Scan barcode
orangefan65's review
4.0
Excellent non-fiction about the explosion of the LA Times building in 1910 perpetrated by socialists sympathetic to labor vs. capital. A crossing of paths of Clarence Darrow, the Burns Detective Agency, D. W. Griffith, domestic terrorism and politics as survival of the fittest.
csdaley's review against another edition
3.0
Great start but I thought it bogged down a little at the end. Still I learned a lot about a bad incident in CA. History which I knew nothing about.
stevewhitaker's review against another edition
2.0
I'd love to give 1½ stars to this, if it were possible. The book had such potential, and having just read The Devil's Gentleman and The Murder of the Century, I know it's possible to write a captivating turn-of-the century mystery. But American Lightning was just too disjointed, too broad in its narrative, and included at least one entire strand - the story of D.W. Griffith - that could have been done without.
messy_dreamer's review against another edition
adventurous
informative
inspiring
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
2.75
treehuggeranonymous's review against another edition
1.0
Took a lot to get into this book. Only really peaked my interest around the water conspiracy and San Fernando valley, and I think I would have preferred that.
These sort of books annoy me sometimes by spending too much time on the background and personal lives of the people involved. This book goes a step further by devoting so much of it's time to DW Griffiths, who has no relevance to the bombings or the labour movement and wasn't even in California at the time. At the end they justify this diversion by claiming that Griffith's pro-klan movie was inspired by these events, which is what brought my two-star feelings for the book down to a on-star.
These sort of books annoy me sometimes by spending too much time on the background and personal lives of the people involved. This book goes a step further by devoting so much of it's time to DW Griffiths, who has no relevance to the bombings or the labour movement and wasn't even in California at the time. At the end they justify this diversion by claiming that Griffith's pro-klan movie was inspired by these events, which is what brought my two-star feelings for the book down to a on-star.
kahale's review against another edition
3.0
An interesting book about an incident I knew little about. I want to look more into William burns, the American Sherlock Holmes
chelsea_not_chels's review against another edition
2.0
More reviews available at my blog, Beauty and the Bookworm.
Okay, I'm going to come out and say it: this book was kind of a drag. Especially for a book that promises to be about "Terror, Mystery, the Birth of Hollywood, and the Crime of the Century." Ostensibly, it's about the bombing of the Los Angeles Times building, the bombings that came before and after it, the hunt for the criminals, the trial...and a guy who makes movies? What? Where the connection? Well, here's the answer: there isn't one.
Now, that's not 100% true. The private detective who worked on the bombings knew the guy who made the movies. But still. The movies weren't actually about the bombings, they were just about social events that occurred around the same time, and in a very vague sort of way--putting the two directly together is a very tenuous connection at best, and trying to tie it together with "But they saw each other in a hotel at the end of it!!!" doesn't really lend the connection any credence. And with the book relying on such a tenuous connection, it was on shaky ground to start with.
Blum focuses on three main figures in this book: Billy Burns, a private inspector; Clarence Darrow, a lawyer; and D. W. Griffith, the filmmaker. But for most of the book, only Burns is actually relevant, as he and other inspectors from his company attempt to find out who are behind the bombings that are sweeping the nation. A startling string of domestic terrorist attacks, the bombings sprung from the ongoing battle of union workers vs. businesses, but initially no one was sure which side was actually doing the bombing. Was it the unions, trying to get back at businesses who were against unions? Or was it the businesses themselves, trying to frame the unions? Meanwhile, Blum intersperses chapters about Darrow and Griffith just...being themselves. Lawyering. Having affairs. Making movies. It's incredibly boring and served no purpose. Griffith's line isn't necessary at all and certainly doesn't play into "the birth of Hollywood" as his movies were made in New York and he wasn't even the first person to film a big movie. Darrow becomes necessary to the story, but not until the very end, and even then it seems like Blum greatly inflated his role in the story, especially given the way the investigation and trial ended.
The writing is bland and it's hard to determine what's actually pulled from research and what's conjecture, especially in the realm of conversations that occurred. There always seemed like suddenly there was going to be a turning point, a new sight of depths...but then that point never actually developed. There were some interesting parts, mainly when Blum actually focused on the investigations, but for the most part this was a very "meh" book. For a good read about an investigation surrounding a crime closely linked to social issues, I would recommend American Fire or Killers of the Flower Moon--the first is set in the 2010s, the second in the 1920s. They are both excellent and far outshone this one.
Okay, I'm going to come out and say it: this book was kind of a drag. Especially for a book that promises to be about "Terror, Mystery, the Birth of Hollywood, and the Crime of the Century." Ostensibly, it's about the bombing of the Los Angeles Times building, the bombings that came before and after it, the hunt for the criminals, the trial...and a guy who makes movies? What? Where the connection? Well, here's the answer: there isn't one.
Now, that's not 100% true. The private detective who worked on the bombings knew the guy who made the movies. But still. The movies weren't actually about the bombings, they were just about social events that occurred around the same time, and in a very vague sort of way--putting the two directly together is a very tenuous connection at best, and trying to tie it together with "But they saw each other in a hotel at the end of it!!!" doesn't really lend the connection any credence. And with the book relying on such a tenuous connection, it was on shaky ground to start with.
Blum focuses on three main figures in this book: Billy Burns, a private inspector; Clarence Darrow, a lawyer; and D. W. Griffith, the filmmaker. But for most of the book, only Burns is actually relevant, as he and other inspectors from his company attempt to find out who are behind the bombings that are sweeping the nation. A startling string of domestic terrorist attacks, the bombings sprung from the ongoing battle of union workers vs. businesses, but initially no one was sure which side was actually doing the bombing. Was it the unions, trying to get back at businesses who were against unions? Or was it the businesses themselves, trying to frame the unions? Meanwhile, Blum intersperses chapters about Darrow and Griffith just...being themselves. Lawyering. Having affairs. Making movies. It's incredibly boring and served no purpose. Griffith's line isn't necessary at all and certainly doesn't play into "the birth of Hollywood" as his movies were made in New York and he wasn't even the first person to film a big movie. Darrow becomes necessary to the story, but not until the very end, and even then it seems like Blum greatly inflated his role in the story, especially given the way the investigation and trial ended.
The writing is bland and it's hard to determine what's actually pulled from research and what's conjecture, especially in the realm of conversations that occurred. There always seemed like suddenly there was going to be a turning point, a new sight of depths...but then that point never actually developed. There were some interesting parts, mainly when Blum actually focused on the investigations, but for the most part this was a very "meh" book. For a good read about an investigation surrounding a crime closely linked to social issues, I would recommend American Fire or Killers of the Flower Moon--the first is set in the 2010s, the second in the 1920s. They are both excellent and far outshone this one.
jelouha's review against another edition
3.5
Well written, lots of jumping around, a little hard to follow.
phoebemurtagh's review against another edition
I had long been looking forward to reading this book, so I jumped at the chance to listen to it as my walking-book. The case itself is fascinating, with a mystery that did not disappoint. The legal battle which followed also engaging, as one would expect a case involving Clarence Darrow to be. The addition of D. W. Griffith's career to the narrative is a somewhat strange choice, however, considering that his involvement with the "crime of the century" was scarcely more than any other influential citizen. While there are parallels between himself and the other two protagonists, his coincidental connections to the case are interesting, but his import (or rather, lack there of) to the story makes his elevation to third main character strange. What bothered me, though, was its praise of Griffiths as a visionary director without an appropriate grappling with the fact that his breakthrough in modern film was the highly racist rewriting of US history, "The Birth of a Nation," nor an acknowledgement of the harm the film caused in reinforcing an anti-Black, pro-white nationalist retelling of the Civil War (while at the same time hinting that Griffiths may have been a pedophile - an odd, unreconciled portrait). A good listen, but one that left a sour note.
baggman's review against another edition
3.0
I'm not one for Historical Narratives, so I wasn't really sure of what I would find in this novel. Turned out it was exactly what I suspected, and why I'm not into Historical Narratives.
Even with my initial apprehension I was initially drawn to this novel by the mention of Clarence Darrow, D.W. Griffith, Samuel Gompers, and Billy Burns (Frankly, I had never heard of Burns before this book). I guess my knowledge of American history is, sadly, lacking. I had no idea that these persons had any professional interaction, or that there was a Trial of the Century well before anyone ever heard of O.J. Simpson.
The book deals with the bombing of the Los Angeles Times building in 1910, killing 21 people; the hunt for the person responsible, and their subsequent trial. The bombing, as the book points out in detail, was a direct result of a intense nationwide conflict between wealthy business owners, Capitalists, and labor, which was significantly influenced by the Socialist movement. Seems pertinent for me to point to a quote by Edmund Burke, "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it." But, what do I know.
The book is full of interesting facts that attempt to describe the feelings and attitudes of early twentieth century American. Things that I did not know or, clearly, did not understand. The book was interesting and informative, just not entertaining. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it wasn't worth reading. From a historical point of view, it was great. As entertainment, which is important to me, it was somewhat lacking.