Scan barcode
khoovreads's review against another edition
4.0
Wow. This is a harrowing, very hefty read. It’s a bit slow at the start but absolutely worth it. There is so much history surrounding the Donner party that I never learned about in school. I really enjoyed the interjections about modern psychology and what we know today about PTSD, disaster survival, and modern medicine.
Overall it can get quite intense and it’s an uncomfortable read at times, but I do really think it’s worth it for those interested in learning more about disaster survival, the Donner party / Oregon trail, and the limits of humanity.
Overall it can get quite intense and it’s an uncomfortable read at times, but I do really think it’s worth it for those interested in learning more about disaster survival, the Donner party / Oregon trail, and the limits of humanity.
kmaemiller's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
medium-paced
4.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Cannibalism, Colonisation, Violence, and Child death
gorseyhorsey's review
adventurous
dark
emotional
sad
slow-paced
4.0
Well written account of the Donner tragedy - heartbreaking read but respectfully done
rebeccasreads20's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
tense
medium-paced
3.5
potathoe's review against another edition
3.5
This is probably a book for people already interested in the subject.
It feels like a very isolated event when reading this, there’s very little about what shaped the people involved or how the situation impacted the society they returned to.
It feels like a very isolated event when reading this, there’s very little about what shaped the people involved or how the situation impacted the society they returned to.
ratalice's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
informative
mysterious
sad
tense
slow-paced
5.0
nimbushfish's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
informative
sad
medium-paced
5.0
camreading's review against another edition
I struggle to rate this because there are many ways about writing history that I find callous or indifferent (hah) that I think for many historians is commonplace. While the research on Sarah Graves and the Donner party members is excellent and clearly well-pursued, I think there are aspects of the book I can’t ignore. Paramount is the way Brown refers to Native Americans throughout the text- writing with the understanding that manifest destiny was inevitable and providing no real condemnation / exploring the morals of that (while he explores motive behind many other choices), describing the killing of two Miwok party members as an obvious choice, painting the landscape as an empty, barren place that no one had travelled when there had been native people there for years, and making the settlers out to be victims of things like robbing or death without an explanation as to why some native groups would have reacted with theft/killing to prevent white colonialism on their lands. These attitudes were thrown in alongside the rest of the book’s details, but I found they stuck out like sore thumbs. When you’re writing history, even if it’s a narrative history, it can be hard to not impose modern ideals / opinions on past events. I understand that, and Brown does too, as he says as much in the book. But I also believe you have a responsibility to your readership to indicate that your coverage of a subject is not an endorsement of it. Why spend time describing the remorse of the dinner party individuals when leaving members behind (Graves children in the hole, Stanton, etc.), killing a fellow traveler (as John Reed did), etc. but spend no more than two sentences on how the group must have felt when one among them went back specifically to kill two Miwok men of the party? This felt disingenuous to me. Where Brown is able to make various moral judgements about those generally seen as bad actors in history (like Lansford Hastings) he chooses not to turn the microscope to the other Donner party members (William Foster in particular). This tells me he’s capable of moralizing the events and making that judgement, but chooses not to when it comes to the discussion of killing Native people because you do not view them as human. Fine if you don’t want to put today’s morals onto the past, but you can’t pick and choose when you want to do that, Brown!
Aside from that, this was a very well-written book. I’m not a hater. I was engaged by the writing style and I do like Brown’s particular flavor of narrative history. I’ve read other books where the place-making and setting of the scene is far too taxing or frequent, but I felt Brown did a great job placing the reader in the time period without it overwhelming the story. I’ve been fascinated by the Donner party since I was a young kid and heard about it in some documentary special, so it was nice to finally read a book about it and I wasn’t disappointed. I think it’s a good non-fiction read if you have the time and are interested in the topic - just take the commentary with a grain of salt.
Aside from that, this was a very well-written book. I’m not a hater. I was engaged by the writing style and I do like Brown’s particular flavor of narrative history. I’ve read other books where the place-making and setting of the scene is far too taxing or frequent, but I felt Brown did a great job placing the reader in the time period without it overwhelming the story. I’ve been fascinated by the Donner party since I was a young kid and heard about it in some documentary special, so it was nice to finally read a book about it and I wasn’t disappointed. I think it’s a good non-fiction read if you have the time and are interested in the topic - just take the commentary with a grain of salt.