|
39 of 57 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
A rehash of old sources; unanalytical, March 17, 2002
Many of the issues discussed are framed in a rather negative and unanalytical context. While I agree that mistakes were made and lots of weird things happened, the author's recounting does little to help one figure out why things happened the way they did, in the context of the times.1. The book contains a litany of weird things done by the Weather Underground, with very little effort at understanding or explanation, or attempt to place in context. I don't think there are easy answers for what happened and what went wrong, but what I would like to see in a study is something that helps one understand. What we have here is not much more than a review of old newspaper stories and some books. Much more primary material is needed, namely, frank interviews with people who were there. That's not easy, because the people are dispersed and not necessarily anxious to talk. But the book fails without some serious first-hand views. And it should be noted that not everything published at the time, by Weather or others, was necessarily reliable or accurate. 2. The author uses a lot of the rhetoric and slogans of the era without definition or explanation. Examples: fascism, imperialism, nationalist (page 3); black colony (page 27); ultra-leftism (page 146). 3. I don't agree that the original Weatherman paper did "little else" than define the role of black people in the U.S. (page 27). 4. I thought the reference to the Weather sign about GE workers (page 75) was peculiar. Perhaps it's accurate, perhaps it's not. To the extent it represents an actual syndrome, more supporting material would be helpful. 5. There are many glaring misspellings and errors of fact. Examples: Pages 4, 6: Fairmont Hotel misspelled. Page 5: Herbert Marcuse was at San Diego, not San Jose. Page 7: Terry Robbins was from Ohio (as noted on page 100), not Michigan. Page 23: Dean Rusk misspelled (note 4). Page 62: Richard Elrod was not a corporate attorney; he was a city attorney, as noted on the next page. The story of what happened to Elrod is an interesting one, but the book doesn't really have it. Page 84: The date of the War Council is wrong in the last paragraph; it was at the end of December, 1969. Page 114: The lawyer's name is incorrect. Page 116: First paragraph, incorrect name of Tom C. Huston. Page 135: Leslie Bacon was called as a grand jury witness but I don't think she was charged with the Capitol bombing. Page 137: The Georgia Straight was not an Atlanta newspaper; it was from Vancouver, B.C. Page 146: Van Lydegraf was in his fifties, not his sixties. I'm not certain that he was expelled from either the CP or PL. He may have quit. Pages 174-178: This section has numerous errors of fact and interpretation regarding PFOC. Page 175: Mark Perry misspelled. Page 179, top paragraph: The use of the passive voice here is not responsible. Who suggested this? Page 180: Grace Fortner was not the name of the "woman originally identified as Esther." Page 186: PFOC did not exist in Seattle in 1990-91. All of these errors, and many more not mentioned, demonstrate two things: the author was not really familiar with the subject, and the book was poorly edited. --Roger Lippman
|