Rating: 
Summary: Good points made poorly
Review:
This book deserves credit for pointing out the mistakes made by Galdikas in Tanjung Puting National Park.
These include swarming a natural habitat with tamed apes that can never become wild again but pass on human diseases to the wild population and outcompete them for food in the area.
It also reveals how OFI "volunter-programs" and "study tours" were little more than overpriced package tours for naive animal lovers, simply aimed at making cash.
In that respect, it is a real eye-opener which is also very accessible to the general reader.
In fact the publication of this book has already caused OFI/Galdikas to address some of the issues publicized in it!
Thus the author has probably achieved more than the she had hoped for.On the downside I found it somewhat poorly-researched.
It is obvious that Spalding knows very little about the culture, fauna, and conservation issues of Indonesia.
She seems also rather naive - all information obtained from Indonesians on her short trips to Borneo is taken at face-value.
The book is also quite unbalanced - Galdikas is put in an all negative light, ignoring the postive aspects of her long work in the area.
Finally, I also found the book too personal - Spalding speaks way too much about herself, which has bored me though may interest others... For those with a serious interest in the issues raised in this book I recommend reading: "Our Vanishing Relative: The Status of Wild Orang-Utans at the Close of the Twentieth Century" by H. D. Rijksen & E. Meijaard which is a proffessional summary of all facts and aspects of the conservation of these great apes.
Rating: 
Summary: What Spalding did not see (or say)
Review: A DARK PLACE IN THE JUNGLE is written as if Borneo were on another planet, not part of the Republic of Indonesia! Where was Spalding when President Suharto was forced to resign? when the news was filled with descriptions of one of the most corrupt, autocratic, environmentally irresponsible regimes on earth. Let's get real! THE BACKGROUND: When Spalding began her "follow" of orangutan researcher and conservationist Birute Galdikas, Indonesia's President Suharto had been in power almost 30 tears. The "Indonesia" Spalding visited was a police state that treated people (as well as orangutans) as expendible. Individuals who dared to question government policy, on the world stage (East Timorese nationalists) or the local level (the story of Spalding's friend Riska's mother), took their lives in their hands. Under this regime thousands of Indonesians were summarily executed; thousands more were forcibly "relocated" to remote islands such as Borneo; and an unknown number were arrested without trial, imprisoned, and torture. In Indonesia, such government actions were perfectly legal. Combining political repression with "crony capitalism," Suharto, his family and friends amassed huge personal fortunes--in large part by raping Borneo's ancient tropical rainforests. Millions of acres of forest were destroyed to produce plywood and paperpulp and to make way for palm oil plantations. Indonesia was the ONLY country in the world to ENDORSE clear-cutting (not selective logging) of primary forests in the name of development! In 1998-99, Borneo went up in flames, engulfing much of Southeast Asia in toxic smoke for weeks at a time. Most of the fires started in land owned by timber and palm oil concessionnaires who used El Nino as an excuse to clear still more forest--with the government's blessing. In Suharto's Indonesia, ministers and timber tycoons were one and the same. To this government, orangutans (and their advocate, Birute Galdikas) were at best a nuisance. To handle the "orangutan problem" Indonesian officials devised a new rehabilitation/conservation policy. By decree, all orphaned orangutans were to be sent to a facility in East Borneo (or in a few cases to untrained park rangers). This rehabilitation site--conveniently located in remote, unprofitable forests--was a "smoke screen" for a program of removing endangered orangutans from profitable forests, which could then be opened to still more commercial exploitation (according to an article in the respected ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE Quarterly, Fall 1998). Perhaps the "new" policy was also designed to discredit Birute Galdikas and her work. Or to convince naive outsiders to do so. SPALDING'S VERSION: Given this background, to characterize Galdikas as a "fallen angel" is ludicrous. It's as if Spalding took everything evil the world knew about Indonesia, dipped her arrow in this poison, and aimed at Galdikas, who is small game (and easy prey) in the global political-economic jungle. But Spalding wasn't interested in the big picture; she wanted a close-up shot (with herself in the picture). So she limited her "research" to brief trips to Tanjung Puting National Park and its surroundings. She talked to local people and officials and asks readers to take them at their word, as if they could speak freely without worrying that someone (the boatman?) might overhear and report the conversation to officials. If only to protect their jobs, her informants were bound to endorce the "party line." Likewise, the few scientists Spalding interviewed had to be careful if they wanted the government to renew their research permits--surely one reason Dr. carey Yeager demanded that Spalding sign a "waiver" and Dr. Anne Russon's affiliations in Borneo are vague. [Galdikas is an Indonesian citizen (a fact Spalding neglects to mention), does not require entry permits, and so is freer to speak her mind and to act according to her conscience.] Yet Spalding asks readers to believe that the rumors and heresay she collected are the "true story." One can almost hear Indonesians chuckling over another North American's naivete. In an epilogue, Spalding recounts a raid on Galdikas' house in the village of Pasir Panjung and prints parts of the government report that followed as well as selected "internal" memos and correspondance. (How she got them is a mystery, but supposing she worked with someone who worked for the Suharto government....) She asks readers to believe that these officials were motivated solely by "concern" for orphaned orangutans and that their report was totally "objective." Anyone with experience in Indonesia can read between the lines: the investigators "found" what they were asked to find, and with their jobs secure, went home to dinner. Never mind that (a) this government deceived officials of the World Bank and IMF (among others) for more than a decade; and (b) that Suharto was overthrown a year before A DARK PLACE was published. Spalding doesn't tell readers that the authors of these allegations, along with most of the ministers, officials, and policies she endorses in her book, were replaced by Indonesia's interim President Habbibie soon after he took office. Or that the Orangutan Care Center and Quarantine opened in January, under the codirection of the orangutan Foundation and Indonesia's CURRENT Forest Ministry....Or that the only place Galdikas has been charged with anything is in Spalding's own article and books.
Rating: 
Summary: Wonderful
Review: A wonderful, insightful, breathtakingly well-written book about an immensely complicated subject. I think this book breaks new ground in nature writing -- a book that is simulataneously an investigation of corruption and a meditation on our existence. Heartbreaking. I've read all of Birute's books, and this is far, far superior and balanced. This is a must-read.
Rating:
Summary: AN IMPORTANT BOOK
Review: Critics of this book claim that Spalding has not backed up her allegations against Galdikas. Leaving aside the fact that those allegations are not the point of the book, let me quote from the Indonesian government's own recent report about Galdikas, which Spalding has included as an epilogue: "Based on the results of this assessment, at this time in the house of Dr. Birute Galdikas were found 89 orangutans, which were held in four secret lodges placed in the forest behind the house...The condition of the place for accomodating the orangutans does not meet health standards. Isolation cages were made of metal measuring 1.5 meters x 1 meter x 1 meter. One such pen would be occupied by 3-5 orangutans. The isolation cages are placed in wooden sheds measuring 10 meters x 4 meters, each holding approximately 10 isolation cages. At the time of the inspection, the floors of the sheds [were] covered with fruit peels and feces, including diarrhea. Two of the sheds were located close to chicken pens owned by other people, and there were two dogs roaming the sheds....Wandering around were several baby orangutans with diarrhea. In one pen occupied by 3-5 baby orangutans, these babies were not free to move about, and their cages also had feces in them. Three young orangutans were found in a hut without ventilation and light, being cared for by a German tourist. One baby orangutan was feverish, while another was wearing a diaper for its diarrhea." How can Galdikas pretend to be against the private holding of orangutans, when she has been found to blatantly violating that law herself? She may claim that she is rehabilitating those orangutans, but her theories on that subject have been thoroughly discredited by the conclusions of the international scientific community, and by the rehabilitation work of Herman Rijksen and Willie Smits. I, too, have worked with the orangutans in Borneo. Why will no one mention the fact that Galdikas has not published _any_ new research in almost 20 years? Why has no one mentioned the fact she lives in a veritable mansion, that I and my fellow volunteers had to pay many thousands of dollars to help her "research," only to find out that our "research" notebooks were recently found rotting in piles? Why has no one mentioned that the Indonesian government recently yanked away Galdikas's title "consultant"? I suspect that the critics of this book are members of the Galdikas cult that tolerates no criticism of Ibu. Witness the online wars that erupted last year on various primate discussion groups; everytime anyone proposed that we wait and see what the investigation into Galdikas concluded, they were shouted down and threatened by rabid, illogical and unreasonable supporters of Galdikas. I for one, welcome this beautifully written book, and will be making it a required book for the curriculum I teach. Spalding may be criticized for pursuing her project against the will of Galdikas, but if every journalist were cowed by the wishes of their subject, then corruption and madness would never be exposed. This book is indispensable to understanding the awful, destructive power of the human ego.
Rating:
Summary: This book exposes the myth of the angel scientist.
Review: Eco-scam Linda Spalding was supposed to write a biography. Her subject: Dr. Birute Galdikas, one of three women sent by famed scientist Louis Leakey to study apes in the jungle. While the first two "Leakey angels" - Dian Fossey and Jane Goodall - have been widely written about, the third, Galdikas, works in relative obscurity. But Spalding ran into a significant problem: Galdikas didn't wish to speak. The author trekked to the jungles of Indonesia anyway to chronicle the reluctant saint's work to save orangutans. What unfolds is an odd combination of investigative reporting, personal journey and mid-life crisis - not to mention a book well worth the read. The author discovers that Galdikas is anything but an angel. She's manipulative, power-hungry and is making a princely sum by charging eco-tourists to do work that's harmful to the apes. Spalding is at her best here, chronicling Indonesia's failure to save its natural resources and the strange phenomenon of eco-tourism, where zealous animal lovers are blinded by Galdikas' reputation. Equally interesting is Spalding's telling of the story. She's not an investigative reporter. She's a middle-aged empty-nester coming to grips with her daughters' adulthood and her own insignificance within the vast natural kingdom. Hence, the saga is delivered in an ambling, non-judgmental manner. It's as much about Spalding as it is her subject. One might argue that a true reporter could have put nastier screws to Galdikas. Yet Spalding's sharp eye and utter lack of conceit force you to keep reading. Her personal journey is nearly as compelling as the main subject. There are a few minor problems. Spalding laments of man's neglect of nature become repetitious, and Galdikas disappears from the narrative for sizable stretches. Yet "A Dark Place in the Jungle's" freshness and honesty more than compensate for these minor blemishes.
Rating:
Summary: This book exposes the myth of the angel scientist.
Review: Eco-scam Linda Spalding was supposed to write a biography. Her subject: Dr. Birute Galdikas, one of three women sent by famed scientist Louis Leakey to study apes in the jungle. While the first two "Leakey angels" - Dian Fossey and Jane Goodall - have been widely written about, the third, Galdikas, works in relative obscurity. But Spalding ran into a significant problem: Galdikas didn't wish to speak. The author trekked to the jungles of Indonesia anyway to chronicle the reluctant saint's work to save orangutans. What unfolds is an odd combination of investigative reporting, personal journey and mid-life crisis - not to mention a book well worth the read. The author discovers that Galdikas is anything but an angel. She's manipulative, power-hungry and is making a princely sum by charging eco-tourists to do work that's harmful to the apes. Spalding is at her best here, chronicling Indonesia's failure to save its natural resources and the strange phenomenon of eco-tourism, where zealous animal lovers are blinded by Galdikas' reputation. Equally interesting is Spalding's telling of the story. She's not an investigative reporter. She's a middle-aged empty-nester coming to grips with her daughters' adulthood and her own insignificance within the vast natural kingdom. Hence, the saga is delivered in an ambling, non-judgmental manner. It's as much about Spalding as it is her subject. One might argue that a true reporter could have put nastier screws to Galdikas. Yet Spalding's sharp eye and utter lack of conceit force you to keep reading. Her personal journey is nearly as compelling as the main subject. There are a few minor problems. Spalding laments of man's neglect of nature become repetitious, and Galdikas disappears from the narrative for sizable stretches. Yet "A Dark Place in the Jungle's" freshness and honesty more than compensate for these minor blemishes.
Rating:
Summary: disappointing
Review: I had high hopes for this book. When reading about Dian Fossey, the most controversial of Leakey's protegees, I found that the books "The Dark Romance of Dian Fossey" by Hayes and "Woman of the Mists" by Mowat were indispensible companions to Fossey's own "Gorillas of the Mist". These two books provided a balanced perspective of Fossey, by potraying her violence towards poachers and willingness to break laws, but stressing her intentions- to save the few hundred mountain gorillas that were left. "A Dark Place in the Jungle", unfortunately, falls short of offering any perspective on Birute Galdikas. In fact, Galdikas is put on the back burner to make room for the author's insights on conservation and motherhood. Not that Spalding's insights are bad, actually I think this book would have worked had she focused on "women's journeys" or something similar, and left Galdikas out of it, because a much of the book is an account of her own self-discovery in Indonesia, her relationship with her daughters, and what she learned from Riska, her Indonesian tour guide. But her haphazard attempts to "research" Galdikas are unforgivable. She has a few conversations with Galdikas's aquantiances, and her arguments against Galdikas can be summed up in three statements: Galdikas is lacking a research permit, Galdikas has orangutans in her home, and Galdikas was rude to her. I don't doubt the first two statements (Indonesia has a very different concept of rudeness, however, for example it is not rude to keep someone waiting for hours) but Spalding provides us only with evidence against Galdikas. There are no interviews with Galdikas' friends or relatives, and Spalding barely speaks to Galdikas herself (although she does try) and the whole case against Galdikas is very one-sided. What caused Galdikas to change from researcher to surrogate mother of baby orangutans? What motivates her to break the law? Spalding doesn't try to answer. This book tries to be too much and fails on both counts. If Spalding wanted to write a personal story or a bunch of travel essays, she would have done a fine job had she left Galdikas out of it. If she wanted to write about Galdikas, then she should have stopped talking about herself, and dug deeper into her research. She's barely scratched the surface. For those interested in Galdikas, I recommend you skip this book, read "Reflections of Eden" for her side of the story and the chapter on Borneo in Karesh's "Appointment at the Ends of the Earth" for a view from one of her critics. (Karesh, a wildlife vet, spells out what's wrong with Galdikas and her orgination more thoroughly in one chapter than Spalding does in 300 pages.) For a balanced account, the best you can do for now is "Walking With the Great Apes" by Sy Montgomery, which about Galdikas, as well as Fossey and Jane Goodall. A book devoted entirely to Galdikas which addresses critics' accusations and provides insight into her life and work has yet to be written.
Rating:
Summary: disappointing
Review: I had high hopes for this book. When reading about Dian Fossey, the most controversial of Leakey's protegees, I found that the books "The Dark Romance of Dian Fossey" by Hayes and "Woman of the Mists" by Mowat were indispensible companions to Fossey's own "Gorillas of the Mist". These two books provided a balanced perspective of Fossey, by potraying her violence towards poachers and willingness to break laws, but stressing her intentions- to save the few hundred mountain gorillas that were left. "A Dark Place in the Jungle", unfortunately, falls short of offering any perspective on Birute Galdikas. In fact, Galdikas is put on the back burner to make room for the author's insights on conservation and motherhood. Not that Spalding's insights are bad, actually I think this book would have worked had she focused on "women's journeys" or something similar, and left Galdikas out of it, because a much of the book is an account of her own self-discovery in Indonesia, her relationship with her daughters, and what she learned from Riska, her Indonesian tour guide. But her haphazard attempts to "research" Galdikas are unforgivable. She has a few conversations with Galdikas's aquantiances, and her arguments against Galdikas can be summed up in three statements: Galdikas is lacking a research permit, Galdikas has orangutans in her home, and Galdikas was rude to her. I don't doubt the first two statements (Indonesia has a very different concept of rudeness, however, for example it is not rude to keep someone waiting for hours) but Spalding provides us only with evidence against Galdikas. There are no interviews with Galdikas' friends or relatives, and Spalding barely speaks to Galdikas herself (although she does try) and the whole case against Galdikas is very one-sided. What caused Galdikas to change from researcher to surrogate mother of baby orangutans? What motivates her to break the law? Spalding doesn't try to answer. This book tries to be too much and fails on both counts. If Spalding wanted to write a personal story or a bunch of travel essays, she would have done a fine job had she left Galdikas out of it. If she wanted to write about Galdikas, then she should have stopped talking about herself, and dug deeper into her research. She's barely scratched the surface. For those interested in Galdikas, I recommend you skip this book, read "Reflections of Eden" for her side of the story and the chapter on Borneo in Karesh's "Appointment at the Ends of the Earth" for a view from one of her critics. (Karesh, a wildlife vet, spells out what's wrong with Galdikas and her orgination more thoroughly in one chapter than Spalding does in 300 pages.) For a balanced account, the best you can do for now is "Walking With the Great Apes" by Sy Montgomery, which about Galdikas, as well as Fossey and Jane Goodall. A book devoted entirely to Galdikas which addresses critics' accusations and provides insight into her life and work has yet to be written.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant, Moving Book
Review: I was completely blown away by this book, and had a hard time putting it down at the end. It's an extremely unusual, ethical and humane book. The orangutans of Borneo are the victims of such complex forces, and this book gave me an appreciation of these complexities. It's too simple to blame things on the Indonesian government, or to criticize Galdikas. I came away from the book appreciative of Galdikas's contributions, yet aware that no one person can be expected to save a species, and that even the most well-intentioned saviors can fall victim to temptation. Spalding ought to be a poet; her evocations of the jungle and the people around her are so lyrical and fecund. The Sekonyer river, the Dayak longhouses, the beautiful and wild forest, the crush and cacaphony of the growing towns, the buzz of the river boats, the breathtaking appearances of wild orangutans floating through treetops -- Spalding made it all vivid and real. The utter disaster -- a man-made disaster -- in the Bornean forest that threatens to wipe the orangutan off the face of the earth, is revealed in all its subtlety and complexity. I wanted to cry. This is not an indictment of one person, but of humanity in general. I have never read a book like this, and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the environment and the survival of endangered species.
Rating:
Summary: Wow!
Review: I was really skeptical of this book since humans always have a tendency to tear each other down, and because I had seen the Outside magazine article that was so hard and cruel on Dr. Galdikas. But this book is incredibly fair and, even better, beautifully written. I came away with a greater knowledge of _two_ extraordinary women -- Galdikas and Linda Spalding. I have to say that the book presents a side of Dr. Galdikas that isn't at all flattering, and is in fact horrifying, but we have to have THE TRUTH if we're ever going to save our primate cousins from extinction, even if the truth hurts. I can't quit thinking about this book, and the beautiful animals and the beautiful country that Spalding has portrayed so incredibly well. READ IT!!!!!
|
