Scan barcode
carly23r's review against another edition
3.0
Loved how ambitious this idea was, and loved the acknowledgement of how difficult - impossible - it is to “capture” anything from the outside.
However, Weingarten’s language often veers sexist and I’m not sure it comes off in a “knowing” way. I think reading some of the language used in chapters regarding race, gender identity and sexuality demonstrated (whether deliberately or not) how important it is to have journalists who specialise in different areas.
The use of “love story” as a phrase in a saga about horrific domestic violence - even if you charitably assume it is sarcastic - was pretty sickening.
Also, what is with the cover image? Why include a polaroid of an event that happened in 1986 and not mention it? (Not sure if my copy had an unusual cover.)
Some stories were definitely stronger than others. Unfortunately the last one about Jerry Garcia was arguably the weakest, so not a great note to end on.
I ultimately want to know more details of the research process itself and the conception of the idea! If they put dates in a hat and picked one at random to get the 28th of December 1986, how many dates were in the hat? Why did they choose the dates that they did?
Concept was super cool but seemed more about describing people’s appearances with a side of very light fact-checking than constructing anything new.
However, Weingarten’s language often veers sexist and I’m not sure it comes off in a “knowing” way. I think reading some of the language used in chapters regarding race, gender identity and sexuality demonstrated (whether deliberately or not) how important it is to have journalists who specialise in different areas.
The use of “love story” as a phrase in a saga about horrific domestic violence - even if you charitably assume it is sarcastic - was pretty sickening.
Also, what is with the cover image? Why include a polaroid of an event that happened in 1986 and not mention it? (Not sure if my copy had an unusual cover.)
Some stories were definitely stronger than others. Unfortunately the last one about Jerry Garcia was arguably the weakest, so not a great note to end on.
I ultimately want to know more details of the research process itself and the conception of the idea! If they put dates in a hat and picked one at random to get the 28th of December 1986, how many dates were in the hat? Why did they choose the dates that they did?
Concept was super cool but seemed more about describing people’s appearances with a side of very light fact-checking than constructing anything new.
niko28's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting concept. Some interesting stores. Learned a couple things. Some chapters were forgettable. Well researched. Author even gave back story to explain some context of some people’s stories.
hcgambrell's review against another edition
emotional
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence, Death, Child death, Gun violence, Medical content, Domestic abuse, Murder, Fire/Fire injury, and Toxic relationship
Moderate: Pandemic/Epidemic
Minor: Infidelity, Addiction, and Kidnapping
gwalt118's review against another edition
3.0
I would love to be able to give this book 2.5/5 stars because it falls right in the middle for me. I'm giving it 3/5 because I respect the process of writing this book - the numerous hours of interviews, the fact-checking, the discovery of people and their stories.
So, here's why it falls right in the middle for me: I love stories about the human experience, so the premise of this book - take a random day and transverse America to figure out what happened to ordinary people - is 100% my cup of tea. As in, this has the potential to be a five star book right off the bat. I enjoyed the book for a long time, at times finding it hard to put down. I appreciate that Weingerten is willing to discuss marriage, death, violent crime, politics, drug abuse -- some things that we tend to shy away from in our daily conversation but that we know is happening everywhere.
And then we get to the story of domestic violence where a drunk husband beats his wife almost to the death. She returns to him and Weingerten calls this a "love story." NOPE. Domestic abuse is never a love story. Now I'm angry. But I keep reading because it's a quick read and I'm almost done. As I continue to read, I realize that what's really bothering me about this book is the fact that there are opportunities for advocacy in this book that are squandered. Weingerten could talk about domestic abuse in a way that draws attention to the issue, suggesting resources and advocating for equitable treatment of women. He could talk about the AIDS crisis among gay men in the late 1980s and early 1990s by bringing the marginalization of LGBTQ individuals into the present day community. He could talk about drug abuse as a way that addresses recidivism in the criminal justice system. But he wastes his opportunity to do any of that.
It was an okay book. I'm not sorry I read it. But it irked me because of what it could have been.
So, here's why it falls right in the middle for me: I love stories about the human experience, so the premise of this book - take a random day and transverse America to figure out what happened to ordinary people - is 100% my cup of tea. As in, this has the potential to be a five star book right off the bat. I enjoyed the book for a long time, at times finding it hard to put down. I appreciate that Weingerten is willing to discuss marriage, death, violent crime, politics, drug abuse -- some things that we tend to shy away from in our daily conversation but that we know is happening everywhere.
And then we get to the story of domestic violence where a drunk husband beats his wife almost to the death. She returns to him and Weingerten calls this a "love story." NOPE. Domestic abuse is never a love story. Now I'm angry. But I keep reading because it's a quick read and I'm almost done. As I continue to read, I realize that what's really bothering me about this book is the fact that there are opportunities for advocacy in this book that are squandered. Weingerten could talk about domestic abuse in a way that draws attention to the issue, suggesting resources and advocating for equitable treatment of women. He could talk about the AIDS crisis among gay men in the late 1980s and early 1990s by bringing the marginalization of LGBTQ individuals into the present day community. He could talk about drug abuse as a way that addresses recidivism in the criminal justice system. But he wastes his opportunity to do any of that.
It was an okay book. I'm not sorry I read it. But it irked me because of what it could have been.
sjgrodsky's review against another edition
4.0
Wonderful reporting and wonderful writing. The stories develop a certain sameness as you read them, one after the other. But I marveled at what the author wormed out of his subjects and at his gently tongue in cheek prose.
Just 10 years later, this book would have been very different. But in 1986 there was almost no Internet and there certainly were not any smart phones.
I might have chosen different stories. With the exception of the heart transplant recipient, all of the stories appear to be about white Americans. The author could have offered greater insight had some of the subjects been African-American or Hispanic or Asian.
Just 10 years later, this book would have been very different. But in 1986 there was almost no Internet and there certainly were not any smart phones.
I might have chosen different stories. With the exception of the heart transplant recipient, all of the stories appear to be about white Americans. The author could have offered greater insight had some of the subjects been African-American or Hispanic or Asian.