Customer Reviews

The Texas Aggie Bonfire : Tradition and Tragedy at Texas A&M

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Maybe it's because I went to a college with no appreciable tradition of its own that I've grown so interested lately in tradition-filled schools like the Virginia Military Institute and Texas A&M University. I picked up Irwin A. Tang's 'The Texas Aggie Bonfire' hoping to discover more about that tradition, and about the role of tradition at A&M generally. I got both more and less than I bargained for.

In a note at the front of the book, the author writes that this is the first title released by 'The it Works' ('it' presumably being 'Irwin Tang'). 'Our company specializes in amplifying the voices, issues, and debates ignored, distorted, or unheard in the mainstream corporate media.' That manifesto symbolizes Tang's approach to the collapse of the Texas Aggie Bonfire on November 18, 1999, in which twelve A&M students were killed. Tang's book is an insightful history, but it's a book with a purpose, too -- one that may not sit well with many members of the Aggie community, and arguably keeps it from being the definitive history of this tragic event.

Although Tang (a lifelong resident of Aggieland and an A&M grad) doesn't leave a lot of doubt about his own opinion on Bonfire, he really spells it out in one of his interviews with an A&M faculty member: 'My book proposes that the Texas A&M culture is at the root of the Bonfire tragedy. Our way of doing things allowed for an unsupervised, unregulated, uninvestigated Bonfire. One component that compounded the dangerously independent nature of the Bonfire was the fact that it is extremely difficult and perhaps dangerous to one's career and possibly dangerous in other ways to criticize Bonfire, the Aggie way of doing things, or other Aggie traditions.'

Though I'm not sure I agree with all Tang's conclusions, I value and appreciate his willingness to swim against what is clearly the spring tide of Aggie opinion. Many Aggies may want to fling this book across a room, but I'd bet they would benefit a lot from reading it.

Tang notes that he began writing his book as the post-collapse investigation was still unfolding. I was concerned, therefore, that this book would be like so many of the 'instant' histories and biographies that appear on the shelves within weeks or months of an important event (or movie). I shouldn't have worried. Tang is a skilled journalist and apparently inexhaustible researcher (maybe *too* inexhaustible -- the in-depth history of Bonfire was a little more than I thought I really needed). His style of writing, however, leads to my biggest stylistic criticism: his annoying habit of switching back and forth between past and present tense, sometimes even within a single paragraph. 'The commission will have to...', 'Investigators must...', 'It remains to be seen if...'. Even the best journalist can use a skilled copy editor sometimes.

After reading Laura Fairchild Brodie's VMI book and Amy Efaw's 'Battle Dress,' I was not expecting to find myself exploring yet again the question of assimilating women into traditionally male preserves. But that's an aspect of the Bonfire story too. Unfortunately, Tang falls into the trap I commended Dr Brodie for avoiding: the temptation to analyze Bonfire/VMI in the terms of primitive tribal rituals. Fortunately, this brush with pop sociology is relatively brief.

All in all, Irwin Tang's book is not the broad-brush look at Aggie tradition I was expecting. However, his portrait of an institution muscle-bound by its own traditions is an insightful one. Is it a complete picture? Maybe not. But it is a clear-eyed one, and one I predict will be a crucial resource for future historians of a sad, dark day in Aggie history.

As a former crew chief during the '99 Bonfire, I was closely involved with building the on-campus bonfire for 2 years. It would have been many more if I could have chosen it to be. The point I am tryin to make is that I loved the bonfire tradition deeply, and have been forever changed by its loss, which meant the loss of many young, promising lives. In my capacity as a crew chief and bonfire worker, I was filled with the desire to protect our tradition from criticism, as were and are my bonfire brothers. Ignorance is bliss, but not a way to live. I have encouraged everyone to read this book, to educate themselves about the misgivings that cling tightly to Aggie traditions, mostly to no avail. Winston Churchill stated once, "Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across the truth. Most jump up, brush themselves off and hurry on about their business as if nothing had happened." The truth about accountability is all our responsibility to know. When you read this book, you will see how stumbling face first into the truth sticks to you if you are strong enough to stand it. Never let common sentiment guide your sense of the truth. Hopefully, you will give this book a chance, from the advice of an Aggie who would have liked to not be in the minority of those who have. Bonfire should come back to campus, but not without understanding why it truly ever lost its rightful place. Good luck to you who endeavors to know.

Aggies who think they know everything there is to know about Texas A&M should read this book. This book is a sincere examination of the history and internal politics surrounding Bonfire. Tang is asute and wildly reverent(not irrerevent) in the conclusions he draws about the culture of Aggieland, and how that culture contibuted to numerous tragedies: the event on November 18, 1999 is only (if the death of 12 young people can ever only be anything)a manifestation of an absolute, rigid adherence to a doctrine of irrationality and destruction. The book delves into A&M's strained, often hostile relationship with minorities, women, and other oddball 2%er's. As I was reading it, my experiences at one of the nation's largest universities came back to me: all the smells, sights,and all were linked to what the book focuses on: CONFLICT. A&M is an institution in conflict with itself. This has caused the institution great pain, and A&M's challenge is to confront this issue with the courage to do the right thing. There is no one more qualified to write this novel, because it is clear that the author has a passionate love of Aggieland. The book is an offer of reconcilation and healing, and should be read as such. Tang has made a well-reasoned, valuable contribution to the heated, polarized discourse that swirls around the future of bonfire, and he makes an excellent argument for alternatives to the hallowed tradition. The interviews contained within the book provide differing insights on the various viewpoints of the increasingly diverse (if you probe deep enough) population of dissenters. Anyone who cares about the future of Texas A&M should read this book and ask themselves how they can contribute to making the university a place of intellectual stimulation and open-mindedness, not one of death and destruction. I am so glad to have read this book: it speaks truth.

I received this book as a gift from my sister-in-law, the author's mother, when she visited us recently. It immediately caught my attention since I heard of the tragedy at Texas A&M, but did not read any of the news reports. (I did not even ask my in-laws, who are A&M employees, concerning this.) His book answers the two primary questions any of us outside of Texas A&M have:

- what happened?

- why did it happen? As an outsider with regard to this school, I found it odd why such a thing could happen on a major university campus. Just what were they thinking? This answers all the questions very well.

The author wrote the book in three months, and it shows with a few minor grammatical errors. But he should be forgiven these oversights in view of the wealth of information and depth of research and analysis presented here. One glance at the bibliography convinced me that he must have many long nights just reading the material alone. Indeed he should be commended for a job well done in presenting not only the facts, but also capturing the feelings of those who were close to the tragedy. I found the interviews of particular interest. They gave the book a more personal feel, rather than being a disinterested examination.

What is missing is the official findings by the University, to give a truly balanced treatment. Hopefully the author will put out a second edition including the official findings, and possibly some follow-up interviews in reaction to those finding.

I recommend this book to anyone with even a mild curiosity concerning this tragedy. I plan to pass it around to my friends and even to the local public library, in the hopes that they will purchase several copies.

I picked up this book at a bookstore, thinking I'd flip through it. Three hours and deep emotions later, I finished it. As a former student (there are no ex-Aggies), a current resident of College Station, a 2nd-generation Aggie, and 12-year A&M employee, I found this book to be painfully accurate, disturbing, right-on-target, and much needed. Tang points out that the University is faced with an incredible opportunity to fix what is rotten, and embrace what is beautiful. This is the first time all this information has come together in one place, and Tang did a loving and honest job of researching and writing. I admire him for what must have hurt as it was coming together. I, too, love A&M, and desperately want to see it recover from it's own failings, and become the University it truly can be and wants to be. This book should be required reading for all Old Ags, future students, and current Aggie family members. They should not waste time villifying him, but should take the time to read, discuss, and examine their own behavior and involvement. Then all of us Ags should come together to fix what was found under the rock, recently turned over by tragedy.

I have family members who are Aggies and their love and loyalty to A&M has always intrigued and horrified me. Is this University a cult? Or a throw-back? Or just a weird Texas thing? Well, I went to Berkeley so you can understand my dilemma. Happily, I got the chance to visit the campus one Thanksgiving with my relatives and had a great time listening to their memories and stories.

I was moved by the Bonfire Memorial. I did remember when it happened and how horrible the accident was. How could a fun event turn into such a tragedy?

I was also revolted, feeling that it was the ubermasculine atmosphere at A&M that led to the collapse. It was a place with no room, apparently, for someone, like me, who was a drama major, who never went to a football game during my years of college and whose campus life revolved around rehearsals and theaters.

But I appreciate greatly the sense of community Aggies feel (theater is also a community) and how the traditions and demands of going to college there creates that community. When we left campus that day, after a very fun time at a local pub, I felt both touched and bothered by the juxtaposition of what everyone expected of the bonfire and what actually occurred. What happened? And why?

When I need to find out more about something, I find a book and was very pleased with Tang's. I found it satisfying, balanced and as complete as I needed. For one thing, before reading the book, I couldn't envision the size of bonfire,what it actually looked like, or why people were actually stuck inside it for hours. The pictures explained it for me and gave me nightmares.

I think the Tang wrote out of grief. I think he was, as I was, trying to make sense of a senseless tragedy. I hope and trust the university has investigated the arrogance, sexism and boys-will-be-boys attitude that led to it.

I received this book as a gift from my sister-in-law, the author's mother, when she visited us recently. It immediately caught my attention since I heard of the tragedy at Texas A&M, but did not read any of the news reports. (I did not even ask my in-laws, who are A&M employees, concerning this.) His book answers the two primary questions any of us outside of Texas A&M have:

- what happened?

- why did it happen?

As an outsider with regard to this school, I found it odd why such a thing could happen on a major university campus. Just what were they thinking? This answers all the questions very well.

The author wrote the book in three months, and it shows with a few minor grammatical errors. But he should be forgiven these oversights in view of the wealth of information and depth of research and analysis presented here. One glance at the bibliography convinced me that he must have spent many long nights just reading the material alone. Indeed he should be commended for a job well done in presenting not only the facts, but also capturing the feelings of those who were close to the tragedy. I found the interviews of particular interest. They gave the book a more personal feel, rather than being a disinterested examination.

What is missing is the official findings by the University, to give a truly balanced treatment. Hopefully the author will put out a second edition including the official findings, and possibly some follow-up interviews in reaction to those findings.

I recommend this book to anyone with even a mild curiosity concerning this tragedy. I plan to pass it around to my friends and even to the local public library, in the hopes that they will purchase several copies.

It was quite obvious after reading the first few pages of this book that Irwin Tang was a 2 percenter (an aggie who does not participate in the traditions.) I picked up this book because I was ready to read a book about Texas Aggie Bonfire, the tradition, the history, and also the tragedy. However what I got was a one-sided opinion of a liberal that never cared for Bonfire in the first place. Mr. Tang's opinion was clearly evident from the beginning, in that he was very against Bonfire. It wasn't a book that showed both sides of Bonfire, it touched on the positives and fully investigated the negatives. He touches on each Bonfire and talks about the things that went wrong. Doesn't talk about any positive aspects - the leadership taught, the friendships made, the traits that were learned that cannot be learned in a classroom. He interviews two freshman females from Aston Hall and asks them repeatedly if they saw alcohol or hazing during Bonfire after they had answered with a "no" the first, second and thrid times he asked. Then he goes on to interview an african american that admits he hated his time at Texas A&M and was a self proclaimed 2 percenter, then he interviews a left wing liberal professor who now teaches at Berkley(surprise! surprise!) who came to A&M and started a chapter of NOW. He also interviews 2 professors that are very outspoken against Bonfire. So, of his 7 interviews, there are 4 2 percenters who are liberals and clearly against Bonfire. In his interviews, his tone changes from one of "buddy-buddy" when interviewing people that share his opinion to one of prying, as if a cop was interviewing a suspect. You never get to read about all the positive aspects of Bonfire or the Aggies who died doing what they loved or stories from Aggies that LIVED Bonfire. The entire book focused on a handful of dissenters and their opinions. It was a waste of time, it was very one-sided and seemed like Mr. Tang got on his soapbox, surrounded him with people that had the same opinion as he and wrote a book. He even goes as far as to give his personal opinion of the cause (rather than waiting for an actual investigation to determine the cause) This will make most Aggies that love their school very angry and bitter. I do not recommend this book to any Aggie that is Pro-Bonfire.