Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.49 AVERAGE
4.49 AVERAGE
4.0
This was an eye-opening read. Meticulous, rousing, poignant - all of the above. This is a monstrously sized book about how politics was responsible for the United State's inadequate response to the AIDS crisis at its onset.
What I liked
1. The mix of personal stories with institutional-level events: This allowed Shilts to tell a very personal story of love and loss in the context of a much larger problem. This was very well done; parts of this book were downright heartbreaking. Shilt's storytelling style made this work of non-fiction read like fiction.
2. Novel information: I learned so much reading this (granted, I didn't know much about this topic to begin with, but still)! I didn't know that there was a huge scandal about AIDS being spread through blood-derived treatments for hemophiliacs, that one of the gay community's biggest hindrances to stopping the spread of AIDS was internal dissent amongst themselves (I didn't know the role gay bathhouses played), that AIDS used to be called 'HTLV-III,' named so by the French scientists that discovered it first, etc. This was just jam-packed with fascinating information.
3. Authenticity: This book revealed Randy Shilt's frustration with how AIDS was handled. It was clear in what people he chose to name, what disagreements he repeatedly covered, and what deaths he delved into with great detail.
What I didn't like
1. Halfway through, the book became very repetitive: One of the main points of this book was that even as years went by, little was done to address AIDS by people who had the power to do so (federal level policies, funding, advocation, etc.) But since Shilts went year by year, month by month, the middling portion of the book was extremely repetitive, which I suppose he could argue was the point. Nonetheless, I felt I had to slog through it.
2. Too much unnecessary detail: There were so many names and dates given in rapid fire order, that I began to skim the book at parts. I think this could have been 100-200 pages shorter.
Parallels I Noticed Between AIDS and COVID-19 at their beginnings
(I thought it was be interesting to take a look at the parallels between AIDs and COVID-19, given that they're two of the biggest pandemics to happen, all within the last 50 years, and because COVID-19 is happening right now.)
1. Politics detracting from productive, health-oriented conversations about the disease.
1a) Politicking downplaying the disease's threat due to concerns over panic and financial losses.
1b) Politicking exploiting people's fears about a disease to divide the general population.
2. People choosing to ignore health guidelines because it inconveniences them.
2a) The conversation about rights vs. public health measures
3. The conversation about business interests vs. public health measures
4. Top US Government officials claiming that they don't have enough money to invest in the handling of the disease or passing off the responsibility of handling the disease to those on the lower rungs of government.
4a) Lack of cohesive strategy from the federal level on how to deal with the disease
5) Rampant disinformation and callous preying on those impacted by the disease
5a) Promises of miracle cures with high price tags
5b) Conspiracy theories that undermine the health guidelines provided by top health officials
(may edit later)
This was an eye-opening read. Meticulous, rousing, poignant - all of the above. This is a monstrously sized book about how politics was responsible for the United State's inadequate response to the AIDS crisis at its onset.
What I liked
1. The mix of personal stories with institutional-level events: This allowed Shilts to tell a very personal story of love and loss in the context of a much larger problem. This was very well done; parts of this book were downright heartbreaking. Shilt's storytelling style made this work of non-fiction read like fiction.
2. Novel information: I learned so much reading this (granted, I didn't know much about this topic to begin with, but still)! I didn't know that there was a huge scandal about AIDS being spread through blood-derived treatments for hemophiliacs, that one of the gay community's biggest hindrances to stopping the spread of AIDS was internal dissent amongst themselves (I didn't know the role gay bathhouses played), that AIDS used to be called 'HTLV-III,' named so by the French scientists that discovered it first, etc. This was just jam-packed with fascinating information.
3. Authenticity: This book revealed Randy Shilt's frustration with how AIDS was handled. It was clear in what people he chose to name, what disagreements he repeatedly covered, and what deaths he delved into with great detail.
What I didn't like
1. Halfway through, the book became very repetitive: One of the main points of this book was that even as years went by, little was done to address AIDS by people who had the power to do so (federal level policies, funding, advocation, etc.) But since Shilts went year by year, month by month, the middling portion of the book was extremely repetitive, which I suppose he could argue was the point. Nonetheless, I felt I had to slog through it.
2. Too much unnecessary detail: There were so many names and dates given in rapid fire order, that I began to skim the book at parts. I think this could have been 100-200 pages shorter.
Parallels I Noticed Between AIDS and COVID-19 at their beginnings
(I thought it was be interesting to take a look at the parallels between AIDs and COVID-19, given that they're two of the biggest pandemics to happen, all within the last 50 years, and because COVID-19 is happening right now.)
1. Politics detracting from productive, health-oriented conversations about the disease.
1a) Politicking downplaying the disease's threat due to concerns over panic and financial losses.
1b) Politicking exploiting people's fears about a disease to divide the general population.
2. People choosing to ignore health guidelines because it inconveniences them.
2a) The conversation about rights vs. public health measures
3. The conversation about business interests vs. public health measures
4. Top US Government officials claiming that they don't have enough money to invest in the handling of the disease or passing off the responsibility of handling the disease to those on the lower rungs of government.
4a) Lack of cohesive strategy from the federal level on how to deal with the disease
5) Rampant disinformation and callous preying on those impacted by the disease
5a) Promises of miracle cures with high price tags
5b) Conspiracy theories that undermine the health guidelines provided by top health officials
(may edit later)
challenging
dark
informative
sad
slow-paced
I am so glad I read And The Band Played On! I watched the movie in health class in high school, and completely forgot about it until it showed up as a recommendation through Goodreads.
It's was a great read, especially because most of the events in the book took place before I was born. I know what AIDS is like now, but I had no idea what it was like when AIDS first started showing up in people. Reading
One thing I really liked was the day-to-day unfolding of AIDS. You see what it was like for so many people- the people who had AIDS, their friends and family and the doctors and scientists. It worked especially well at the beginning, when everyone was trying to figure out what AIDS was. It did get a little tiresome at times and sometimes, it was hard getting through some of the sections that dealt with funding and some of the more political aspects of the AIDS epidemic. While we see Reagan, Congress, and whatever agency is in charge of the budget, it's always through the eyes of researchers, doctors and AIDS patients. So while it was to follow and a little overwhelming, you see so many different sides to the early years of AIDS.
Shilts' interest in AIDS really comes through, and what I found fascinating was that he was tested for HIV/AIDS while working on the book. He waited until it was finished before learning the results and would later die of AIDS. He didn't want the results to get in the way with his objectivity. I felt like there was a little bit of bias, but for the most part, I did feel like it was pretty objective.
It does make you think about why some diseases get more funding and attention then others. I know we can't devote equal time and funding to every single disease out there, and that the ones that affect millions of people get more attention/funding than ones that affect hundreds or thousands of people. It is sad that it took years for anyone to care about AIDS, and I loved the statistics about how many people had AIDS and how many had died from it.
There are definitely a lot of people to keep track of, and while the list of important players was pretty helpful, there were times where I couldn't remember who was who. Still, you get pretty invested in their stories, even though a lot of people don't come off well at times. That being said, he does hold everyone accountable, and doesn't place the blame on just one group of people.
You really see the stigma that was attached to the early victims of AIDS, especially because of the heavy toll it took on gay men. It is sad that it took years for anyone to care, and you have to hope that we've learned our lesson. There are so many what-ifs that you think about. You can't help but wonder if doing things differently might have changed how AIDS played out.
I have the 20th anniversary edition, and I thought it was interesting that there wasn't some kind of update about what AIDS is like now. I'm not sure if it's because the author has since passed away, or if there's some other reason, but considering life before AIDS and life after it, and AIDS before Rock Hudson and AIDS after Rock Hudson was a huge theme in the book, you'd think there'd be something about how far we've come with AIDS (and how far we have to go).
Final thoughts: I didn't love And The Band Played On, but it's a great read. Reading it was a little strange, knowing what AIDS is like know, and really seeing how much it's changed over the last 30 or so years. It gets a 4 out of 5.
It's was a great read, especially because most of the events in the book took place before I was born. I know what AIDS is like now, but I had no idea what it was like when AIDS first started showing up in people. Reading
One thing I really liked was the day-to-day unfolding of AIDS. You see what it was like for so many people- the people who had AIDS, their friends and family and the doctors and scientists. It worked especially well at the beginning, when everyone was trying to figure out what AIDS was. It did get a little tiresome at times and sometimes, it was hard getting through some of the sections that dealt with funding and some of the more political aspects of the AIDS epidemic. While we see Reagan, Congress, and whatever agency is in charge of the budget, it's always through the eyes of researchers, doctors and AIDS patients. So while it was to follow and a little overwhelming, you see so many different sides to the early years of AIDS.
Shilts' interest in AIDS really comes through, and what I found fascinating was that he was tested for HIV/AIDS while working on the book. He waited until it was finished before learning the results and would later die of AIDS. He didn't want the results to get in the way with his objectivity. I felt like there was a little bit of bias, but for the most part, I did feel like it was pretty objective.
It does make you think about why some diseases get more funding and attention then others. I know we can't devote equal time and funding to every single disease out there, and that the ones that affect millions of people get more attention/funding than ones that affect hundreds or thousands of people. It is sad that it took years for anyone to care about AIDS, and I loved the statistics about how many people had AIDS and how many had died from it.
There are definitely a lot of people to keep track of, and while the list of important players was pretty helpful, there were times where I couldn't remember who was who. Still, you get pretty invested in their stories, even though a lot of people don't come off well at times. That being said, he does hold everyone accountable, and doesn't place the blame on just one group of people.
You really see the stigma that was attached to the early victims of AIDS, especially because of the heavy toll it took on gay men. It is sad that it took years for anyone to care, and you have to hope that we've learned our lesson. There are so many what-ifs that you think about. You can't help but wonder if doing things differently might have changed how AIDS played out.
I have the 20th anniversary edition, and I thought it was interesting that there wasn't some kind of update about what AIDS is like now. I'm not sure if it's because the author has since passed away, or if there's some other reason, but considering life before AIDS and life after it, and AIDS before Rock Hudson and AIDS after Rock Hudson was a huge theme in the book, you'd think there'd be something about how far we've come with AIDS (and how far we have to go).
Final thoughts: I didn't love And The Band Played On, but it's a great read. Reading it was a little strange, knowing what AIDS is like know, and really seeing how much it's changed over the last 30 or so years. It gets a 4 out of 5.
emotional
informative
reflective
slow-paced
dark
informative
inspiring
sad
tense
medium-paced
emotional
informative
sad
medium-paced
So well written and informative. Took me a couple months to read because it was so emotionally challenging. The fact that so many organisations/ institutions built to serve the people failed to act at all,instead being driven by ignorance, prejudice and self interest is maddening.This really opened my eyes. The chronological order and structure of this book is a true testament to the authors meticulous reporting and research. One of the most powerful things in this book is the description of inaction and restraint from key bodies due to their fear of pissing off various political allies then followed up by statistics detailing the aids cases and deaths that happened in the time it took to make any decision at all. It’s also chilling that right at the beginning of the epidemic doctors predicted exactly what would happen and what would need to happen to stop the spread and nobody listened to them at all. I was floored by the role of the blood industries and their total disregard for human health in the name of avarice. Their constant sticking to the made up statistic that the chance of developing aids from infected blood would be one in a million. The notion of aidsspeak was also something that really intrigued me as another way to dehumanise a community that has already been excluded. I also did not know about the time frame and the fact that many politicians including the president did not even acknowledge the epidemic until four years later when it almost could not be ignored anymore. The role of the media is just as pernicious, continually ignoring the severity of the disease until it affects heterosexual populations and even then being complicit in fear mongering and demonising of a community already under attack. there were so many levels on which the people were failed at a political, medical, journalistic. Also the fact that funding was so hard to get inner politics played such a massive role. There was also hope and I’m glad I read this learned a lot about an area of history I had not known. The way the gay community really came together to educate in place of the government that is elected to do so was heartwarming. this was a good read that I will be thinking about for years to come.
fascinating heartbreaking frustrating and a whole lot of other -ings as well
Well. That was quite a read. As a general reader, you can't help but be kinda gobsmacked at the obsessiveness of the documentation of what seems like every false step of the US government, every act of bigotry and stupidity, and the senseless compounding of it all by the leaders of many of the gay groups themselves, in their resistance to changing their habits. I have to admit to having skipped a hundred or so pages in the first half of the book - it just seemed too repetitive as we watch researchers see the evidence accumulate, the cases deteriorate, and the doors of funding slam over and over again in their faces. But I can only admire the hard work and research that this tome represents. Randy Shilts has been a dogged, tireless and apparently objective researcher, and this is a very readable book, despite its length. There are acts of extremism and excess documented against both parties in this battle, government and gays.
But to describe this as a work of journalism is to sell it far short. Shilts is compassionate and angry, and the molasses of prejudice and stupidity in the face of the ever rising tide of death stories and human loss do have a cumulative effect which brings us, by the final third or so, to a place of horror and pain as affecting and tragic as do the best novels.
When Marc Conant, the researcher, sees himself staring at what he can see will be a preventable but unattended catastophe, and reflects on how he now can understand for the first time, perhaps, the frozen fear and disbelief which may have been felt by intelligent, resourceful Jewish men soon after Krystalnaght back in Germany in the second world war, we know what he means.
The guilt, the suffering, the compassion and the love, the reflection, the guilt and the spiritual awakenings as death approaches these men are beautifully related and real, especially the extracts from the diary of Matt Krieger, as he nurses the man he loves through the pain, and watches his beautiful spirit concentrate into an essence of pure love and light on his death bed, as his body decays.
Finally, the compassion and love the gay community begins to show towards itself, in instigating vigils at the beds of the many dying alone, and the hospitals who changed their rules on only blood or married family visiting their patients, are the rare, shining examples of humanity in this story. The examples of indifference, insensitivity and bigotry unfortunately are far more numerous, and all because of those who believe our humanity can be denied, and our rights ignored, because of who we want to love.
But to describe this as a work of journalism is to sell it far short. Shilts is compassionate and angry, and the molasses of prejudice and stupidity in the face of the ever rising tide of death stories and human loss do have a cumulative effect which brings us, by the final third or so, to a place of horror and pain as affecting and tragic as do the best novels.
When Marc Conant, the researcher, sees himself staring at what he can see will be a preventable but unattended catastophe, and reflects on how he now can understand for the first time, perhaps, the frozen fear and disbelief which may have been felt by intelligent, resourceful Jewish men soon after Krystalnaght back in Germany in the second world war, we know what he means.
The guilt, the suffering, the compassion and the love, the reflection, the guilt and the spiritual awakenings as death approaches these men are beautifully related and real, especially the extracts from the diary of Matt Krieger, as he nurses the man he loves through the pain, and watches his beautiful spirit concentrate into an essence of pure love and light on his death bed, as his body decays.
Finally, the compassion and love the gay community begins to show towards itself, in instigating vigils at the beds of the many dying alone, and the hospitals who changed their rules on only blood or married family visiting their patients, are the rare, shining examples of humanity in this story. The examples of indifference, insensitivity and bigotry unfortunately are far more numerous, and all because of those who believe our humanity can be denied, and our rights ignored, because of who we want to love.
challenging
emotional
informative
slow-paced
Devastating and infuriating. All I did while reading this was shake my head in disbelief, anger or sadness. So many unnecessary deaths, so much blame to spread around. I lived this era as a fledgling physician, hearing about a "new disease", then hearing about AIDS on the West Coast, then treating babies and hemophiliacs during my training in a pediatric hospital. I (unforgivably) did not know enough about this shameful backstory in which a nation, its leaders, and its public (including some of the gay community itself) turned its back on their own.