brianlarson's review against another edition
3.0
“Isaac’s Storm” lacks the panache of Larson’s other books.
Unwittingly, I’ve read Larson’s entire collection… in reverse order of their publication. It’s clear that this book served as the fertile ground for Larson to experiment with his now infamous “bad guy, good guy” juxtaposed narratives.
Readers are left to interpret for their own the prowess and moral-standing of our titular character. There are some clear “villains” in the book as well: Moore and, anthropomorphically speaking, the Great Hurricane. There’s no winning “good guy” (Joseph is a sidelined character that should’ve been brought to the main field) or “hero” (it seems that some of the Cuban meteorologists could’ve really fit the bill here; but, again, they never serve as anything more than anecdotal players in a book about a storm that killed some 6,000-10,000 people). Notwithstanding, readers of Larson will be able to recognize the talent brewing, even in its nascent, chaotic form.
The backdrop of “Isaac’s Storm” is a historical narrative around the fall of a once-prized American city, Galveston. Larson’s detailing of Galveston’s rival with Houston was brilliant; no history textbooks could detail this rivalry better. I was a little shocked that by the end of the book Larson associates Houston’s monumental rise to mega-city with its discovery of oil around the Buffalo Bayou. It read to me as “oh yeah, Galveston never really stood a chance of becoming the shining city on the hill because, of well, oil.” Maybe the intent was to show how Galveston could possibly have beat Houston to the oil field discovery had it prepared its citizens for one of the worst hurricanes of all time? It’s possible. But did Galveston ever really stand a chance of gaining this title? Probably not.
“For days, however, Isaac had been receiving cables from the Weather Bureau's Central Office in Washington describing a storm apparently of tropical origin that had drenched Cuba. Although Isaac did not know it, there was confusion about the storm's true course, debate as to its character. The bureau's men in Cuba said the storm was nothing to worry about; Cuba's own weather observers, who had pioneered hurricane detection, disagreed. Conflict between both groups had grown increasingly intense, an effect of the unending campaign of Willis Moore, chief of the U.S. Weather Bureau, to exert ever more centralized control over forecasting and the issuance of storm warnings. The bureau had long banned the use of the word tornado because it induced panic, and panic brought criticism, something the bureau could ill afford. Earlier that week, Moore had sent Galveston a telegram asserting yet again that only headquarters could issue storm warnings.”
Unwittingly, I’ve read Larson’s entire collection… in reverse order of their publication. It’s clear that this book served as the fertile ground for Larson to experiment with his now infamous “bad guy, good guy” juxtaposed narratives.
Readers are left to interpret for their own the prowess and moral-standing of our titular character. There are some clear “villains” in the book as well: Moore and, anthropomorphically speaking, the Great Hurricane. There’s no winning “good guy” (Joseph is a sidelined character that should’ve been brought to the main field) or “hero” (it seems that some of the Cuban meteorologists could’ve really fit the bill here; but, again, they never serve as anything more than anecdotal players in a book about a storm that killed some 6,000-10,000 people). Notwithstanding, readers of Larson will be able to recognize the talent brewing, even in its nascent, chaotic form.
The backdrop of “Isaac’s Storm” is a historical narrative around the fall of a once-prized American city, Galveston. Larson’s detailing of Galveston’s rival with Houston was brilliant; no history textbooks could detail this rivalry better. I was a little shocked that by the end of the book Larson associates Houston’s monumental rise to mega-city with its discovery of oil around the Buffalo Bayou. It read to me as “oh yeah, Galveston never really stood a chance of becoming the shining city on the hill because, of well, oil.” Maybe the intent was to show how Galveston could possibly have beat Houston to the oil field discovery had it prepared its citizens for one of the worst hurricanes of all time? It’s possible. But did Galveston ever really stand a chance of gaining this title? Probably not.
“For days, however, Isaac had been receiving cables from the Weather Bureau's Central Office in Washington describing a storm apparently of tropical origin that had drenched Cuba. Although Isaac did not know it, there was confusion about the storm's true course, debate as to its character. The bureau's men in Cuba said the storm was nothing to worry about; Cuba's own weather observers, who had pioneered hurricane detection, disagreed. Conflict between both groups had grown increasingly intense, an effect of the unending campaign of Willis Moore, chief of the U.S. Weather Bureau, to exert ever more centralized control over forecasting and the issuance of storm warnings. The bureau had long banned the use of the word tornado because it induced panic, and panic brought criticism, something the bureau could ill afford. Earlier that week, Moore had sent Galveston a telegram asserting yet again that only headquarters could issue storm warnings.”
slurpy_mcgee's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
3.75
Isaac is kind of an ass.
nicolaspratt's review against another edition
3.0
A very interesting recounting of the story of the deadliest hurricane in US history. As with many of Larson's other books, this book rambles through a series of stories all generally connected, before getting to the "point" of the book. His style is always interesting and easy to read, but sometimes it feels like a lot of extra content to get to the main point. I enjoyed learning about the beginning of the national weather service, and how infighting possibly caused unnecessary deaths. Worth the read for the history, but lacking in cohesiveness.
slider9499's review against another edition
3.0
Starts off very, very slow. So slow, I almost stopped reading it. But then picks up about 60% through. Not his best work and I am a huge fan. I was going to rate it 2 stars but as I said, it picked up to earn a 3-star rating.
leasummer's review against another edition
3.0
This was a very interesting book detailing the 1900 hurricane that struck Galveston, TX. It includes the budding Weather Bureau and their dedication to being taken seriously, even at the detriment of those depending on them for weather. It shows how the arrogance of man can make a disaster much worse and more deadly. There are stories from survivors of the hurricane to paint a picture of what it was like as the hurricane came and what it left behind.
captaincocanutty's review against another edition
2.0
While the meteorological science, eyewitness accounts, and historical context are interesting to read to gain perspective, Erik Larson tries way too hard to paint Isaac Cline in a sympathetic light. My great grandfather survived that storm no thanks to him, and Cline should not be portrayed as some tragic hero.
jeaninesmith1962's review against another edition
4.0
This book had a very slow start. As it began to share the history of meteorology, it grabbed my interest. I learned a great deal about the science of weather - hurricanes in particular.