Osborn 1

Ivory Osborn

Fitzgerald

English 2A

December 16, 2019

Brennert’s Choice

Brennert’s book Moloka’i was awarded one of the Los Angeles Times Bestsellers and

was named a best/most anticipated books by USA Today. Brennert’s usage of thematic themes in

the book Moloka’i disempowers those with leprosy and the overall history and impact leprosy

has made on Hawaii. Brennert segregates those with leprosy and those without, dividing them by

their worth. Brennert decimates these people, making their sense of identity secondary to those

considered ‘clean’, leaving the leprosy residents powerless. His intentions are unclear and takes

power away from the overall history of Moloka’i and the people who were consumed and

impacted by leprosy.

Brennert chooses not to include organizational and community advancements that those

with leprosy made on the island of Moloka’i. He chooses to leave out the best developments so

that he limits the readers knowledge on the impacts lepers made for themselves and future

generations. In the video “The Harrowing True Story of The Exiles of Moloka’i”, speaker

Tayman points out these new advancements that includes a full time medical staff, a dance hall, a

rollerskating rink, as well as hospitals and care facilities. Brennert speaks on behalf of the

medical advancements, but leaves out all details of community progression. Brennert allows the

readers to misjudge the people with leprosy, as he makes them out to be powerless. He is very

vague on the resistance and control the resident’s have on Moloka’i. He leaves us to believe that
 Osborn 2

they couldn’t fend for themselves, that the clean people on the island had to do everything for

them. Excerpts in the back of Brennert’s book contains many letters from the residents,

demanding change from the government and showing the improvement those with leprosy had

made. One of these excerpts in filed under Get to know the History: Exert 1 written by J.D.

Kahauliko, where he informs the government of how people are getting along at Moloka’i, and

what they desire and need.

Brennert presents a bias against the so called “unclean” and “clean” residents of

Moloka’i, favoring those without leprosy. Brennert’s language alters when speaking of those

with and without leprosy. He dehumanizes the lepers, ignoring their significance and chooses to

only highlight their sad and gloomy traits for the sake of his audience. “How stupid could she be

to think a clean person would love her - would risk death and decay and banishment for love! A

blossom of self-hatred flowered insider her and she jabbed her fingernail into the rosy patch of

her skin on her leg. She poked and jabbed until it bled, but felt no pain; it might as well have

been someone else’s flesh, someone else’s body. She looked up at the pali, at the trail she has

ascended years before, and cursed herself for a fool (Brennert 209).” In this quote Brennert

speaks of Rachel’s self hatred and remarks on how it was driven from leprosy. He dehumizies

Rachel in this scene and personifies leprosy, taking power away from Rachel’s character.

Brennert uses more favorable styles of language and craft when explaining those on Moloka’i

who do not have leprosy. He lets the fact that they don’t have leprosy change the way he speaks

about them. He uses more advantageous and uplifting descriptions, creating a clear difference

between the residents with leprosy and the residents without.

 Osborn 3

Brennert did not write this book to be informational, nor did he write this book to share

the story of Leprosy and its effect on Hawaii. He used this tragedy as a plot for another one of

his books. Some may argue that Brennerts persepective is ‘unique’ and does a great job at

highlighting the history of Molokai and the disease that overtook many lives. Although the story

is moving and touching, I believe that you cannot write a fictional book on such events that are

as devastating as this one. “By interweaving real-life patients and caregiver with my fictional

cast of characters, I sought to blur the lines between fact and fiction..(Brennert 385).” Brennerts

blurs the lines between what is real and what is not in correlation to the history and real life

events that took place. By blurring these lines, how can we infer that any of this information is

correct? How do we know how much be blurred for the sake of his plot and overall image as an

author? As Brennert mentions in his author's note and ‘Q and A’s’, he wrote this book because

he “loved Hawaii” and “felt accountable” to tell this story. In what way could a white man feel

accountable for telling a story of an native island where he is a foreigner? Brennert did not write

this book because he grieved for those sent to Moloka’i, he did not write it so that he could share

the true story of leprosy. In order to do that, Brennert wouldn’t have made up false pretenses and

left out impactful moments of history. Brennert wrote this book for the sake of his ratings, to

strengthen his ego as a writer.

In conclusion Brennert’s craft and usage of thematic ideas takes power away from people

with leprosy, and the history of Moloka’i. He leaves out important historical factors in order to

sway the audience a specific way. He presents a bias against those with leprosy, dehumanizing

them and leaving them powerless. He favors those on Molokai who don’t have leprosy and his

craft changes when he interprets them. Finally he clouds the lines between fact and fiction,

leaving his readers to wonder what is really true and what was made up benefit of his self-
 Osborn 4

importance. Alan Brennert should not have been the person to write this book. He uses incorrect

and misleading information about Moloka’i and takes away the power embedded in the original

events.
 Osborn 5

Works Cited

Brennert, Alan. Moloka’i. New York, St. Martin’s Press, 2003.

Modlin, Robert L. “The Colony The Harrowing True Story of the Exiles of Molokai.”

Journal of Clinical Investigation, American Society for Clinical Investigation, 2 Jan. 2007,

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1751292/.