What do you think?
Rate this book
American Lightning: Terror, Mystery, the Birth of Hollywood & the Crime of the Century
It was an explosion that reverberated across the country—and into the very heart of early-twentieth-century America. On the morning of October 1, 1910, the walls of the Los Angeles Times Building buckled as a thunderous detonation sent men, machinery, and mortar rocketing into the night air. When at last the wreckage had been sifted and the hospital triage units consulted, twenty-one people were declared dead and dozens more injured. But as it turned out, this was just a prelude to the devastation that was to come.
In American Lightning, acclaimed author Howard Blum masterfully evokes the incredible circumstances that led to the original “crime of the century”—and an aftermath more dramatic than even the crime itself.
With smoke still wafting up from the charred ruins, the city’s mayor reacts with undisguised excitement when he learns of the arrival, only that morning, of America’s greatest detective, William J. Burns, a former Secret Service man who has been likened to Sherlock Holmes. Surely Burns, already world famous for cracking unsolvable crimes and for his elaborate disguises, can run the perpetrators to ground.
Through the work of many months, snowbound stakeouts, and brilliant forensic sleuthing, the great investigator finally identifies the men he believes are responsible for so much destruction. Stunningly, Burns accuses the men—labor activists with an apparent grudge against the Los Angeles Times’s fiercely anti-union owner—of not just one heinous deed but of being part of a terror wave involving hundreds of bombings.
While preparation is laid for America’s highest profile trial ever—and the forces of labor and capital wage hand-to-hand combat in the streets—two other notable figures are swept into the drama: industry-shaping filmmaker D.W. Griffith, who perceives in these events the possibility of great art and who will go on to alchemize his observations into the landmark film The Birth of a Nation; and crusading lawyer Clarence Darrow, committed to lend his eloquence to the defendants, though he will be driven to thoughts of suicide before events have fully played out.
Simultaneously offering the absorbing reading experience of a can’t-put-it-down thriller and the perception-altering resonance of a story whose reverberations continue even today, American Lightning is a masterpiece of narrative nonfiction.
In American Lightning, acclaimed author Howard Blum masterfully evokes the incredible circumstances that led to the original “crime of the century”—and an aftermath more dramatic than even the crime itself.
With smoke still wafting up from the charred ruins, the city’s mayor reacts with undisguised excitement when he learns of the arrival, only that morning, of America’s greatest detective, William J. Burns, a former Secret Service man who has been likened to Sherlock Holmes. Surely Burns, already world famous for cracking unsolvable crimes and for his elaborate disguises, can run the perpetrators to ground.
Through the work of many months, snowbound stakeouts, and brilliant forensic sleuthing, the great investigator finally identifies the men he believes are responsible for so much destruction. Stunningly, Burns accuses the men—labor activists with an apparent grudge against the Los Angeles Times’s fiercely anti-union owner—of not just one heinous deed but of being part of a terror wave involving hundreds of bombings.
While preparation is laid for America’s highest profile trial ever—and the forces of labor and capital wage hand-to-hand combat in the streets—two other notable figures are swept into the drama: industry-shaping filmmaker D.W. Griffith, who perceives in these events the possibility of great art and who will go on to alchemize his observations into the landmark film The Birth of a Nation; and crusading lawyer Clarence Darrow, committed to lend his eloquence to the defendants, though he will be driven to thoughts of suicide before events have fully played out.
Simultaneously offering the absorbing reading experience of a can’t-put-it-down thriller and the perception-altering resonance of a story whose reverberations continue even today, American Lightning is a masterpiece of narrative nonfiction.
339 pages, Hardcover
First published September 16, 2008
About the author
Howard Blum
40 books287 followersHoward Blum is the author of New York Times bestsellers including Dark Invasion, the Edgar Award–winner American Lightning, as well as Wanted!, The Gold Exodus, Gangland, and The Floor of Heaven. Blum is a contributing editor at Vanity Fair. While at the New York Times, he was twice nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting. He is the father of three children, and lives in Connecticut.
Get in touch!
Website: www.HowardBlum.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: Like Howard Blum on Facebook
Twitter: @HowardBlum and @FloorOfHeaven
Get in touch!
Website: www.HowardBlum.com
Email: [email protected]
Facebook: Like Howard Blum on Facebook
Twitter: @HowardBlum and @FloorOfHeaven
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 410 reviews
March 1, 2009
I was looking for a light, quick, entertaining read that I didn't have to think too much about so I picked up this book b/c I thought how can I lose with a true-crime novel about unionist leaders accused of blowing up the L.A. Times building b/c they didn't like the press they were getting, a detective known as the "American Sherlock Holmes", D.W. Griffith, and a very young city of Los Angeles? I like History, I like crime stories, it's a win-win. Wong-Wong.
Although the story did have it's moments my main issue was that there wasn't nearly enough meat there for a full-lengthed novel. The Author was a journalist (for Vanity Fair), and it shows. His style is choppy and hardened, and the story is presented in sort of a "just the facts, maam" way. When Blum does editorialize, he doesn't back up anything he is saying with historical facts, or examples. For instance he wraps the story up into neat little packages concerning the detective, the defense attorney, and D.W. Griffith (the latter with only a loose connection to the case) and says stuff like, "America could now move forward," and "America's equilibrium had been restored." I wanted to know why the entire nation was at a stand still over a trial involving the bombing of a newspaper building. I'm not saying it wasn't, I mean, I remember where I was when OJ's Ford Bronco was on the run, but he doesn't give us any insight as to the effect this case had on the outside world. Certainly not to the point where the wheels of America had ceased spinning until a resolution came about.
All in all I was disappointed because, as I said, all the components for a great story were there. Sadly, I hate to say, Blum failed in execution.
I still think it would make a great movie, depending on who would be assigned to write the screenplay.
Although the story did have it's moments my main issue was that there wasn't nearly enough meat there for a full-lengthed novel. The Author was a journalist (for Vanity Fair), and it shows. His style is choppy and hardened, and the story is presented in sort of a "just the facts, maam" way. When Blum does editorialize, he doesn't back up anything he is saying with historical facts, or examples. For instance he wraps the story up into neat little packages concerning the detective, the defense attorney, and D.W. Griffith (the latter with only a loose connection to the case) and says stuff like, "America could now move forward," and "America's equilibrium had been restored." I wanted to know why the entire nation was at a stand still over a trial involving the bombing of a newspaper building. I'm not saying it wasn't, I mean, I remember where I was when OJ's Ford Bronco was on the run, but he doesn't give us any insight as to the effect this case had on the outside world. Certainly not to the point where the wheels of America had ceased spinning until a resolution came about.
All in all I was disappointed because, as I said, all the components for a great story were there. Sadly, I hate to say, Blum failed in execution.
I still think it would make a great movie, depending on who would be assigned to write the screenplay.
September 29, 2008
Generally a very good read, but I have a couple of quibbles--No index ( a horrible choice for a book of history), a couple of factual boners--the population of Los Angeles was closer to 350,000 in 1910 than to the 900,000 cited in the book, and "A Corner in Wheat" was NOT 32 frames long--that would have made it approximetely 2 seconds in length--the author may have meant 32 scenes.
The idea of the book--that Wiliam J. Burns, Clarence Darrow and filmmaker D.W. Griffith, acting separately at a moment in time, forever changed the shape of America's future is a grand theme--but not fully realized. The D.W. Griffith stuff seems grafted onto the story and not orgainic to it. This becomes especially evident when he discusses the 1913 film "From Dusk to Dawn" in which Darrow appears and the author feebly suggests that the film, which Griffith had nothing to do with, was nevertheless "influenced" by the master filmmaker.
Very entertaining and well worth reading, "American Lightning" was a little too precious for me to give it a wholehearted endorsement.
The idea of the book--that Wiliam J. Burns, Clarence Darrow and filmmaker D.W. Griffith, acting separately at a moment in time, forever changed the shape of America's future is a grand theme--but not fully realized. The D.W. Griffith stuff seems grafted onto the story and not orgainic to it. This becomes especially evident when he discusses the 1913 film "From Dusk to Dawn" in which Darrow appears and the author feebly suggests that the film, which Griffith had nothing to do with, was nevertheless "influenced" by the master filmmaker.
Very entertaining and well worth reading, "American Lightning" was a little too precious for me to give it a wholehearted endorsement.
October 2, 2011
I honestly cannot believe that this book doesn't have a higher rating on here. This is one of the best non-fiction books that I have read in a very long time.
Ostensibly about the 1910 bombing of the LA Times building (which killed 21 people), it plays out more like a "whodunit." Blum interweaves the story of three famous men - William J. Burns, "America's Sherlock Holmes," the private detective hired to catch the bomber; Clarence Darrow, the "peoples' lawyer" who was hired to defend the men accused of the bombing; and D.W. Griffith, the famous director who basically turned LA into the movie capital of the world. In all honestly, I still don't really know what Griffith had to do with this story, but reading about him was so interesting that I didn't really care what the point of including him was.
There is just so much to love about this book. It was all fascinating to me. I enjoyed reading about the underhanded, capitalist shenanigans of Otis, the owner of the Times. I enjoyed reading about the labor vs. capital "civil war" that was raging across the nation at the time (and the echoes of which have begun to rage in our country again, 100 years later). I really, really enjoyed reading about the detective work that Burns and his men did to capture the bombers, and about the nationwide conspiracy of bombings that they discovered. Usually books like this get boring when it comes to the trial, but this one didn't: yellow journalism, misleading PR campaigns, attempts to buy off witnesses and jurors. Seriously, what is not to love about this book?
I found it astonishingly readable and accessible. I finished it in a mere 3 days, which is pretty good for a 300+ page non-fiction book. I really would recommend this book to anyone, but if you have a particular interest in America of the 1890s-1930s like I do, I think you'd love it just as much as I did.
Ostensibly about the 1910 bombing of the LA Times building (which killed 21 people), it plays out more like a "whodunit." Blum interweaves the story of three famous men - William J. Burns, "America's Sherlock Holmes," the private detective hired to catch the bomber; Clarence Darrow, the "peoples' lawyer" who was hired to defend the men accused of the bombing; and D.W. Griffith, the famous director who basically turned LA into the movie capital of the world. In all honestly, I still don't really know what Griffith had to do with this story, but reading about him was so interesting that I didn't really care what the point of including him was.
There is just so much to love about this book. It was all fascinating to me. I enjoyed reading about the underhanded, capitalist shenanigans of Otis, the owner of the Times. I enjoyed reading about the labor vs. capital "civil war" that was raging across the nation at the time (and the echoes of which have begun to rage in our country again, 100 years later). I really, really enjoyed reading about the detective work that Burns and his men did to capture the bombers, and about the nationwide conspiracy of bombings that they discovered. Usually books like this get boring when it comes to the trial, but this one didn't: yellow journalism, misleading PR campaigns, attempts to buy off witnesses and jurors. Seriously, what is not to love about this book?
I found it astonishingly readable and accessible. I finished it in a mere 3 days, which is pretty good for a 300+ page non-fiction book. I really would recommend this book to anyone, but if you have a particular interest in America of the 1890s-1930s like I do, I think you'd love it just as much as I did.
February 4, 2009
I agree with the reviews on this book that likened it to The Devil in the White City Murder, Magic, and Madness at the Fair that Changed America ; this book had the same two plot lines converging, famous characters, and a sensational murder mystery behind it, but Larson's book was more deftly written.
It was a strain trying to weave D.W. Griffith and the evolution of Hollywood in to the L.A. Times bombing for the length of the entire book; I could buy into it for the first hundred pages, but then it seemed to be reaching.
That having been said, "American Lightning" had a great background history of Hollywood in the early 20th century, and on how the San Fernando Valley evolved from desert to suburbia.
I'd recommend it as a library read or paperback purchase, but not hardback.
It was a strain trying to weave D.W. Griffith and the evolution of Hollywood in to the L.A. Times bombing for the length of the entire book; I could buy into it for the first hundred pages, but then it seemed to be reaching.
That having been said, "American Lightning" had a great background history of Hollywood in the early 20th century, and on how the San Fernando Valley evolved from desert to suburbia.
I'd recommend it as a library read or paperback purchase, but not hardback.
July 26, 2012
I couldn't remember for the life of me what this book reminded me of. A magic trick maybe? All sleight of hand and prestige, but a closer look has us realizing we can see all the wires and the false bottoms and right up its sleeve. But more than that, it was more like a con. Like that old folk tale about the travelers who trick a town into giving them food?
Stone Soup. That's what this book is. I didn't realize it at first, but as it wore on, it became clear that this piece was more of a contrivance than anything else. It has little flavor and no meat. It's a pot of water with a few stones in it and tricks the reader into giving it more credit than it deserves.
The main reason that this book seems to have dazzled some readers? Howard Blum is an extremely capable writer. Stylistically, at least. The narrative feels comfortably conversational, and he's able to weave a somewhat interesting web of intrigue with some very tenuous connections. Yes, tenuous. The fact that Blum tries his damndest to place DW Griffith at the heart of this narrative tells us that he really didn't have a story he could sell until he could link it very loosely to the "birth of Hollywood". Because who wants to read a history book with substance over scandal? may be the only one.
What bothered me most about the book is the fact that you can clearly tell Blum wholly understands that his "birth of Hollywood" schtick is just that. He doesn't even bother to connect the threads in 99% of the book (which I actually have to credit him for because at least he doesn't flat out lie to us). Instead of makiing this an intellectually sound piece of reporting or even a fantastic history book on labor struggles, he instead tries to make it seem as if this is the beginning of the end for print media and the start of a war between movie studios and newspapers. It absolutely blows my mind as to why this became an embroiled murder Sherlockian murder mystery as opposed to a substantial tome about labor practices, labor policies and the history of Los Angeles at the turn of the century.
While Blum can write, he often falters in descriptive narration and it makes most of his characterization awkward. It feels forced. Again, like he's trying to put meat on the bones and beef up a story that could have been a great 10,000 word essay instead.
All in all, there may not be many other books written on the Times bombing, but that may be for good reason. ALthough Blum can bill it as the 'crime of the century', as any good newspaper man would, it really doesn't stack up against other domestic terror attacks or other heinous crimes that have happened in the 90 years that follow this one very petty crime.
Grade: D
Stone Soup. That's what this book is. I didn't realize it at first, but as it wore on, it became clear that this piece was more of a contrivance than anything else. It has little flavor and no meat. It's a pot of water with a few stones in it and tricks the reader into giving it more credit than it deserves.
The main reason that this book seems to have dazzled some readers? Howard Blum is an extremely capable writer. Stylistically, at least. The narrative feels comfortably conversational, and he's able to weave a somewhat interesting web of intrigue with some very tenuous connections. Yes, tenuous. The fact that Blum tries his damndest to place DW Griffith at the heart of this narrative tells us that he really didn't have a story he could sell until he could link it very loosely to the "birth of Hollywood". Because who wants to read a history book with substance over scandal? may be the only one.
What bothered me most about the book is the fact that you can clearly tell Blum wholly understands that his "birth of Hollywood" schtick is just that. He doesn't even bother to connect the threads in 99% of the book (which I actually have to credit him for because at least he doesn't flat out lie to us). Instead of makiing this an intellectually sound piece of reporting or even a fantastic history book on labor struggles, he instead tries to make it seem as if this is the beginning of the end for print media and the start of a war between movie studios and newspapers. It absolutely blows my mind as to why this became an embroiled murder Sherlockian murder mystery as opposed to a substantial tome about labor practices, labor policies and the history of Los Angeles at the turn of the century.
While Blum can write, he often falters in descriptive narration and it makes most of his characterization awkward. It feels forced. Again, like he's trying to put meat on the bones and beef up a story that could have been a great 10,000 word essay instead.
All in all, there may not be many other books written on the Times bombing, but that may be for good reason. ALthough Blum can bill it as the 'crime of the century', as any good newspaper man would, it really doesn't stack up against other domestic terror attacks or other heinous crimes that have happened in the 90 years that follow this one very petty crime.
Grade: D
December 9, 2008
A couple of years ago, "The Devil in the White City" kicked off a trend of writing history books with a narrative, almost fictional style, and "American Lightning" is clearly indebted to it. They even designed the cover with a similar aesthetic. I thought it was the same author until I checked the "Other Works" page. Devious, yes. And in this case, acceptable, because it was nearly as good.
"Lightning" follows the 'American Sherlock Homes' as he pieces together the Crime of the Century. No, not O.J. And not the Lindbergh babynapping, either. The ORIGINAL Crime of the Century took place closer to the start of the century, when a group of anarchists or possibly unionists or maybe even the owner himself blew up a non-union printing press. Meanwhile, D.W. Griffiths is busy inventing the movie business (yeah, that's right, Birth of a Nation guy) and Clarence Darrow is brought in to defend the accused. Blum ties in so many big names, it's almost like reading the People mag of the early 1900's. And it all goes down, appropriately enough, in Los Angeles.
Part of the fun for me was finding out the origins of why L.A. is such terrible city (as in, urban center) today. And if you thought our justice system is screwed up now, I highly recommend you read "Lightning." Witness intimidation, out-and-out bribery, wheeling and dealing and more weren't so much expected as they were mandatory. "Lightning" is a fun, fast-paced read that will actually make you feel like we've made progress in the last hundred years.
"Lightning" follows the 'American Sherlock Homes' as he pieces together the Crime of the Century. No, not O.J. And not the Lindbergh babynapping, either. The ORIGINAL Crime of the Century took place closer to the start of the century, when a group of anarchists or possibly unionists or maybe even the owner himself blew up a non-union printing press. Meanwhile, D.W. Griffiths is busy inventing the movie business (yeah, that's right, Birth of a Nation guy) and Clarence Darrow is brought in to defend the accused. Blum ties in so many big names, it's almost like reading the People mag of the early 1900's. And it all goes down, appropriately enough, in Los Angeles.
Part of the fun for me was finding out the origins of why L.A. is such terrible city (as in, urban center) today. And if you thought our justice system is screwed up now, I highly recommend you read "Lightning." Witness intimidation, out-and-out bribery, wheeling and dealing and more weren't so much expected as they were mandatory. "Lightning" is a fun, fast-paced read that will actually make you feel like we've made progress in the last hundred years.
March 7, 2009
Starting with a bomb that was set in the Los Angeles Times building, this nonfiction thriller leads to a veiled plot across the whole united states involving labor unions and leads to a trial involving Clarence Darrow and weaving the web to include D. W. Griffith and the birth of Hollywood moviemaking. A rapid page turner that reads like a great fiction detective novel.
March 15, 2009
Fans of The Devil in the White City should like this one. It's narrative history set against the backdrop of the bombing of a conservative turn-of-the-century newspaper. Clarence Darrow and D.W. Griffith are a couple of the more famous people the book tracks through the case. Lightweight history but an entertaining read.
October 13, 2023
Talk about an overenthusiastic subtitle. American Lightning just barely grazes the "birth of Hollywood" and I would argue that it does not, in fact, feature the "crime of the century." Who gets to decide that anyway?
Instead, we get Billy Burns, Clarence Darrow, and D.W. Griffith swirling around the mysterious case of the bombing of the L.A. Times building. The setting: early 20th century. The vibe: labor vs. capital. The case is honestly pretty simply: the L.A. Times was fiercely anti-labor, so some labor activists blew up the building. American Lightning tracks Burns as he investigates the crime, so that part is interesting, if littered with dull dead ends.
Once the criminals are apprehended, Darrow swings in as the defense attorney. He and Griffith get a lot of potted backstory that doesn't really apply to the main narrative, but serves nicely at padding the page count. Griffith especially does not belong here: he kind of made a progressive "yay labor!" film, which was popular around the time of the bombing. Also, he was sometimes in Los Angeles. And he once was in the same room as the other two. You could cut his involvement in the book and not miss a thing. (Plus, the author is very circumspect about the dude's racism, which is not a great look.)
Honestly, American Lightning is mostly a disappointment, at least in terms of plot. But the pacing is fast, the writing easy, and the narrative mostly engaging. A book solely about the life of Billy Burns would have been much more interesting - maybe I'll go find that next.
Instead, we get Billy Burns, Clarence Darrow, and D.W. Griffith swirling around the mysterious case of the bombing of the L.A. Times building. The setting: early 20th century. The vibe: labor vs. capital. The case is honestly pretty simply: the L.A. Times was fiercely anti-labor, so some labor activists blew up the building. American Lightning tracks Burns as he investigates the crime, so that part is interesting, if littered with dull dead ends.
Once the criminals are apprehended, Darrow swings in as the defense attorney. He and Griffith get a lot of potted backstory that doesn't really apply to the main narrative, but serves nicely at padding the page count. Griffith especially does not belong here: he kind of made a progressive "yay labor!" film, which was popular around the time of the bombing. Also, he was sometimes in Los Angeles. And he once was in the same room as the other two. You could cut his involvement in the book and not miss a thing. (Plus, the author is very circumspect about the dude's racism, which is not a great look.)
Honestly, American Lightning is mostly a disappointment, at least in terms of plot. But the pacing is fast, the writing easy, and the narrative mostly engaging. A book solely about the life of Billy Burns would have been much more interesting - maybe I'll go find that next.
Read
May 20, 2019I found this fascinating. The way the author wove together labor and capital wars, bombing and domestic terrorism, detective work, courtroom drama, and the rise of Hollywood as we know it today, with its artistic beauty and its dark power, made for a riveting read.
January 10, 2018
This book is excellent when focused on the central mystery of the horrible 1911 explosion of the Los Angeles Times building that left 21 people dead, the war between unions and capitalists, and the topsy-turvy court case that followed. Much of the book follows the efforts--outright unconstitutional at times--of the "American Sherlock Holmes," William J. Burns as he pursues justice.
Where the book falters in a major way, though, is in how it markets itself: Terror, Mystery, & the Birth of Hollywood. The narrative wanders to follow D.W. Griffith and how he changed the way films were made through new techniques and marketable stars like Mary Pickford. It simply does not fit with the main plot. This is especially frustrating for me because I picked it up for the Hollywood angle, and while I was fascinated by the real life detective work and court case, I can't help but feel like I was terribly mislead. Judging by other reviews, I am certainly not the only one to feel this way.
Where the book falters in a major way, though, is in how it markets itself: Terror, Mystery, & the Birth of Hollywood. The narrative wanders to follow D.W. Griffith and how he changed the way films were made through new techniques and marketable stars like Mary Pickford. It simply does not fit with the main plot. This is especially frustrating for me because I picked it up for the Hollywood angle, and while I was fascinated by the real life detective work and court case, I can't help but feel like I was terribly mislead. Judging by other reviews, I am certainly not the only one to feel this way.
December 12, 2023
Very well researched with multiple storylines coming together — a famous detective, director and lawyer at the turn of the 20th century after a bombing takes twenty-one lives in Los Angeles. It’s amazing what detectives were able to accomplish without modern technology.
November 24, 2022
Interesting story about a 20th century "Crime of the Century" that I had not heard about. The Los Angelas Times bombing. No one really comes out of this as a nice guy. A very interesting story.
December 24, 2011
Ohhhhhhhh man! If the current folks complaining about President Obama being a Socialist could read this book! Not only does Eugene Debs make an appearance...but so does Big Bill Haywood! Awesome! The text focuses on the Oct 1, 1910 destruction of the LA Times building. It seems that the building was blown up using dynamite, killing 21 people. This is one of those events that I had no idea about.
The text is a story of three people: William Burns, Clarance Darrow and D.W. Griffith. Burns was the operator of the most dreaded private detection agency this side of the Pinkertons in 1910. Darrow was by this point a famous attorney in his 50s. Griffith was a movie director who could not keep his dick in his pants. In a slightly more important note, he invented the close up.Yes, this is a "real crime" story. But, it is fascinating.
Los Angeles, much like the rest of the country in 1910, was beset by the age old battle of capitalists vs. labor. When the Times building went up in smoke the question became who was guilty, not why they did it. This is the first thing the reader notices. In 1910, growing up in poverty or earning $5 for a 65 hour week was not considered reasons for committing a crime.
Both sides looked at the trial as something that was to be played outside the courtroom. Bloom lays wasted the idea that the OJ or Chuck Manson case changed the way criminals are judged in this country. I could not help but think of Casey Anthony while I read this book. Media convicted her years ago; they then labeled the verdict "surprising". In this country, we try people every day via polls and other assorted bull shit. This did not start in the 1980s. Bloom convincingly argues that it begins in the first decade of the 20th century.
In some ways, the crime itself is secondary to the politics surrounding it, which was Darrow's biggest problem with the case. Darrow was reluctant to take the case because of the energy he expended in a corruption case in San Francisco five years before. If people currently think that Fox News and MSNBC are partisan, the media companies are ball-less wienies compared to outfits like the LA Times or NY Times in the early 1900s. Bloom's portrait of both sides is even handed.
What is most compelling is Billy Burns, the private detective who is charged with solving the crime. At one point, he is asked while doing a search "Do we not have rights?" Burns replied "Not in this case you do not." It is here that Bloom's narrative is both the most compelling and most frustrating. The actions of both sides (bribing witnesses, bullying, kidnapping witnesses) is carried on with not one jot of thought for civil liberties. In fact, civil liberties seem an anathema to the capitalists. Bloom does not explore this as much as I would like, but the reader can swing his/her own way on that matter. What does matter is this is a story that deserves to be told, and Bloom does tell it very well.
The text is a story of three people: William Burns, Clarance Darrow and D.W. Griffith. Burns was the operator of the most dreaded private detection agency this side of the Pinkertons in 1910. Darrow was by this point a famous attorney in his 50s. Griffith was a movie director who could not keep his dick in his pants. In a slightly more important note, he invented the close up.Yes, this is a "real crime" story. But, it is fascinating.
Los Angeles, much like the rest of the country in 1910, was beset by the age old battle of capitalists vs. labor. When the Times building went up in smoke the question became who was guilty, not why they did it. This is the first thing the reader notices. In 1910, growing up in poverty or earning $5 for a 65 hour week was not considered reasons for committing a crime.
Both sides looked at the trial as something that was to be played outside the courtroom. Bloom lays wasted the idea that the OJ or Chuck Manson case changed the way criminals are judged in this country. I could not help but think of Casey Anthony while I read this book. Media convicted her years ago; they then labeled the verdict "surprising". In this country, we try people every day via polls and other assorted bull shit. This did not start in the 1980s. Bloom convincingly argues that it begins in the first decade of the 20th century.
In some ways, the crime itself is secondary to the politics surrounding it, which was Darrow's biggest problem with the case. Darrow was reluctant to take the case because of the energy he expended in a corruption case in San Francisco five years before. If people currently think that Fox News and MSNBC are partisan, the media companies are ball-less wienies compared to outfits like the LA Times or NY Times in the early 1900s. Bloom's portrait of both sides is even handed.
What is most compelling is Billy Burns, the private detective who is charged with solving the crime. At one point, he is asked while doing a search "Do we not have rights?" Burns replied "Not in this case you do not." It is here that Bloom's narrative is both the most compelling and most frustrating. The actions of both sides (bribing witnesses, bullying, kidnapping witnesses) is carried on with not one jot of thought for civil liberties. In fact, civil liberties seem an anathema to the capitalists. Bloom does not explore this as much as I would like, but the reader can swing his/her own way on that matter. What does matter is this is a story that deserves to be told, and Bloom does tell it very well.
March 26, 2014
While this book promises to shed light on the birth of Hollywood and a crime of the century, it fails in quite significant ways. The author weaves three narratives together: the detective work of Billy Burns to solve a bombing in Los Angeles, the efforts of Clarence Darrow to defend the bombers, and the nascent film work of D.W. Griffith. But the attempt to link these three fails because Griffith had precious little to do with the other men, and nothing to do with the bombing or its aftermath. His early film work is grafted onto the other two narratives in an unconvincing and pointless gesture. And while Darrow was hired to defend the bombers, the case never went to trial. The bombers pleaded out. So there was no courtroom drama that justifies giving Darrow such high profile attention in the narrative.
A stronger element is the focus on Burns and his efforts to solve the crime. Here the story moves with some energy. Had the book focused on Burns as the main character, and followed that line of development, it might have made a better overall book. But it seems the author felt there was not enough there for such a book, and chose to pad the account with extraneous details about Griffith and Darrow.
Another significant problem is that none of the sources for historical information are cited. Blum explains in an afterward that he is a reporter, and therefore feels he is exempt from footnoting. But frankly, the account seems to play fast and loose with conversations, and supposed internal thoughts and motivations of characters. And Blum errs with some basic facts. For example, it was not "Frank Dixon" who wrote "The Clansmen," it was Thomas Dixon, Jr. Blum also indulges in some sweeping claims about the the transformational effect of the LA bombing without offering any proof. And most glaringly, Blum makes no effort to tell the story of organized labor, the struggles that led up to the bombing campaign, and why that became a strategy in the fight. There is simply no attention paid to the labor movement or the condition of the working class at all, except when it comes to the defense of the bombers. And yet, understanding what led up to these extreme tactics is key.
What the reader is left with is narratives that don't deliver, dubious use of primary sources, and big holes in the historical account. This book is not worth the time.
A stronger element is the focus on Burns and his efforts to solve the crime. Here the story moves with some energy. Had the book focused on Burns as the main character, and followed that line of development, it might have made a better overall book. But it seems the author felt there was not enough there for such a book, and chose to pad the account with extraneous details about Griffith and Darrow.
Another significant problem is that none of the sources for historical information are cited. Blum explains in an afterward that he is a reporter, and therefore feels he is exempt from footnoting. But frankly, the account seems to play fast and loose with conversations, and supposed internal thoughts and motivations of characters. And Blum errs with some basic facts. For example, it was not "Frank Dixon" who wrote "The Clansmen," it was Thomas Dixon, Jr. Blum also indulges in some sweeping claims about the the transformational effect of the LA bombing without offering any proof. And most glaringly, Blum makes no effort to tell the story of organized labor, the struggles that led up to the bombing campaign, and why that became a strategy in the fight. There is simply no attention paid to the labor movement or the condition of the working class at all, except when it comes to the defense of the bombers. And yet, understanding what led up to these extreme tactics is key.
What the reader is left with is narratives that don't deliver, dubious use of primary sources, and big holes in the historical account. This book is not worth the time.
July 14, 2009
Written in quasi novel style, this is about one of the original acts of domestic terrorism in the US when the LA Times building was blown to bits in 1910 killing 21 people and injuring many more. In covering this event, Howard Blum weaves a great detective story featuring the "American Sherlock Holmes" William J Burns around the twin pillars of the rise of Hollywood and the escalation of the violence between capital and labor that gripped the early 20th century (The Soviet Union revolutoin would occur a decade after the bombing). The LA Times was blown up as its owner was committed anti-union. Burns arrives on the bomb scene and over time uncovers a national terrorist conspiracy led by extreme elements within labor that lands in a trial room drama featuring a philandering Clarence Darrow--who then has to face the music on jury tampering and bribery charge after the trial. My one thought after reading this book, was my amazement that I'd never heard this story before, or that a movie hasn't been made about it. It's grand in ambition and at its best when zeroing in on Burn's amazing detective work and the organized labor violence that occurred in the early 20th century...some have hammered this book as superficial and tangential in its incorporation of certain story elements. I disagree, and think readers should pick interesting elements from this to pursue in more depth with the benefit of context. No historical event lives in isolation. Historical lines run deep and across.
June 24, 2021
A new civil war was almost begun in America at the beginning of the 20th Century. Only this time the opposing sides were Labor and Capital, not the Union & the Confederacy. Instead of Fort Sumter, the first shot was the bombing of the Los Angeles Times newspaper building that killed 21 people. Other bombings of non-union workplaces had happened before, but this was the first one with a death toll. The bombing and its aftermath are the focus of Howard Blum's "American Lightning."
The story is approached from three angles involving celebrities of the time. Private investigator William "Billy" Burns, famed defense attorney Clarence Darrow and filmmaker D. W. Griffith. All three played roles in the solving, prosecuting and public relations of the "Crime of the Century." It is an interesting approach and quite effective in telling the story as it must have seemed to the public of the time.
Recommended for readers interested in American socialism, true crime and/or film history.
The story is approached from three angles involving celebrities of the time. Private investigator William "Billy" Burns, famed defense attorney Clarence Darrow and filmmaker D. W. Griffith. All three played roles in the solving, prosecuting and public relations of the "Crime of the Century." It is an interesting approach and quite effective in telling the story as it must have seemed to the public of the time.
Recommended for readers interested in American socialism, true crime and/or film history.
Read
February 5, 2009Most critics were eager to learn more about this neglected event in American history and were glad to have Blum as their teacher. They were most impressed by the first half of the book, which covers the attacks and investigation and which was several times compared to a Hollywood thriller or an episode of the television show 24. Reviewers were less thrilled by the second part of the book, where Blum introduces Darrow and Griffith into the story. Several felt that these great American personalities were presented superficially, perhaps because Blum attempted too great a scope in the book. But on the whole, critics found American Lightning to be a satisfying work of narrative history.
This is an excerpt from a review published in Bookmarks magazine.
December 12, 2008
I have finished "American Lightning". It is an interesting book, but not a great read. The history, more than the mystery, is what kept me reading. It is a fascinating tale that had an impact on film and the lives of those involved. I am always amazed at how a person's life is impacted and directed by the events, and if one little thing had gone differently, how that person's life may have twisted and turned in a different direction. This book makes one wonder about how history may have been different if people had made other choices.
August 26, 2009
Argh argh arrrrgh. Fascinating true-life story (actually two fascinating true-life stories that never really mesh); horrible, repetitious, overwrought writing style; poorly sourced because the author doesn't think extensive sourcing is necessary in a popular history. In the afterword, the author compares himself to a gray wolf. WHAT. EVER.
September 15, 2009
The build-up and the crime investigation were really interesting. The end result of what actually did happen to this "crime of the century" was beyond disappointing. And his throwing D.W. Griffith into the storyline felt more than a bit forced.
February 29, 2020
Actual rating: 2.5 stars
So I will say some of this is colored by my inability to really get into audiobooks. I find I get very distracted and might miss something, so I usually only listen to audibooks of novels I know very well.
That said. The writing was interesting. I didn't really know very much about the bombings before coming in, so it was cool to learn some completely new history.
But what really threw me off was D. W. freaking Griffith.
I have a degree in film. I know he did a lot of amazing things for the medium. He was an innovator and both stylistically and technically very skilled.
He's still a PoS. I hate him. He was pretty racist. He was painfully into teenage girls.
And this book glorified a lot of what he did. There was a ton of information about what good he did for the film medium, but also some very uncomfortable tongue in cheek comments, like, "Oh that rascal, he sure liked that girl who looked like a 14 year old! It's okay, though, because she was 16!" Can you not?? There was little to no criticism of Griffith until the very end of the epilogue and by that point, I found it was too little too late.
Really, he wasn't even particularly relevant to the story, to be perfectly honest, so I would have been happy to see him gone.
In general, Blum offered very little of his own criticism, which didn't really work in this particular instance. I felt like there needed to be much more or practically none to make it really work.
I didn't come into this book knowing about the plot, so I would say I learned quite a bit from it. It's an easy read and not very long, so if you're looking for a quick bit of true crime that's not about a serial killer or a murder (specifically), this might be one to try out!
So I will say some of this is colored by my inability to really get into audiobooks. I find I get very distracted and might miss something, so I usually only listen to audibooks of novels I know very well.
That said. The writing was interesting. I didn't really know very much about the bombings before coming in, so it was cool to learn some completely new history.
But what really threw me off was D. W. freaking Griffith.
I have a degree in film. I know he did a lot of amazing things for the medium. He was an innovator and both stylistically and technically very skilled.
He's still a PoS. I hate him. He was pretty racist. He was painfully into teenage girls.
And this book glorified a lot of what he did. There was a ton of information about what good he did for the film medium, but also some very uncomfortable tongue in cheek comments, like, "Oh that rascal, he sure liked that girl who looked like a 14 year old! It's okay, though, because she was 16!" Can you not?? There was little to no criticism of Griffith until the very end of the epilogue and by that point, I found it was too little too late.
Really, he wasn't even particularly relevant to the story, to be perfectly honest, so I would have been happy to see him gone.
In general, Blum offered very little of his own criticism, which didn't really work in this particular instance. I felt like there needed to be much more or practically none to make it really work.
I didn't come into this book knowing about the plot, so I would say I learned quite a bit from it. It's an easy read and not very long, so if you're looking for a quick bit of true crime that's not about a serial killer or a murder (specifically), this might be one to try out!
February 10, 2022
The history covered (the labor/capital wars) is very interesting. The ties between the crime and D. W. Griffith feels shoehorned and really had me asking, "How much longer is this..." Without citations for all dialogue written, it's really hard not to wonder, especially in that 3rd person narrative, how speculative the emotions portrayed as fact are actually the author's projections.
October 5, 2017
We listened to this in the car and it took us a long time to get through the 9 disks. I'm glad I listened to it but it was a much more complex story than I imagined at the beginning. The story began Oct 1 ,1910 with the bombing of the Los Angeles Times building. The investigation and trial brought together Clarence Darrow and William J Burns. Of course I've heard of Darrow but did not know anything of his life and career before the Scopes trial. The story also included DW Griffith and the early days of the moving picture industry. It was fascinating when the careers of these 3 individuals intersected during this period in history. It was just a very LONG story.
November 2, 2023
3.5 I had some difficulty getting into it but once I was there it was good.
February 26, 2017
A well written, fascinating account of the bombing of the LA Times building in 1910 by the McNamara brothers. This is definitely a case where there are no heroes, just victims, crooks, bullies, and very misguided activists who believe that violence will get them what they want.
This was during what only could be called a war between labor and business owners. Employers fight unions with strike breaking, spies, private detectives, and outright violence on frequent occasions. Unions fight back with violence of their own, including bombings. The Iron Workers union, which the McNamaras belonged to, blew up 110 iron works, though the damage was not that great and no one was killed. The LA Times bombing changed everything. A total of 21 people died, mostly in the ensuing fire.
Howard Blum tells the story of the bombing, its investigation, and the trial of the McNamaras through three men - D W Griffith, the director; William J. Burns, the famous private detective; and Clarence Darrow, the legendary defense attorney. I wasn't convinced by Griffith's inclusion because his connection to the whole case was very tenuous at best. I understand that Mr Blum had included Griffith to paint a more detailed picture of the time, but it just didn't work for me. However, Burns and Darrow were deeply involved in the case - Burns investigated the crime and Darrow defended the McNamara brothers, who were accused of the bombing.
Burns is forgotten now except for true crime buffs and historians. However, in his day he was a famous detective and was called "America's Sherlock Holmes." He had been investigating a series of bombings of iron manufacturing plants for four years, so he was a natural choice to investigate the LA Times bombing as well. Burns' investigation is the best part of the book - meticulous, careful, and determined. This is what Colin Wilson has referred to as "needle in the haystack" investigation. I don't know that I would compare Burns to Sherlock Holmes, but he was definitely an excellent detective who deserved his reputation.
Darrow does not come off very well. He is exhausted and sick. He has also been cheating on his long-suffering wife Ruby. Though reluctant to take another labor-related job, Darrow agrees to defend the McNamaras. It quickly becomes obvious to Darrow that his clients are guilty and he may not be able to get them out of this.
What amazed me more than anything was the complete lack of concern for people's civil rights. Suspects are kidnapped and possibly coerced into confessions. Jurors are bribed. Attempts are made to bribe, intimidate or otherwise suborn witnesses. Darrow and Burns are involved deeply in this skulduggery. Nowadays if detectives or lawyers did this, they would end up in jail. However, in 1910-1911, it was business as usual. Harrison Gray Otis, the publisher of the LA Times, is spectacularly repulsive. It got to the point whenever he made an appearance, I just skipped over those passages.
At the end of the book, Mr Blum wraps things up with a few notes about what happened to Burns, Griffith, and Darrow. However, he left a few things out:
Griffith went on to make two more classic films that in many ways repudiate "Birth of a Nation": "Intolerance" and "Broken Blossoms." Mr Blum also repeats the myth that Griffith created the closeup. However, that is wrong. The closeup had been used for many years by other filmmakers - for example, "The Big Swallow" (1901) by James Williamson.
Burns became director of the Bureau of Investigation (BOI) (forerunner of the FBI) in 1921. However, he become indirectly involved in the Teapot Dome scandal when he "investigated" some jurors in the trial of an oil executive. When news of this leaked out, it caused a mistrial and legal trouble for Burns. He also tried to intimidate newspaper offices that portrayed the BOI's behavior in a negative light. He was forced to resign in 1924 and J Edgar Hoover took over.
This was during what only could be called a war between labor and business owners. Employers fight unions with strike breaking, spies, private detectives, and outright violence on frequent occasions. Unions fight back with violence of their own, including bombings. The Iron Workers union, which the McNamaras belonged to, blew up 110 iron works, though the damage was not that great and no one was killed. The LA Times bombing changed everything. A total of 21 people died, mostly in the ensuing fire.
Howard Blum tells the story of the bombing, its investigation, and the trial of the McNamaras through three men - D W Griffith, the director; William J. Burns, the famous private detective; and Clarence Darrow, the legendary defense attorney. I wasn't convinced by Griffith's inclusion because his connection to the whole case was very tenuous at best. I understand that Mr Blum had included Griffith to paint a more detailed picture of the time, but it just didn't work for me. However, Burns and Darrow were deeply involved in the case - Burns investigated the crime and Darrow defended the McNamara brothers, who were accused of the bombing.
Burns is forgotten now except for true crime buffs and historians. However, in his day he was a famous detective and was called "America's Sherlock Holmes." He had been investigating a series of bombings of iron manufacturing plants for four years, so he was a natural choice to investigate the LA Times bombing as well. Burns' investigation is the best part of the book - meticulous, careful, and determined. This is what Colin Wilson has referred to as "needle in the haystack" investigation. I don't know that I would compare Burns to Sherlock Holmes, but he was definitely an excellent detective who deserved his reputation.
Darrow does not come off very well. He is exhausted and sick. He has also been cheating on his long-suffering wife Ruby. Though reluctant to take another labor-related job, Darrow agrees to defend the McNamaras. It quickly becomes obvious to Darrow that his clients are guilty and he may not be able to get them out of this.
What amazed me more than anything was the complete lack of concern for people's civil rights. Suspects are kidnapped and possibly coerced into confessions. Jurors are bribed. Attempts are made to bribe, intimidate or otherwise suborn witnesses. Darrow and Burns are involved deeply in this skulduggery. Nowadays if detectives or lawyers did this, they would end up in jail. However, in 1910-1911, it was business as usual. Harrison Gray Otis, the publisher of the LA Times, is spectacularly repulsive. It got to the point whenever he made an appearance, I just skipped over those passages.
At the end of the book, Mr Blum wraps things up with a few notes about what happened to Burns, Griffith, and Darrow. However, he left a few things out:
Griffith went on to make two more classic films that in many ways repudiate "Birth of a Nation": "Intolerance" and "Broken Blossoms." Mr Blum also repeats the myth that Griffith created the closeup. However, that is wrong. The closeup had been used for many years by other filmmakers - for example, "The Big Swallow" (1901) by James Williamson.
Burns became director of the Bureau of Investigation (BOI) (forerunner of the FBI) in 1921. However, he become indirectly involved in the Teapot Dome scandal when he "investigated" some jurors in the trial of an oil executive. When news of this leaked out, it caused a mistrial and legal trouble for Burns. He also tried to intimidate newspaper offices that portrayed the BOI's behavior in a negative light. He was forced to resign in 1924 and J Edgar Hoover took over.
December 9, 2016
A most interesting read and one that had been on my list for a while and suddenly became available at the library. This historical account is written much like a lengthy and well constructed novel, that is to say the narrative weaves together several strands and a number of key protagonists in the telling of the story. In this case those threads involve Clarence Darrow, DW Griffith and Billy Burns. The first and last of these I understand but Griffith seems a little more tenuous to me, but certainly sets the tone for the times. He does have a direct input too so it is very valid to include him.
This is a broad account of the fight between labour and capital as epitomized by the bombing of the LA Times building owned by Harrison Otis, as well as other organized terrorist attacks. This is an interesting political war in its own right and is certainly well illustrated as the backdrop to this particular crime, dubbed at the time, somewhat melodramatically as "The Crime of the Century".
The tale integrates the growth of motion pictures with the labour war, the chasing of the terrorists by Burns and their defense by Darrow. These accounts sometimes leave the reader wanting to know more about the main characters and there are always autobiographies to seek out if that is the case. However here, I don't care for any of them, or find them of interest beyond the character sketches here. Nonetheless, they are interesting enough to keep the reader engaged and the story that criss-crosses the US is well told and moves pretty fast.
Well worth a read. The story itself fizzles somewhat at the trial phase the the closing stages of the book therefore strike me as anticlimactic but that is hardly the fault of the author. It fills in the time very well when, as hard as it is to believe if you look at the US today, socialism was briefly in the ascendency. Also, those who think terrorism is a modern invention only needs to read this book to be disabused of that notion.
Well worth a read. Lifts the lid on the turn of the century labour struggles and it is that subject that is probably worthy of my further attention.
This is a broad account of the fight between labour and capital as epitomized by the bombing of the LA Times building owned by Harrison Otis, as well as other organized terrorist attacks. This is an interesting political war in its own right and is certainly well illustrated as the backdrop to this particular crime, dubbed at the time, somewhat melodramatically as "The Crime of the Century".
The tale integrates the growth of motion pictures with the labour war, the chasing of the terrorists by Burns and their defense by Darrow. These accounts sometimes leave the reader wanting to know more about the main characters and there are always autobiographies to seek out if that is the case. However here, I don't care for any of them, or find them of interest beyond the character sketches here. Nonetheless, they are interesting enough to keep the reader engaged and the story that criss-crosses the US is well told and moves pretty fast.
Well worth a read. The story itself fizzles somewhat at the trial phase the the closing stages of the book therefore strike me as anticlimactic but that is hardly the fault of the author. It fills in the time very well when, as hard as it is to believe if you look at the US today, socialism was briefly in the ascendency. Also, those who think terrorism is a modern invention only needs to read this book to be disabused of that notion.
Well worth a read. Lifts the lid on the turn of the century labour struggles and it is that subject that is probably worthy of my further attention.
November 19, 2011
In 1910 there were a series of explosions across the country. Some believed the bombings were the work of anarchists while others thought they were more likely caused by workers in the fight between the working class and capitalists. The bombings were destructive but bloodless until October 1, 1910 when 21 employees of the Los Angeles Times were killed when an explosion ripped through their building. But was it the work of angry workers or company owners hoping to blame the unions? Enter Billy Burns, the greatest private detective of his day.
Burns was hired by the city to find the culprits and he took his role very seriously. His company followed every lead and eventually located the people who set the bomb and the people who hired them. But the story is much more than just Billy Burns solving the bombing. The unions wanted the best man possible to defend the accused union leaders so they hired Clarence Darrow. Darrow still had his most famous years ahead of him to defend Scopes for teaching evolution and Leopold and Loeb for being cold blooded killers. But this case almost broke him.
And finally we meet D.W. Griffith, the famous director who’s involvement in this case is very peripheral but who represents what Los Angeles is becoming. The end result is a fast moving and interesting look at a little known terrorist period in out history. Blum writes like a newspaperman (which he is) and not a novelist (which he isn’t). The book is a quick read that bounces between the three main characters and tries to tie them together with varying success.
The end result is not a failure but it isn’t a great success. There are many parts of the story (the many bombings by the labor movement, for example) that could have used more in-depth treatment. But it isn’t a bad book and I think you will find it worth the time. The 300 pages read quickly and Blum wrap up things well enough at the end to leave you feeling that you got the meat of the story.
Burns was hired by the city to find the culprits and he took his role very seriously. His company followed every lead and eventually located the people who set the bomb and the people who hired them. But the story is much more than just Billy Burns solving the bombing. The unions wanted the best man possible to defend the accused union leaders so they hired Clarence Darrow. Darrow still had his most famous years ahead of him to defend Scopes for teaching evolution and Leopold and Loeb for being cold blooded killers. But this case almost broke him.
And finally we meet D.W. Griffith, the famous director who’s involvement in this case is very peripheral but who represents what Los Angeles is becoming. The end result is a fast moving and interesting look at a little known terrorist period in out history. Blum writes like a newspaperman (which he is) and not a novelist (which he isn’t). The book is a quick read that bounces between the three main characters and tries to tie them together with varying success.
The end result is not a failure but it isn’t a great success. There are many parts of the story (the many bombings by the labor movement, for example) that could have used more in-depth treatment. But it isn’t a bad book and I think you will find it worth the time. The 300 pages read quickly and Blum wrap up things well enough at the end to leave you feeling that you got the meat of the story.
July 30, 2010
When I think of the great battlefields of labor vs. the bosses, Los Angeles isn't even on my list. Yet here comes American Lightning, an absolutely fascinating story of a bombing, a manhunt, and a trial - with the bitter war between labor and management at its heart.
If I'm being picky, the one flaw in this book is Blum's inclusion of D.W. Griffith, the early filmmaker. Blum attempts to connect Griffith to the bombing case by making his work a product of these times, but I found his efforts to be forced. Griffith had absolutely nothing to do with the case, and I found his (thankfully, brief) sections to be distracting and irrelevant. His icky fascination with young girls, his cinematic vision, his use of film to shape public opinion - all should have been part of a different book and had no place here.
Yes, film was used as propaganda during the trial, but they weren't Griffith's films and Blum never really made a convincing argument for his inclusion in this book.
Fortunately, the bulk of this story follows the case. Blum writes the story of the Times bombing without editorializing. The detective work that went into finding the criminals responsible is an amazing story unto itself, and reads like a novel. Blum's style often makes me forget that I'm reading history, not fiction. I loved it. I recommend this for anyone who is interested in a good detective story, as well as anyone who's interested in early American labor politics. Good stuff.
If I'm being picky, the one flaw in this book is Blum's inclusion of D.W. Griffith, the early filmmaker. Blum attempts to connect Griffith to the bombing case by making his work a product of these times, but I found his efforts to be forced. Griffith had absolutely nothing to do with the case, and I found his (thankfully, brief) sections to be distracting and irrelevant. His icky fascination with young girls, his cinematic vision, his use of film to shape public opinion - all should have been part of a different book and had no place here.
Yes, film was used as propaganda during the trial, but they weren't Griffith's films and Blum never really made a convincing argument for his inclusion in this book.
Fortunately, the bulk of this story follows the case. Blum writes the story of the Times bombing without editorializing. The detective work that went into finding the criminals responsible is an amazing story unto itself, and reads like a novel. Blum's style often makes me forget that I'm reading history, not fiction. I loved it. I recommend this for anyone who is interested in a good detective story, as well as anyone who's interested in early American labor politics. Good stuff.
November 9, 2008
The nucleus of Pulitzer Prize finalist Howard Blum's 'American Lightning' is the October 1910 bombing of the Los Angeles 'Times' building. From that one act of terrorism a story is spawned that includes legendary detective William J. Burns, defense attorney extraordinaire Clarence Darrow, and the early twentieth century's greatest motion picture director, D.W. Griffith. Mary Pickford even puts in an appearance. Burns works to bring the 'Times' bombers to justice, Darrow eventually steps in to save them from the noose, and Griffith churns out populist films such as 'A Corner in Wheat', which criticizes the greedy merchants who profit at the expense of the poor and working classes.
'American Lightning' is, as another reviewer accurately put it, history aimed at the popular fiction market. With its liberal use of dialogue and non-scholarly approach to the political intrigues and labour unrest that infested the 1910s, the book is an entertaining read. Because it will appeal to its intended audience, I have accorded it four stars. But I am personally uncomfortable with such a creative treatment of historic events, as it's difficult to discern what actually happened from what the author has included to make the story more vivid or smooth. I enjoyed 'American Lightning', but don't come away feeling as if I truly know what happened during the turbulent events that it covers.
'American Lightning' is, as another reviewer accurately put it, history aimed at the popular fiction market. With its liberal use of dialogue and non-scholarly approach to the political intrigues and labour unrest that infested the 1910s, the book is an entertaining read. Because it will appeal to its intended audience, I have accorded it four stars. But I am personally uncomfortable with such a creative treatment of historic events, as it's difficult to discern what actually happened from what the author has included to make the story more vivid or smooth. I enjoyed 'American Lightning', but don't come away feeling as if I truly know what happened during the turbulent events that it covers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 410 reviews