<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: The perfect read if you enjoy real history and adventure
Review: If you enjoy true documentary type history and politics, well written, and especially if you are one of the thousands who enjoyed this author's "Alive" - about the survivors of an airplane crash - then you will devour "Ablaze". Mind you, among the page-turning excitement there is also a lot of breathtaking incompetence and cover-up. You'll remember: the Chernobyl reactor blew up, the Soviets covered up, Europe was contaminated, thousands of Soviet citizens were (and still are) made tragically ill. This book gives a journalistic factual account of the emergency and all its aftermath. The physics is well explained for the non-scientist. Worth ordering!
Rating:
Summary: The perfect read if you enjoy real history and adventure
Review: If you enjoy true documentary type history and politics, well written, and especially if you are one of the thousands who enjoyed this author's "Alive" - about the survivors of an airplane crash - then you will devour "Ablaze". Mind you, among the page-turning excitement there is also a lot of breathtaking incompetence and cover-up. You'll remember: the Chernobyl reactor blew up, the Soviets covered up, Europe was contaminated, thousands of Soviet citizens were (and still are) made tragically ill. This book gives a journalistic factual account of the emergency and all its aftermath. The physics is well explained for the non-scientist. Worth ordering!
Rating:
Summary: Read like a novel, but told a sad but true story.
Review: The Devil himself was manifested in the hellish heat and fire of the exposed core of reactor number four at the V.I. Lenin PowerStation in Pripyat, outside of Chernobyl, in the USSR. Soundsgrotesque, but intriguing, right? Piers Paul Read's novel, Ablaze, presents the horror "story of the heroes and victims of [the] Chernobyl [nuclear accident]." in a daunting,yet scientifically credible way. In the introduction of the book, Piers Paul Read, presents the information regarding thedisaster in Pripyat. Read writes in a straight forward manner that promotes a trust between the reader and author. During his introduction,Read clearly outlines his thesis and how he is going to present information. He tells you from that beginning that he does not know extensively about nuclear physics, reactor construction, orabout the operation of a nuclear power plant. His lack of experience paired with the average reader's same lack, makes a perfect match. For the information that the average readerdoesn't know, the author provides what could be called a mini-lesson on the basics of nuclear power as well as a bit of nuclear physics. I think thatthe author does this to promote a feeling of trust between the author and the reader. When reading the introduction where the author spoke of not knowing extensively about the world of nuclear power, I gotthe impression that the author was learning along with me during the mini-lessons. This instilled a feeling of companionship and trust in me toward the author. I believe that trust is a vital part of the relationship between an author and his/her audience. While the mini-lessons alleviated much of the lacking of background information, the reader still needed to know some of the general history of Russia and the USSR to completely comprehend the work. The knowledge required amassed mostly to the structureof the Soviet government and the structure and the power of "the party" otherwise known as the Communist Party of the country. Although this information is not obscure or arduous to find, itstill required some research on the part of this reader. After a brief mini-lesson on nuclear physics, Read went on to explain events leading up to the disaster. He provided a total explanation of the history behind atomic weaponry development and howit led to the development of nuclear reactors in the USSR. Read focused mainly on the RBMK reactor development and the Soviet drive to harness the vast amounts of energy that can be created by a nuclearreactor. While the explanation of this "nuclear race" was quite education, it seemed too name and oriented for me to follow with full cognition. In fact, to this reader, the whole book appeared to be overflowing with names. While it can be understoodthat names and specific facts are imperative to a non-fiction historical book, they can be overused, as they appear to have been in Ablaze. To this reader, the overuse of names and other facts avertthe reader from fully enjoying and understanding the book. After the explanation of the events leading to the disaster, the author moves into a stage where the pace picks up. Events start happening with short intervals, and the words start forming vividimages in the reader's mind. This reader could see the eerie blue and red glow of the reactor as it emitted the deadly radionuclides that killed or harmed so many. The writing explaining the actual explosion and the 20 or so minutes that followedwere realistic and action-packed. The pages of these actions, made the daunting journey through the pages of explanations worth it. The writing on the actual accident was like something one could readout of a best-selling novel, or more accurately, could see in the newest blockbuster action movie. Piers Paul Read's writing in this middle phase of the book were superb, but, to this reader, the readability and excitement soon faded. The writingof the immediate aftermath was still interesting, and I wanted to continue to read. But, as the book further progressed, the quality of the writing diminished. While totally untrue and unrealistic,it could be said that this book appears to be written in one day: It starts slowly, like one is writing after just awaking, then, as the writer wakens and becomes more alert, the writing qualityand excitement increase. The writing quality and excitement seem to reach their pinnacle at the center of the book. Then, the quality diminishes, getting worst as the day goes on -- as the writergrows weary. The book closes with a triteness that is so indicative of the common history book. It closes like one has slowly drifted off to sleep. It does not close with the BANG that a topic of this proportion and magnitude demands. The book, while not in chaos, could use a better organization system. The Table of Contents was quiet insufficient for a book with as many divisionsand sections as Ablaze. Also, the different sections and chapters would be better suited with a textual title as well as the numerical title that each section has. And these titles should beincluded in the table of contents. For a book that appears to be researched extensively, the author should have paid more attention to the structure and organization of the book. Published in 1993, Ablaze by Piers Paul Read addresses a concern that many American and International citizens share-- nuclear safety. MostAmericans live within a comparatively close proximity of a nuclear reactor, weather for electricity creation, or for governmental andmilitary use. The possibility is always there, for an explosion like at Pripyat, or for something worse, a full meltdown or even nuclear war. Piers Paul Read illustrates this point effectively. Although lengthy, the message is clear. Read tells us crystal-clearly, like Jacobo Timerman said, "Everything that happened once can happen again.
Rating:
Summary: Good Account
Review: This book covers the Chernobyl nuclear reactor melt down that took place back in the early 80's in the USSR. The first third of the book covers what happened to cause the accident - an amazingly small human error for such a major problem. The next third of the book covers the fighting of the fires, evacuation of the town and the closure of that part of the facility. The last third of the book covers the political fallout for the incident.Overall he details are very interesting and the author has done a very good job in pulling all the facts together. You really can tell that this is a very well researched book. The writing is not bad and the book follows a well-constructed path. My only complaint would be that the last third of the book tends to drag a little due to the in depth coverage of the political aspects, due to it being USSR it is not always the most interesting for an American. All in all, this is a good book that does a great job in describing the accident and the clean up. The one thing you will take away from the book is that it is a wonder that this type of incident has not happened again.
Rating:
Summary: Good Account
Review: This book covers the Chernobyl nuclear reactor melt down that took place back in the early 80's in the USSR. The first third of the book covers what happened to cause the accident - an amazingly small human error for such a major problem. The next third of the book covers the fighting of the fires, evacuation of the town and the closure of that part of the facility. The last third of the book covers the political fallout for the incident. Overall he details are very interesting and the author has done a very good job in pulling all the facts together. You really can tell that this is a very well researched book. The writing is not bad and the book follows a well-constructed path. My only complaint would be that the last third of the book tends to drag a little due to the in depth coverage of the political aspects, due to it being USSR it is not always the most interesting for an American. All in all, this is a good book that does a great job in describing the accident and the clean up. The one thing you will take away from the book is that it is a wonder that this type of incident has not happened again.
<< 1 >>
|
