Rating: 
Summary: Heros and Villains
Review: It's easy for characters in books to be all black or all white - to be wholly heroic or without any redeeming character whatsoever. And that's what's wrong with this book. I enjoyed the read enormously, but Ms. Bruce's "either/or" tendency towards human nature left me emphathetic towards her purported villian, Stanley Williams. I've just started reading his own account of the trajedy, and so far I see no reason to change my opinion. If he's such a bad person, why is Marta Calvache - Ms. Bruce's heroine - still work with him, and and how can she, to all appearances, continue to respect him?As to the hard hat controversy, Ms. Bruce seems to feel Williams is personally responsible for the failure of other vulcanologists to wear one. While there were, sadly, a few novice scientists among the fatalities (I leave the "tourists" out of this particular controversy), the trip also included seasoned professionals from around the globe. These experienced scientists were not in the habit of wearing hard hats or they would have worn them, regardless of what anyone else did or didn't recommend. Good policy or bad, the obvious truth is that it does not occur to even the most experienced volcanolists to wear hard hats; it has nothing whatsoever to do with one person's judgment. Is Williams responsible for the behavior of senior scientists like Igor Menyailov and Geoff Brown? Ms. Bruce herself supports this view by stating that it was only the Los Alamos scientists who wore them, and that they wore them because hard hats are US government policy for their employees. Ms. Bruce makes the Galeras trajedy sound unique; in his first few pages, Williams mentions several other vulcanologist friends who died in other volcanic eruptions, one of whom - Dave Johnston, who died on Mount St. Helens - worked for the US Geological Survey and, as a government employee, presumably wore a hard hat whenever he descended into a volcano. I should reiterate here that I very much enjoyed this book. I only think that I could have enjoyed it more if it read a little less like a vendetta. The worst part of failing to bring to light any redeeming quality whatsoever in Williams is that his actual shortcomings - oversights, errors, ego, whatever - lack the true impact they could have had. A book about black and white heroes and villians may be a good read, but a book about human failings would have been great.
Rating: 
Summary: Action and Intrigue
Review: Loved this book. It's smart, filled with excitement, and fun to read. Would make a great movie.
Rating:
Summary: Kudos from a Novel Reader
Review: My nose is always tucked in a puzzling mystery or a novel about interpersonal relationships. When my usually passive friend assertively insisted I read this book by a local author, I gave in. Thank Goodness! It is wonderful. Its science is easy to read and appealing, but the story is so much more. It's a personal, sociological, and economic view of a country impacted by its beautiful landscape, dominated by volcanos that capture the imagination and dominate the life of the people who live near them. It has a hero - Marta and, like a novel describes exciting conflicts of man against nature and man against man. The story of Ruiz is as important as Galeras! It reads like a novel. Does Ms. Bruce have plans to write one??? Please Do Ms Bruce.
Rating: 
Summary: Blame, blame, go away, come again some other day.
Review: No Apparent Danger by Victoria Bruce is 2/3 to 3/4 a good book. Ms. Bruce certainly has the credentials [science writer for NASA, science reporter for the Portland Oregonian, and holder of a masters degree in geology (Geochemistry of hydrothermal alteration along a radial transect from the Summit of Mount Rainier, Washington)] and talents to tell a good geologic tale. She makes few scientific flubs ('Earth's fiery core...was still holding the heat from the Earth's formation.' The heat currently comes from ongoing radioactive decay.) and historic blunders (Which church blasted Alfred Wegener's ideas?) that make you gasp. Her story of intrepid developing nation geologists is inspiring. She did her homework on Nevado del Ruiz and Galeras and the reader feels as if they are there. But in my opinion, two things seriously mar an otherwise good book: 1) her almost blind faith in the ideas and talents of Bernard Chouet, geophysicist with the USGS, and 2) her need to blame Stanley Williams for the death of 9 people. The last line of Chapter 8 is where things seem to begin to go wrong. 'In fact, without the presence of the U.S. Geological Survey volcanologists, including Dave Harlow, John Ewert, and Andy Lockhart, and most important, Bernard Chouet, there wasn't anyone in Pasto with the clout or experience to stand up to [Stanley] Williams and make the call: GALERAS IS DANGEROUS. DO NOT GO INTO THE VOLCANO (italics in the original).' Here Williams is prepared by Bruce to take the fall, and most important, Chouet is prepared by Bruce to take the credit for being the man with THE answer to predicting volcanic eruptions. To accept all this, we must accept, among other things, that nobody at the Galeras conference was able to stand up to Williams (Marta Calvache, among others, ought to be insulted by this), that long period seismicity BY ITSELF is a reliable predictor of volcanic eruptions, that seismicity as predictor was well-known and internalized by Williams and others at the conference, that if the USGS people had been able to attend the conference the eruption would have been predicted and nobody would have died. [I would love to hear from Harlow and Lockhart, two of the heroes of Pinatubo, in detail concerning how they feel about the situation-I can't find anything written by them regarding this book.] And my search of the available scientific literature does NOT give me the impression that Bernard Chouet has solved the problem of predicting volcanic eruptions. Stanley Williams has taken some responsibility for the incident on Galeras, but Ms. Bruce wants us to BLAME him for it. At a signing that I attended, she first referred to the others in the volcano that day as 'amateurs' and then, when questioned on the use of the word amateur, she changed it to 'inexperienced'. Yet Marta Calvache, a truly heroic person, and others were not inexperienced. I think the situation is much more complicated than Ms. Bruce makes it out to be and I don't think anyone in this tragic situation deserves to be blamed.
Rating:
Summary: Who Has What at Stake
Review: No Apparent Danger by Victoria Bruce is the accounting of two tragedies on Galeras. The first is the volcanic eruption. The second is Stanley William's denial of what actually happened. From the evidence presented, there seems to be little doubt Williams knew Galeras was not safe. Still, he did not take appropriate safety precautions. Members of his team even mocked scientists who DID wear hard hats. William's PR team has attacked Bruce regarding her version of the events on Galeras. In truth, she had little to gain by presenting this account. Her story is unbiased, well researched and extremely readable. She does not condescend to the reader, even when simplifying the complex science of volcanology. No Apparent Danger remains reader friendly without losing its credibility. Bruce discusses in the book's final chapter how she approached Williams to assist in writing his story and was basically rebuked. Later, she attempted to talk to him about the seismicity on Galeras and he claimed to not be familiar with what she was referring to. In the end, the readers will determine which version of events they prefer, but for now, Bruce's seems the most logical. She was an outsider to the events, merely documenting what she was told by people who were there. While Williams was one of the people on the volcano, he has a tremendous stake in selling his version. Neither No Apparent Danger nor Bruce seeks to persecute Williams. The book only tells the story as the people who were there lived it.
Rating:
Summary: Credible Account
Review: No Apparent Danger is a an extremely well written, well researched credible account of a tragic event. The author presents the facts in an objective style. This fascinating book is a joy to read.
Rating:
Summary: remarkable
Review: No Apparent Danger is a stunning example of careful and diligent attention to details of the horrible human suffering due to natural disasters in Colombia in the last decade and a half. It explains the events through the words both published and from interviews of dozens of people who were involved. The book reads in a wonderful, descriptive way. From the earnest attempts of the scientists/engineers to understand the signals from Nevado Del Ruiz-to the flight from Arbolito during the eruption-to the devastation of Armero, the reader is left profoundly saddened. The idea that in 1985, lack and hindrance of scientific support from the government of Colombia was responsible for the death of many thousands of people is appalling. Strong people of Colombia are introduced to the reader who were coffee growers, engineers, and scientists all working to understand these disasters and to form plans and procedures needed to prevent loss of life and property. These people become real in the book because of the description of their lives, personalities, work, and in some cases, their heroism. The story of the explosion of Galeras is rich in detail because of the view of people who witnessed it from different places. The confusion in the city of Pasto, the anxiety and concern of the people hiking the flanks of the mountain, the agony of death and injury in the volcano, the search and rescue for surveyors. And the almost comical event where a scientist, TV cameraman, and reporter ended in a heap at the summit. I am moved by this book, which has described all of this and much more. I am pleased to know of strong, intelligent, and caring people who acted in brave ways in Colombia. I am pleased to read about the women who are dedicated scientists in Colombia and I salute the two women who by example (by running in to the volcano) started the rescue of the injured. It's remarkable.
Rating:
Summary: An Explosion of Facts!
Review: No Apparent Danger is beautifully written and excruciatingly honest. Ms. Bruce's thorough documentation of events does not sugar coat the facts, politics, or egos of the players involved in both tragedies. Her thorough research of the facts are brutally honest and objectively exposes the conflict of an economically troubled country, complicated politics, horrendous egos and the lack of resources available to the young Columbian scientists who are desperately trying to understand the dangers and complexities of awakening volcanoes. Ms. Bruce's ability to clearly communicate the science of geology and volcanology to a lay reader is a talent to be admired. She simplifies the science and facts about volcanoes so clearly it is truly baffling as to why the warning signals of both active volcanoes were ignored causing such horrific tragedies. The complete neglect of safety procedures in both eruptions is absolutely criminal. It's clear that Ms. Bruce's credentials as a journalist, geologist and volcanologist gives her the ability to honestly and concisely report the tragedies which should have never occurred. She exposes the "real danger" involved in science - the human ego! This is a must read! You will not want to stop until you've reached the last page!
Rating: 
Summary: No Apparent Integrity
Review: No Apparent Danger is the story of two volcanic eruptions in the strife-ridden country of Columbia, tied together by horrible loss of life. Unfortunately, this book is written in a tabloid, sensational style that completely undermines the tragedy. Part one describing the tragedy of Nevada Del Ruiz is fairly informative and dramatic, though she unfairly tends to vilify the priest of Armero and others for their part in the tragedy. Hindsight is twenty-twenty. However, in the second part of the book, about the eruption of Galeras, the gloves come off and the sensationalism comes up faster than a pyroclastic flow. Her ability to make the scientists (including the dead) mustache-twirling villains is phenomenal. She shows little respect for the victims, ignoring their willingness to take risks in their professions and describing gory details of their deaths that are best left to the tabloids. We can only hope the victims' families don't read this. Buy the book if you want finger-pointing and rude details. Otherwise, read Surviving Galeras, by Stanley Williams instead...a much more balanced, complex and respectful version of the tragedy.
Rating:
Summary: An involving survey
Review: No Apparent Danger is the story of volcanic disaster at Galeras and Nevado del Ruiz and tells of a team of scientists who died during a research expedition, and of the woman who experienced two volcanic disasters in less than a decade of study. Scientific tragedy and study risks are detailed in an involving survey.
|
