Still talking about these books...
The Unthinkable: Who Survives When Disaster Strikes--and Why by Amanda Ripley
Greg got this book for Christmas. It didn't seem quite as boring as his usual fare, so I gave it a go after he finished it. Basically, it's a collection of survival stories. Ripley recounts the stories of several plane crashes, a horrendous fire at an Ohio supper club, tragic stampedes during the haj, both attacks on the World Trade Center, and the Virginia Tech shootings, among other disasters. Having conducted extensive interviews with survivors, she relates their personal accounts. And she examines why these people survived.
For me, this books was escapism. I read it just before the blood drive. Organizing the blood drive was seriously stressful for me. And I found it oddly relaxing to put each mini-fiasco (and a few major ones) that came along out of my mind in order to read about a plane crash or a hurricane or a terrorist attack. (I'm not sure what this says about me?)
Recounting the narratives of survivors and closely examining how and why they survived (when others didn't) made for a very interesting read. What I did not like were the conclusions and extrapolations Ripley made. At times the book takes the tone of a "how-to" manual and insists on a call to action. She should have left that alone. It was annoying (like being in a Sunday School class where every single scripture verse and scripture story has to be overly simplified so as to be 100% applied directly to your life in the form of an immediate personal action plan). And it didn't really work.
Because I guess this is what happens when disaster strikes--
- You have no idea how you will respond.
- How you respond is pretty much genetically determined.
- Procrastination is bad--except when it's not.
- Fire drills are good.
So, really, the moral of the book is "Fire drills are good."
Read the book for the stories. But draw your own conclusions. Or not. Either way, the tales she shares and the people she introduces make for a quick, interesting, thought-provoking read.
William Henry Harrison was the "Log Cabin and Hard Cider" presidential candidate of 1840. There's always a question on the AP US History exam about the Whigs' Log Cabin campaign--because it marked the beginning of modern campaign politics. Harrison never really lived in a real log cabin and he didn't even like alcohol. And he ran as a hero of the War War of 1812, even though he wasn't really that either. But the myth-making worked.
After winning the election, Harrison arrived in Washington wanting to prove himself virile, healthy, and vibrant. (Harrison was sensitive about his age--he was an ancient 68 when life expectancy was about 45. Plus, his campaign had centered on his role as a courageous military warrior.) To prove himself, he refused to wear a coat or hat at his inauguration on a wet, cold Washington day. Then he proceeded to give the longest inaugural address in U.S. history, coming in at two hours. He caught pneumonia and died a month later.
Collins points out that the "William Henry Harrison story is less about issues than about accidents of fate and silly campaigns." Even if he had lived, he would not have been a transformational figure. But he was a genuinely kind, likable man. He was open and friendly. And his primary mission in life was caring for his large family. As Collins suggests, "Maybe someday he'll be repackaged in a way that's more inspiring--not as the guy who got elected president by pretending to be something he wasn't and then made a fatal inauguration speech in the rain, but as a struggling American dad in a difficult era, trying to keep food on the table and a roof over everybody's head."
Yes, I read the book because Gail Collins wrote it. I did not have a genuine interest (or any interest at all) in William Henry Harrison. But I'm glad I read it! Harrison was a decent, warm man, who was surprised and giddy to find himself as the President. The historical context of his life was interesting--and new to me. I didn't realize how much of the War of 1812 involved battles and negotiations with Indians. I had never given much thought to life on the frontier (Ohio, Kentucky, etc.) during the early 19th century. And I was very happy to meet Tecumseh. (Why is there no question on the AP exam about him?)
This is a short read, less than 200 pages. And Gail Collins is a good writer, so you're in good hands for those 200 pages. It is a tad on the boring side. But it's brief.
Now that I have been introduced to this series, I'm considering reading up on a few other often overlooked presidents. (Franklin Pierce anyone? How about Grover Cleveland? Chester Arthur? Or perhaps Benjamin Harrison, good old William Henry's grandson? Oh, this could be fun...)
Love this book!! I highly recommend it (and, no, it's not boring). I read this book because I enjoyed so much Candice Millard's book about James Garfield, Destiny of the Republic. As much as I love James Garfield, this is the superior book. It is so well-written, in my opinion.
Millard writes about Teddy Roosevelt's journey down an unchartered tributary of the Amazon. After his humiliating defeat in the 1912 election, Roosevelt sought solace through a punishing physical challenge. The journey was something of a whim and poorly planned. (There is definitely something to micro-managing! Roosevelt surely regretted that he had not involved himself in the planning--because the lack thereof very nearly cost him and his son Kermit their lives.) The hardships this group faced are unbelievable. Unbelievable! (You'll have to read the book.)
I certainly have a new respect for Theodore Roosevelt. The Big Stick thing (there's always a question about that on the AP Exam) didn't really leave me with a favorable impression. And the Bull Moose thing was just kind of confusing. (But I knew as long as I associated the Bull Moose party with TR, I'd get the question on the AP Exam right.) I enjoyed getting to know Teddy Roosevelt. I also enjoyed getting to know Candido Mariano da Silva Rondon, Brazil's most famous explorer. What a remarkable man! Perhaps most of all, I enjoyed getting acquainted with the Amazon jungle:
Far from its outward appearance, the rain forest was not a garden of easy abundance, but precisely the opposite. Its quiet, shaded halls of leafy opulence were not a sanctuary but, rather, the greatest natural battlefield on the planet, hosting an unremitting and remorseless fight for survival that occupied every single one of its inhabitants, every minute of every day.Millard's writing is at its best when she's describing the jungle: the layers of the tropical rain forest, the different kinds of flesh-eating fish, the geological history of the continent, the variety of ants, the mat of fungi under the soil, and the "exquisitely efficient competition for survival." (She is a former writer and editor of National Geographic, after all.)
But, above all, this is an adventure tale. But a dark, claustrophobic, tragic one. (Read it.)
The Big Burn: Teddy Roosevelt and the Fire That Saved America by Timothy Egan
I am lukewarm on this book.
It was on our bookshelf, and I picked it up because of Teddy Roosevelt. I wanted to read more about him. So I did. And I enjoyed reading about him. He was definitely a man of action. Wow. We have a lot to thank him for. He (and his advisor Gifford Pinchot) invented the idea of conservation. And they reshaped the country by introducing the idea of public lands preserved for every citizen. This was totally revolutionary. It's hard to believe that so many people thought stripping the land was a GOOD thing (not just a necessary evil). He reshaped our thinking and saved the West (and facilitated saving parts of the East too). It is amazing what Teddy Roosevelt accomplished. (And what a weanie president Taft was. Poor guy. He didn't even want to be president.)
This book is about the advent of the Forest Service and the largest-ever American forest fire--that exploded in the Forest Service's infancy.
Reading about the fire is interesting and almost gripping, but the narrative could have been more compelling and easier to follow. Perhaps it's because I so recently read The Unthinkable and The River of Doubt, but Egan did not meet my expectations in his telling of the disaster itself. I'm not sure why...
Finally, Egan shies away from sending home the point that ultimately the Forest Service staked its existence on the promise to fight fires with a 0 tolerance policy. But that policy, which was ostensibly to protect the forests, has actually made them unhealthy. We now understand that fire is an important part of forest life. And there is reason to believe that the early leaders of the Forest Service knew that. As one of the Forest Rangers in the book points out (I can't remember who?): Fire is not good or bad. It just is.
Okay, now that I'm thinking about the book: It was pretty good. Just not great.
And now I need to start packing. The kids and I are flying to Texas tomorrow! Guess who is home from Chile!!
