Scan barcode
kimball_hansen's review
2.0
Almost 3 stars. This book was way too long but it flowed well and read quite easily.
A malatov cocktail is not a bomb. There were so many real bombs during that time. Are there as many bombs today or do we just not hear about them? And what's the point of telling people when the bomb is going to go off? Why not just plant the bomb and sit back and wait. Idiots.
Malcolm x is so dumb. And his black Muslim brothers killed him. While he had a good idea to stop racism, his means didn't justify the ends. And he himself was very racist. No,he's not a martyr. He's just a moron.
The 60's and early 70's sounded like a crappy time to live. I'm sure people would say the same thing about today, yet things are great (and no it's not because of white privilege).
A malatov cocktail is not a bomb. There were so many real bombs during that time. Are there as many bombs today or do we just not hear about them? And what's the point of telling people when the bomb is going to go off? Why not just plant the bomb and sit back and wait. Idiots.
Malcolm x is so dumb. And his black Muslim brothers killed him. While he had a good idea to stop racism, his means didn't justify the ends. And he himself was very racist. No,he's not a martyr. He's just a moron.
The 60's and early 70's sounded like a crappy time to live. I'm sure people would say the same thing about today, yet things are great (and no it's not because of white privilege).
scttpmllkn's review
5.0
An incredible look back at an incredible period full of some truly loathsome characters (looking at you, Bernardine Dohrn).
gjones19's review against another edition
3.0
I never knew about the underground groups of the 70s, which is really interesting! The book was a little dry and overly detailed though.
misterkait's review against another edition
2.0
Finally! I thought I would never finish this book. It was interesting and jam packed with information. Unfortunately, that's all it had going for it. It was a treasure trove of facts and timelines regarding radical groups in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, specifically their bombing campaigns. But there was no analysis, it was as if the author was afraid to delve more deeply into the issues, but I had the distinct impression that the thought that there was nothing deeper. He saved a few paragraphs to quote angry FBI agents and the son of one of the few people killed in the blasts that lambasted the groups with no response or counter to their opinions. This could have been a really great book, but instead it just fell flat.
allibroad's review against another edition
2.0
I'm stopping this half-way through.
The author should have included a dedication. Dear Bill O'Reilly, I didn't pal around with terrorists. These aren't my politics. Love, Bryan.
Instead, he infused his writing with the same message. He distanced himself from the book's subjects by failing to fully humanize them and writing in moral judgments. I didn't need to be told when each group crossed a line or for for Burrough to act like a horrified father watching his daughter's first orgy. I understand that the people he interviewed are now much older, but does he need to write everything from the perspectives of disgust?
I also don't feel comfortable that Bernardette Dohrn is portrayed as a manic-militant-dream-girl. I would have preferred to learn more about a person than selected sexy stories recounted by men (and apparently women) who wanted to sleep with her.
On the bright side, it has a fantastic cover.
The author should have included a dedication. Dear Bill O'Reilly, I didn't pal around with terrorists. These aren't my politics. Love, Bryan.
Instead, he infused his writing with the same message. He distanced himself from the book's subjects by failing to fully humanize them and writing in moral judgments. I didn't need to be told when each group crossed a line or for for Burrough to act like a horrified father watching his daughter's first orgy. I understand that the people he interviewed are now much older, but does he need to write everything from the perspectives of disgust?
I also don't feel comfortable that Bernardette Dohrn is portrayed as a manic-militant-dream-girl. I would have preferred to learn more about a person than selected sexy stories recounted by men (and apparently women) who wanted to sleep with her.
On the bright side, it has a fantastic cover.
jpowerj's review against another edition
3.0
The story gets 5 stars, it's one of the most mind-blowing accounts I've ever read in the "shit they don't teach you in history class" genre. There's a lot to learn about the merits and pitfalls of revolutionary violence and urban guerilla tactics within the "belly of the capitalist beast" here. But it gets 1 star for the author's particular takes. First off, the descriptions of all the people are intensely creepy. Every woman is portrayed as "dazzlingly attractive" and as hopelessly enthralled with some other male revolutionary figure. The lack of agency given to them is just absolutely disgusting. And then, in general, Burrough is just a consummate boot-licker, unwilling to provide any context whatsoever for the grievances of the guerillas. For example, not a single word about the suffering of Puerto Ricans, an omission all the more galling given what we're seeing in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria right now. So, final score = (1+5)/2 = 3
cdoors's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
While the author’s political biases are often on full display, his research is deep and the scope of the book is wide. There was a great deal about the radical underground movement that began in the 1960’s that I learned for the first time in Days of Rage. Highly recommend it anyone looking to learn more about this often overlooked chapter in American political history.
rzahradnik's review against another edition
5.0
I read this for my next Coleridge Taylor mystery, set in 1978. An excellent history of the topic and the period.
amandamarieger's review
Had to return to the library. Definitely want to finish another time!
blevins's review against another edition
4.0
Because I have been long interested in 1970s era radicals such as Weather Underground, SLA, BLA and their co-horts, I was very much into this exhaustively researched book by Bryan Burrough. I like the topic so much, I was able to overlook and forgive the book its flaws--too often using hyperbolic descriptions to amp up the tensions, Burrough's own political baggage that seeps out from time to time as he moralizes on the actions of these groups of and his apparent fetish for female revolutionaries with nearly every female Burrough describes is sexy, sensual, attractive or some other attribute.
The 1970s were a wild time for radicals and revolutionaries. Bombs were made and set-off, banks were robbed, shootouts with the police ensued, heiresses were kidnapped and innocent people died. From people who hi-jacked jets to those who formed small organizations who wanted to overthrow the government, there was no shortage of radical actions during this turbulent decade. In our post-9/11 world that we exist in today, when everything is branded an act of terrorism by our media/politicians, it is kind of shocking when reading about how different things used to be. While these groups in their heyday were not accepted by a majority of the nation [not even close!], they were embraced by enough people, especially early in their campaigns, to justify their actions amongst the hardcore leftists that they existed in. Things are so different now. Can you be a revolutionary in America ever again and genuinely attack the government if you believe they are on an incorrect path? Is the idea of revolution something that has been killed by the already mentioned politicians/media who have turned the masses into a nation of sheep? Face it, the general public is perfectly happy to throw away our rights to privacy and freedom in the name of fighting whatever future terrorist attack that may or may not happen. Legitimate concerns of mine when I read about groups like this from the past and think how much America and the world has changed in the past few decades. Do I long for the days of people blowing up stuff? No, but I'm an idealist who still holds onto the belief that resistance to the corporate machine that our government has turned into should be not only a right of us as citizens, it should be a possibility in the mind's of the politicians when they decide to listen to this lobbyist or that lobbyist before deciding what their opinion is. The idea of revolution, or revolutionary action, is not always a step toward terrorism, if it was, then, America itself was founded on terrorism, as was every revolutionary movement that has occurred in the past. Every single one. Those are the kinds of things Days of Rage made me think about as I was reading it.
The 1970s were a wild time for radicals and revolutionaries. Bombs were made and set-off, banks were robbed, shootouts with the police ensued, heiresses were kidnapped and innocent people died. From people who hi-jacked jets to those who formed small organizations who wanted to overthrow the government, there was no shortage of radical actions during this turbulent decade. In our post-9/11 world that we exist in today, when everything is branded an act of terrorism by our media/politicians, it is kind of shocking when reading about how different things used to be. While these groups in their heyday were not accepted by a majority of the nation [not even close!], they were embraced by enough people, especially early in their campaigns, to justify their actions amongst the hardcore leftists that they existed in. Things are so different now. Can you be a revolutionary in America ever again and genuinely attack the government if you believe they are on an incorrect path? Is the idea of revolution something that has been killed by the already mentioned politicians/media who have turned the masses into a nation of sheep? Face it, the general public is perfectly happy to throw away our rights to privacy and freedom in the name of fighting whatever future terrorist attack that may or may not happen. Legitimate concerns of mine when I read about groups like this from the past and think how much America and the world has changed in the past few decades. Do I long for the days of people blowing up stuff? No, but I'm an idealist who still holds onto the belief that resistance to the corporate machine that our government has turned into should be not only a right of us as citizens, it should be a possibility in the mind's of the politicians when they decide to listen to this lobbyist or that lobbyist before deciding what their opinion is. The idea of revolution, or revolutionary action, is not always a step toward terrorism, if it was, then, America itself was founded on terrorism, as was every revolutionary movement that has occurred in the past. Every single one. Those are the kinds of things Days of Rage made me think about as I was reading it.