fiction, and it doesn't hurt to have a sense of humor, but this occurs so often in this book. Later, the author introduces a character (I say "character" because, by the nature of this book, one can't make a judgment on the people the author describes; one has to rely on the canvas the author is painting) as Tupaia; she goes to lengths to say he is very important in the quest of understanding the origins of the Polynesian people. Stuff like, Tupaia was a super smart guy, he was this and that, yada yada yada, and then Tupaia's ultimate contribution to the narrative is that he ... draws a map. And then the author says, This map is very interesting, and then doesn't return to the map for the next 100 pages. This is such a frustrating aspect of the book, that of its lack of organization. I am fine with a book that is a series of stories concerning how people have tried to contextualize the Polynesian people. I am fine with a super technical book about how theories were formed about these origins, the data captured and what conclusions were wrong. I am even fine with a laidback book about the history of research into the Polynesian origins. But the book has to be about ONE thing. The current book is a scattering of anecdotes about what some people did to uncover the origins of the Polynesian people mixed in with the author editorializing about what those people did - and I don't even know if that list of anecdotes is comprehensive. Like, the author is saying, "Fornander recorded the oral traditions of the Hawaiians, and it was pretty good, but he was wrong"; and, "Willowdean tried to record the heights and skin colors of Marquesans, but she was wrong"; and, "Te Rangi Hiroa had this theory about where the Polynesians came from, but he was wrong, and, oh, do you want to know more about his life?" Like, why tell me about things that are wrong, don't I have better things to do with my time? There should instead be a narrative about, "Yes, the conclusions they made were incorrect, however the data they collected and their perspectives were influential to so-and-so who refined their viewpoints." It's amazing too how information-light the book can be. What makes a book valuable is how in-depth you can go on a subject. This book is literally, "And then someone did this, and then someone did that, and I'm going to comment on what they did, hundreds of years in the future." I would like to know that what they did, mattered. Something like, "In spite of Fornander's romanticization of Hawaiian history given his lack of verifiable sources, you can gleam this and this from the information." Why do I care about the guy's biography, which has as much detail as his Wikipedia page? This book suffers from a ludicrous amount of padding, and it's difficult to say that the padding is, in fact, the book. It's clear Christina Thompson is well-versed in this subject and has knowledge in biology, geology and environmental history besides anthropology. I really like the premise of this book, and I would love to learn more. But this book, as it stands right now, is no more useful than a Wikipedia page or a Reddit thread summarizing the key ideas.