Post #13, Comments on “Cadillac Desert”
Post #13, Comments on “Cadillac Desert” (for 27 Nov seminar)
I also commented on Jim's site and Dan's site .
This book wins my vote for the biggest surprise of the semester. I was fully expecting to be crushed by the deadly triumvirate: a belly full of turkey, a 514-page snoozer, and whiny enviro-twaddle about the sad fate of the three-toed wart less salamander. By the end of the week I fully expected to be found in a corner with bloodshot eyes and a pallid complexion, whimpering “please, please, just let me read some history…that’s all I ever wanted.”
Fortunately, for all of us as I am leading the discussion this week, I sit here hale, hearty and refreshed, eager to dive into the discussion tomorrow night. In short, I liked the book. I found some sections fascinating (especially the sagas of the early explorers, feats of engineering derring-do, bankers with pistols, and incredible tales of hubris). I was entertained by most of the book (two excellent dam-meltdowns) and even disposed to yield grudging admiration for the parts that featured more detail than I would have liked. In short, Reisner’s writing style made the dry section palatable and the good parts great.
There is no doubt that the book is thoroughly researched using primary and secondary sources. I am usually suspect of gratuitous use of numbers as a symptom of 1980’s fetish for quantifiable history (as in reviews that praised books for thorough charts and tables in the appendix without establishing a need fulfilled or value added by the inclusion in clarifying the information or informing the reader), but was impressed by Reisner’s ability to help a reader grasp the immense scale described by the numbers. Some of my favorites explained that as late as the 1930’s over 70% of the Northwest’s three million people were without electricity (p. 161, bottom), or that the storm surge flow of the Missouri river as sufficient to supply New York City for 70 years (p. 189, bottom). I may not be able to picture water flow of 892,000 cubic feet per second, but I’ve lived in New York and now better understand how much water can flow through the Missouri River.
But the book isn’t just about rivers and dams. It is also about people and organizations. Reisner began with the missions of the Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers—the former to enable irrigation agriculture, the latter to control flood damage—and graphically depicted the wheels coming off both carts over time due to a synergy of organizational momentum and individual failings.
Finally, I was tickled by three quotes that I used to reflect on the meaning of the 500 pages I read (and to assist in the digestion of the holiday feast):
“Water flows toward power and money.” (p. 307)
“Don’t bring the water to the people, let the people go to the water.” (p. 392)
“The people who support these boondoggle projects are always talking about the vision and principles that made this country great. ‘Our forefathers would have built these projects’ they say. ‘They had vision.’ That’s pure nonsense. It wasn’t the vision and principles of our forefathers that made this country great. It was the huge unused bonanza they found here.”
I’ll send the questions out via e-mail momentarily.
I also commented on Jim's site and Dan's site .
This book wins my vote for the biggest surprise of the semester. I was fully expecting to be crushed by the deadly triumvirate: a belly full of turkey, a 514-page snoozer, and whiny enviro-twaddle about the sad fate of the three-toed wart less salamander. By the end of the week I fully expected to be found in a corner with bloodshot eyes and a pallid complexion, whimpering “please, please, just let me read some history…that’s all I ever wanted.”
Fortunately, for all of us as I am leading the discussion this week, I sit here hale, hearty and refreshed, eager to dive into the discussion tomorrow night. In short, I liked the book. I found some sections fascinating (especially the sagas of the early explorers, feats of engineering derring-do, bankers with pistols, and incredible tales of hubris). I was entertained by most of the book (two excellent dam-meltdowns) and even disposed to yield grudging admiration for the parts that featured more detail than I would have liked. In short, Reisner’s writing style made the dry section palatable and the good parts great.
There is no doubt that the book is thoroughly researched using primary and secondary sources. I am usually suspect of gratuitous use of numbers as a symptom of 1980’s fetish for quantifiable history (as in reviews that praised books for thorough charts and tables in the appendix without establishing a need fulfilled or value added by the inclusion in clarifying the information or informing the reader), but was impressed by Reisner’s ability to help a reader grasp the immense scale described by the numbers. Some of my favorites explained that as late as the 1930’s over 70% of the Northwest’s three million people were without electricity (p. 161, bottom), or that the storm surge flow of the Missouri river as sufficient to supply New York City for 70 years (p. 189, bottom). I may not be able to picture water flow of 892,000 cubic feet per second, but I’ve lived in New York and now better understand how much water can flow through the Missouri River.
But the book isn’t just about rivers and dams. It is also about people and organizations. Reisner began with the missions of the Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers—the former to enable irrigation agriculture, the latter to control flood damage—and graphically depicted the wheels coming off both carts over time due to a synergy of organizational momentum and individual failings.
Finally, I was tickled by three quotes that I used to reflect on the meaning of the 500 pages I read (and to assist in the digestion of the holiday feast):
“Water flows toward power and money.” (p. 307)
“Don’t bring the water to the people, let the people go to the water.” (p. 392)
“The people who support these boondoggle projects are always talking about the vision and principles that made this country great. ‘Our forefathers would have built these projects’ they say. ‘They had vision.’ That’s pure nonsense. It wasn’t the vision and principles of our forefathers that made this country great. It was the huge unused bonanza they found here.”
I’ll send the questions out via e-mail momentarily.
posted by john | 8:44 PM
2 Comments:
Hi John. The fact that you have no comments yet on your great blog makes me suspect that others, too, did not receive it until Tuesday (what is with Blogger??) Enjoyed the style of your blog, as always, AND thought your presentation on Monday was GREAT. I too was fascinated by this book.
Just read Steve's blog tonight and realize that as a historian I probably shouldn't be so pro-Reisner, but I just can't help myself; guess I'm not that much of a purist.
Have a great trip to Germany!
John, thank you again for your presentation on this work. I agree that this work was surprisingly readable. However, I believe that it really does fall more into the camp of environmental expose. Reisner tries to be historically sound, yet I beleive that he tips his hand. In his introduction he clearly reveals his environmental bias. He also uses language that leans toward the dramatic. With that said, i too found this to be a valuable work and he raises very important questions concerning water's impact upon the development of the West that are invaluable to the historian. I would just tend to be a little more critical of this reading as a work of history.
Post a Comment
<< Home