Customer Reviews

Surviving Galeras

5 star:		(25)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

As the wife of Professor Geoff Brown, killed in the Galeras eruption of 1993, and a geologist myself, I have been delighted by Stan Williams's and Fen Montaigne's account in Surviving Galeras.

It is a sensitive and honest account of an unpredictable tragedy, exploring not only the event itself, but the backgrounds and characters of the volcanologists who risk their lives to help minimise the risks to others of natural disasters. Anyone with a background in the Earth Sciences who has read the scientific literature about Galeras volcano will appreciate just how unexpected the eruption was and why those who died in it were taken by surprise.

Although Galeras is the major character in the volcanic drama, other eruptions, e.g. that of Mount St. Helens,Mont Pelee and Vesuvius, are explored as well. There is a good mixture of accessible science, human interest and historical context with various themes carefully interwoven. The horror of being caught in an eruption is painted vividly but the temptation to dramatize events has been avoided.

Congratulations are due to the authors for raising awareness of natural disasters, and the risks that must be taken by those who seek to understand them for the benfit of society.

This book, along with Victoria Bruce's account of the disaster at Galeras are a must read for anyone interested in Earth science or psychology. Williams appears to be a rogue volcanologist with a cavalier attitude about the dangers of working inside an active volcano. The simple fact is that Williams apparently did have some warning that Galeras was not 'sleeping' the day he led the conference into the crater and he did not insist on safety precautions. As leader of the expedition, Williams could easily have demanded that everyone wear safety gear or they would not be allowed inside. Apparently, Williams thinks anyone who is interested in safety is somewhat of a wimp. While hard hats, gas masks and flame retardent suits would not have saved everyone, no doubt a few of the nine might have also lived. The post-disaster story is almost as intriguing as the events leading to the disaster Williams appears as a glory seeker 'cashing in' on his compatriots ill-fortune. That is perhaps over-emphasized in Bruce's account. Williams himself suffered a serious head injury that apparently left him with some behavioral problems and difficulty in living a normal life. Nevertheless, he was made aware of how he was portraying the incident and has done little to correct those errors of fact publicly. I highly reccomend you read both accounts. Williams ego comes through strongly in both accounts of the story and yet this book paints a somewhat different picture of the post-tragedy fallout.

Unfortunately, most of this book is built on nothing but Stanley Williams' ego. After parading around the media for years bragging about how he had been the only survivor of a scientific expedition on Galeras, Williams continues the lie by writing a book about the explosion but conveniently forgets about the other 5 scientists who got out alive. A more compelling and truthful account about Galeras is the book by Victoria Bruce called "No Apparent Danger". Bruce took the time to interview the dozens of people involved with the Galeras tragedy and so her book is much more broad-based than the single-handed novel written by Williams.

This is truly a spectacular book. I would highly recommend it for everyone to read. It is a breathtaking first-hand account of the events of the Galeras eruption in January 1993. After reading the book by Fen Montaigne and Stanley Williams, I felt as though I lived through the eruption of Galeras and it even made me short of breath. Stanley Williams clearly sets forth his emotions for all people, whether involved at Galeras, those families who suffered as a result of the incident, or for volcano lovers. Being a volcano lover, I remember the eruption quite well and have followed articles about it ever since. This book is definitely a "must read".

While writing a children's book (Wild Earth: Volcano!), I interviewed two volcanologists: Stan Williams and John Ewert, a USGS scientist who was at Pinatubo in 1991.

Mt. Pinatubo, in the Philippines, was the second-greatest eruption of the 20th century. After planting equipment on the rumbling volcano, scientists bunkered down at Clark Air Force Base. They were nearly certain the volcano would blow. They also knew, from geologic evidence, that Pinatubo was powerful enough to bury the base.

Even so, the scientists could not predict the exact moment and size of the explosion. In fact, there were lots of explosions. A big explosion a few days before the really big one spewed ash and rock for miles. When the big blast did happen, the scientists hightailed it out of the base through fallout: a black rain of acidic ash and volcanic rocks. John Ewert told me that, in hindsight, they probably should not have stayed so long.

The point is that those scientists could have been injured or killed at several points in time--by a mini-explosion of rocks as they were setting up equipment, by a collapsed roof at Clark Air Base, by fallout as they zoomed away in their jeeps. They weren't reckless. They were cautious. Yet they still could have died. Studying active volcanoes up close is a very dangerous job.

Two years after Pintatubo, in 1993, six scientists and three tourists did die on Galeras volcano in South America. They were assaulted by a "hiccup" on the volcanic scale--a relatively small explosion in which a volcano clears its throat, spitting up hot rocks the size of TV sets. To tiny, ant-like humans on a huge mountain, any explosion, no matter how small, can be deadly.

The exact time of such explosions isn't 100 percent predictable. Despite rapid advances in technology and knowledge, volcano science is an educated guessing game full of probabilities and percentages and confusing, conflicting, or incomplete data.

Stan Williams and his team were preparing to descend Galeras when the explosion occurred. Had they left a little earlier, they would have been safe. Had they gone up the day before, as originally planned, they would have been safe. Had the volcano exploded before they went up--thus cancelling the expedition--they would have been safe.

On the other hand, had the explosion been bigger, more scientists might have died, including Williams' two rescuers, who were elsewhere on the volcano.

I honestly don't know if Stan Williams made a mistake in judgment, or if the scientists were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Clearly, it's an issue that has polarized people, both scientists and nonscientists.

What I found in Williams' book Surviving Galeras was a sensitive man humbled by a life-changing experience. He admits to having had a large ego, a certain swagger that comes with the title "volcanologist." He admits to getting caught up in the media circus after the accident. He admits to an addiction: being "hooked on the thrill of climbing into the crater."

Williams does sound defensive in places, pointing an accusatory finger at what he perceives as overly harsh criticisms by fellow scientists. He describes those criticisms, and then explains why he disagrees. It's his book, his opinion.

Whichever side people take, the debate is an interesting one that has already improved safety guidelines for volcano researchers. For example, one criticism is that Williams didn't wear protective gear and, as expedition leader, didn't tell anyone else to do so, either. For years, he and colleagues had climbed active volcanoes in Gortex parkas and sturdy boots. Williams remembers being disconcerted and concerned when the tourists showed up in sneakers and light street clothes.

Two scientists, following U.S. safety guidelines, wore helmets and discussed an evacuation plan in case of an eruption. One of the scientists, Andy Adams, also wore a fire-resistant suit. The precautions saved Adams's life. A helmet might have lessened the severity of Williams' head wound. A suit might have reduced his burns.

Today, Williams points out, Adams has helped make evacuation plans and safety gear part of the international guidelines for volcano safety. Williams himself is a convert. He wears a helmet and protective suit on the job. He says that some scientists still choose not to use the safety gear.

I found Surviving Galeras to be both very readable and very human. Williams discusses in an open and straightforward manner his problems with memory (he suffered severe injuries, including brain damage), the points where other eyewitness stories conflict with his own, his human flaws, the many physical and mental difficulties he is still working to overcome, the strain on his marriage, his new-found humility at no longer being able to pursue his career with the same intensity.

At the heart of Surviving Galeras, Williams and co-author Fen Montaigne tell a riveting, true-life tale of a disastrous afternoon on an active volcano. Through their extensive interviews with other Galeras victims and their families, the authors provide insight into the lives, motivations, and exploits of volcanologists. They put human faces on "the three tourists," a university administrator, his teenage son, and his son's friend, who, in effect, died of curiosity.

The authors explain the science of volcanology in a clear and interesting way, including volcanic eruptions of the past and their lasting impact. In fact, it is that deep commitment to educating the public that prompted Stan Williams, a geology professor at Arizona State, to patiently answer my questions and help me simplify tough scientific concepts for young children. (The interviews took place before Surviving Galeras was published.)

As a writer and nonscientist, I applaud Williams' willingness to share his time and knowledge freely. I feel both educated and enlightened by this book.

I truly enjoyed this book. One reviewer said women will find it offensive(a male reviewer). I did not. True, all of the scientists on the mountain were men. So what? The rescuers were women and Williams portrays them as the true heroes. Should men be offended? After the eruption the soldiers on the volcano fled and the women led the rescue.

People seem to be trying so much to hate the author of this book. Why? He admits over and over that he does not know all the answers.

Somenone else has written a book and claims to know all the answers even though she has never been on a volcano.

I truly enjoyed this book. Read it and ignore the people who for personal gain or because of professional jealousy or for whatever reason dislike the author. He admits he is human.I thought he came across as a flesh and blood likable man.

I thoroughly enjoyed this gripping account. Some reader felt the digressions were distracting but I felt they addded to the tension and really taught me ( a nonscientist) a lot.The Perfect Storm did much the same thing with the same tension building result. The author is not a saint and does not pretend to be. He conveys brilliantly what it is about volcanoes and their study which draws people to this dangerous work. Once I started this book I had a hard time puttting it down.

Stan Williams has bravely written an account, with the help of Fen Montaigne, of a life-changing event as he recalls it. He admits that his recollection is only his own, and he did have a significant brain injury. I see the book as a tribute to the people he worked closely with, some of whom died. Part of himself died,too. Now he is still being attacked after trying to set the record straight, while he is also trying to educate about volcanoes. I see it as tragic that he has survived to live in a hell of criticism. Eight years is a long time to live this way. The evidence to predict the "hiccup" was not there at the time. Really read the book and others to decide for youself.

Surviving Galeras provides a fascinating and valuable read. The book blends solid, clearly explained science with insightful and honest descriptions of the events before, during, and after the catastrophic eruption of Galeras volcano in Columbia. As a field geologist who occasionally works in risky environments (but not volcanoes), I found Williams' description of the personalities who do this sort of work and the way they reached decisions to be familiar and, more importantly, entirely rational and reasonable. Williams and Montaigne allow the reader to really understand how this type of field scientist works.

Anyone who has been in the midst of an event where people died or were seriously injured knows that memories don't get recorded accurately. Williams acknowledges the problem and presents the memories of others as well as his own. Some of Williams's critics have placed an unnecessary blackmark on both their profession and their agencies by airing "dirty laundry". Public rantings have ranged from legitimate (but overly inflammatory) debate over the value of seismic vs. gas flux data to asinine declarations that mandating hard hats would have minimized this tragedy. Fortunately, Williams and Montaigne have stayed with the high road in their book and avoided the temptation of pandering to journalist in search of creating conflict. In this book, Williams shows great respect for all his colleagues, even his critics, and one senses the effort to provide balance to the story. I have only been in the field with one person (Patty Mothes) in the book and she is portrayed exactly as the person I know. Williams does not minimize the credit due to his colleagues, whether for their scientific endeavors or their heroism on the fateful day. He shows remarkable class in honoring his graduate students (a trait all too rare in American academia), praising his fallen colleagues and his rescuers, and presenting the conflicting views of his critics.

Good science requires a variety of approaches and, far too often, practitioners of the different styles see themselves as competitors for grant money and acclaim. Divergent geologist who view themselves as colleagues serve the profession far better. Valuable information comes from the lab and the computer. But, despite our progress in these "safe" venues of science, field observations still provide critical data. Obtaining that data on active volcanoes requires a personality that accepts, even enjoys, risk. Williams calls these folks, "My kind of geologist." But, some of Williams critics seem to think that this personality trait is better applied to bungee jumping, driving fast cars, and chain-smoking cigarettes instead of striving to better understand a public hazard. Their logic evades me. We need the out-on-the-edge field scientists, and Surviving Galeras helps show us why without denigrating the other approaches to studying volcanoes. We need the lab-oriented geochemist and computer-oriented geophysicists, also. But, the nature of public opinion is that field scientists make sexier subjects for the journalist, which seems to annoy some non-field folks. Unfortunately, it appears that the one thing more attractive to some journalists than a cutting-edge, field scientists is personal controversy.

Read Surviving Galeras. It's a great read....entertaining, informative, and void of the emotional smears that mark other accounts of this dramatic event.

When Charles Darwin viewed the remnants of an ocean floor on the heights of the Andes Mountains, he reflected on the seismic powers that change the world. Films of molten stone, red hot and moving relentlessly, send shudders through audiences around the world. It is in Surviving Galeras, the personal story of Professor Stanley Williams' escape from death, that readers again can sense volcanic power. Galeras, a volcano in Colombia became active in the 1980's, attracting scientists to study the patterns of movements and escaped gases, and tourists for the thrill of danger. On January 16, 1993, at early afternoon, as scientists were completing their observations, the mountain exploded sending blazing stones of all sizes to the atmosphere. Six scientists and three tourists died. Professor Williams, his skull and both legs fractured, was saved.

As leader of the scientific team, the question is asked: "Why did he not know that the mountain would blow?" We are still far from predicting a volcano's activity, and the very fact that a team of experienced volcanologists were fooled is evidence enough that the science is still in its childhood, and much more work needs to be done.

Williams is fascinated by active volcanos. The story is well told of the meeting of scientists at the base of Galeras, the field trip and studies, the sudden eruption, the years of recovery, and the years of recriminations. The reader is left with admiration for the scientists and wonder that men are willing to put themselves at imminent risk of death.

The Galeras story is interspersed with chapters on man's interest in volcanos. The monumental historic discharges of Vesuvius, Laki, Tambora, and St. Helens are described, with their awesone loss of life and the dramatic changes in the earth's shape, making the book not only a personal diary but a field text and travel guide as well.

The book is an excellent read and a prologue to the Hollywood movie that is sure to come.