I am a history enthusiast. Galveston's 1900 hurricane is one that interests me enough to read everything I can get my hands on about it.
Erik Larson's book "Isaac's Storm" was far better than this book.
Roker went into far too much detail about race relations in a book that should have been about meteorology and the disaster. I got so very bored by pages of non-relevant references to the race relations that I quit reading the book for several weeks. I had to renew it to finally read the remainder. Roker really should have written a separate book about race relations in Texas in 1900. This was NOT the place to push the segregation topic.
Al Roker has at least one thing very wrong. He claims that the Federal Government fired on Fort Sumter. In truth, the Confederates started the Civil War by firing on the Federal Fort Sumter! That made me question the accuracy of the rest of the book if he gets something so obviously wrong.
It was nothing but a rehashing plus a tale of the African American in Galveston 1900. I found the section on the relationship between the early weather service and their Cuban counterparts tedious. I kept asking myself just when were we going to get to the subject of what the book was supposed to be about!
Read "Isaac's Storm"... it is far more interesting. I couldn't put that book down once I started it. This one? I wouldn't recommend it.
Roker's book is a comprehensive look at the nat'l US situation, Cuban relations (poor), many personal accounts, excellent weather analysis (lacking in US weather bureau management) and graphic descriptions of the event & aftermath/recovery. The Publishers Weekly negative review of June 2015 is grossly inaccurate, biased & misleading.
There are no ages for this title yet.
There are no summaries for this title yet.
There are no notices for this title yet.
There are no quotes for this title yet.