The Way the Wind Blew: A History of the Weather Underground (Haymarket Series)

A gripping account of 1960s radicals who took up arms against the state. The arrest and subsequent imprisonment of Silas Bissell, former heir to the rug-cleaning fortune who was discovered living near Eugene, Oregon, in 1987, drew a line under one of the most spectacular and bizarre episodes in the historv of the American New Left, for it marked the official end of the Weathermen. Product of splits within the antiwar movement during the late 1960s, the Weather Underground would become synonymous with violent, clandestine resistance to racism and imperialism in the United States and, for some, a symptom of how the movement went wrong. In the first comprehensive history of the Weathermen, Ron Jacobs narrates the origins, development and ultimate demise of the organization: its emergence from the Students for a Democratic Society; its role in the famous Days of Rage in Chicago during October 1969; its decision to go underground; the various actions it staged -- and in some cases bungled -- during the 1970s; its role as goad to other left organizations to sustain the struggle against racism and imperialism; and finally its disintegration, as various members were either captured or surrendered. Drawing on a rich array of documents, interviews with participants and an unrivalled knowledge of the history of the New Left, Jacobs weaves a gripping tale, by turns inspiring and hair-raising -- a fitting testimony to the serried adventures of Weatherman itself. The Way the Wind Blew fuses the excitement of a thriller with an objective assessment of US 1960s radicalism. It is an indispensable resource for comprehending the recent history of the US left.

Ron Jacobs, the author of this book, really could have done a better job. For one thing, he sympathizes too much with his topic. This causes serious problems with his objectivity and taints the book. His research is lacking as well. He relies exclusively on news clippings and documents. I believe I saw only one citation concerning an interview with a figure involved in the actual events. Errors abound as well, mostly concerning editing problems that should have been rectified before reaching publication. The book resembles a laundry list of events more than a historical narrative. In short, Jacobs takes a subject that has the potential for interest and turns it into cerebral novacaine. I'd like to see a more serious treatment of this topic, preferably written by a professional historian.

There is still some value to be found here, however. Even a car wreck of a book can't hide the fact that Weather was made up of serious wackos. The conflicts within Weather about the direction the group should take would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous. All the talk about revolution and women's roles in the group become ridiculous when you remember that we are talking about an organization made up of at most a few hundred people. Actually, I hesitate to call Weather an organization because hierarchy was seen as a symptom of the "imperialist pig" system. I also have problems with using the term "underground" in referring to Weather. Most of the group lived openly, albeit under assumed identities, for years. Bernardine Dohrn, who praised the Manson killings and wrote most of the Weather invective, lived with hubby Billy Ayers in New York. They raised children and worked jobs like any other people. When I think of underground, I think of hiding out and moving from safe house to safe house. This definitely didn't happen here. It's unimaginable that members of the Order, a neo-Nazi insurrectionist group active in the 1980's, would have lived the comfortable life many Weather members enjoyed while on the run. Unfortunately, instead of rotting away in prison, most of the former Weather members lead comfy lives today. Billy Ayers is a university professor at UI in Chicago (parents, remember this when looking for schools for your kids) and wife Bernardine works at a legal foundation. Since we can't seem to throw these people in prison, I think the best thing to do is constantly throw light on them and never forget what they did. Marginalize them as much as possible.


A rehash of old sources; unanalytical   March 18, 2002
 30 out of 47 found this review helpful

Many of the issues discussed are framed in a rather negative and unanalytical context. While I agree that mistakes were made and lots of weird things happened, the author's recounting does little to help one figure out why things happened the way they did, in the context of the times.

1. The book contains a litany of weird things done by the Weather Underground, with very little effort at understanding or explanation, or attempt to place in context. I don't think there are easy answers for what happened and what went wrong, but what I would like to see in a study is something that helps one understand. What we have here is not much more than a review of old newspaper stories and some books. Much more primary material is needed, namely, frank interviews with people who were there. That's not easy, because the people are dispersed and not necessarily anxious to talk. But the book fails without some serious first-hand views. And it should be noted that not everything published at the time, by Weather or others, was necessarily reliable or accurate.

2. The author uses a lot of the rhetoric and slogans of the era without definition or explanation. Examples: fascism, imperialism, nationalist (page 3); black colony (page 27); ultra-leftism (page 146).

3. I don't agree that the original Weatherman paper did "little else" than define the role of black people in the U.S. (page 27).

4. I thought the reference to the Weather sign about GE workers (page 75) was peculiar. Perhaps it's accurate, perhaps it's not. To the extent it represents an actual syndrome, more supporting material would be helpful.

5. There are many glaring misspellings and errors of fact. Examples:

Pages 4, 6: Fairmont Hotel misspelled.

Page 5: Herbert Marcuse was at San Diego, not San Jose.

Page 7: Terry Robbins was from Ohio (as noted on page 100), not Michigan.

Page 23: Dean Rusk misspelled (note 4).

Page 62: Richard Elrod was not a corporate attorney; he was a city attorney, as noted on the next page. The story of what happened to Elrod is an interesting one, but the book doesn't really have it.

Page 84: The date of the War Council is wrong in the last paragraph; it was at the end of December, 1969.

Page 114: The lawyer's name is incorrect.

Page 116: First paragraph, incorrect name of Tom C. Huston.

Page 135: Leslie Bacon was called as a grand jury witness but I don't think she was charged with the Capitol bombing.

Page 137: The Georgia Straight was not an Atlanta newspaper; it was from Vancouver, B.C.

Page 146: Van Lydegraf was in his fifties, not his sixties. I'm not certain that he was expelled from either the CP or PL. He may have quit.

Pages 174-178: This section has numerous errors of fact and interpretation regarding PFOC.

Page 175: Mark Perry misspelled.

Page 179, top paragraph: The use of the passive voice here is not responsible. Who suggested this?

Page 180: Grace Fortner was not the name of the "woman originally identified as Esther."

Page 186: PFOC did not exist in Seattle in 1990-91.

All of these errors, and many more not mentioned, demonstrate two things: the author was not really familiar with the subject, and the book was poorly edited.
--Roger Lippman


Fast and loose with the facts   August 29, 2001
 15 out of 26 found this review helpful

Useful for the bibliography and notes, but little else. Chock-full of inaccuracies and questionable interpretation, as Mr. Lippman pointed out below. A few examples: "[Bill Ayers] met Diana Oughton later that school year [1965], and together they began working at the Children's Community School." (p. 203). Ayers' "Fugitive Days": "In my second year at the Children's Community, Diana Oughton...arrived to volunteer at our school." (p. 91). The cover photograph of Bernardine Dohrn and Brian Flanagan is reversed from its printing on p. 63. When easily verifiable factual errors are made, one must question statements of a more interpretive nature. Marcuse is "a controversial Marxist philosopher and professor at San Jose State" (p. 5). This is a less than useful description of "One Dimensional Man"'s author, and contributes nothing to our understanding of his place in the intellectual climate of the time. I think most telling are Jacobs' acknowledgements. He thanks library staff for their help in helping him assemble material, throws off an "[A]lso, acknowledgements are extended to Roger Lippman, ... as well as various activists whose insights and conversation helped to shape my approach to this book." Jacobs then thanks his housemates, put on a par with ex-Weatherpeople. Jacobs is offering his less than well informed review of already published material. There is no indication he went to any effort to discuss the Weather Underground with the major actors he writes about. This might be a worthy masters thesis at a second-rate college, but is not the sort of thing you would get from a professional historian.


A great book---if placed in the right context   October 27, 2000
 16 out of 20 found this review helpful

Jacobs, certainly with a leftist perspective, attempts to explain the motives of the Weather Underground. Classify them as terrorists or glorify them as heroes, but either way, they made an undisputable mark on history if one is willing to take the time to write reviews characterizing them as both. The fact is that in 200 pages, one can not clearly express what the Weather Organization did, why, and when those actions occured and why that timing was deemed necessary. In spite of that, Jacobs gives a great framework, regardless of your perspectives on the movement, for a cursory survey. In that context, this is perhaps the best book on the movement. If you are seriously researching the movement, this is great background, but in 200 pages, you'll never get the whole story.


A Whitewash...   September 19, 2000
 10 out of 58 found this review helpful

The weathermen were TERRORISTS, just as if they had blown up planes or taken over an Embassy. Actually, they were expodentially worse, since they were Americans killing Americans. I'd be very interested to hear the feelings of a reader who LOST A FAMILY MEMBER because of these psychotic, spolied little children, as I did. My father died at the hands of the weathermen, and I'm sorry that Boudin and her friend escaped their own bomb. I hope they're slapping each other on the back IN HELL.