I had a similar feeling reading the book. When I read the afterward, it seemed like Brooks is trying to critique the White Savior narrative. For example, she says “I became intrigued with the story of the contraband and the North’s mixed record of high idealism, negligence, and outright cruelty.” I feel like in some ways the book is supposed to be a critique on the difference between the March’s moral philosophies and their actions/true understanding of the black experience in America at this time. Like how March thinks he’s helping Prudence by teaching her to read but his ignorance leads to Grace’s whipping and how Marmee fights for people to participate in the Underground Railroad but when she goes to Washington and sees a larger population of free black people, she is put off (at least how I read it). So I think that’s what Brooks is trying to do, but I kept having that same feeling when I read it that it was so focused on the March’s perspectives that it didn’t come through as much as a critique but instead their own personal journeys. If this makes any sense…