Let the Faggots Burn: The UpStairs Lounge Fire Paperback – August 15, 2011

Townsend was living in New Orleans at the time of the Upstairs Lounge fire. Much of his research was done decades ago when he interviewed multiple eye-witnesses. The layout of this first-generation edition includes a paragraph or two about each individual. Interspersed among these bios are chapters about how the fire likely was set, the subsequent litigation, the survivors’ post-event adjustment, and the fate of the main suspect.The 32 dead and many otherwise harmed become individuals that lends an indelible immediacy to the historical event. The writing is fluid from start to finish—an accomplishment given the volume of facts presented.

I remember reading about the Upstairs Lounge Fire when I worked in the reference department at East Baton Rouge Parish Library and I discovered a file of newspaper articles about it. I am so glad that this author has kept this story alive, and I hope that he's right that other works are going to be coming out regarding the fire.I found this book somewhat difficult to read, not only because of the subject matter, but also because there's not really a narrative thread apparent throughout the book. Each chapter tells a different character's, or sometimes couple's, story, but I think it would have been more effective to actually have a narrative about the fire. While this book does include that, it comes late in the process, and you've been introduced to so many different characters by that point, it can get lost. I do appreciate the author's afterword as well, in which he acknowledges his shortcomings as a historian, but I do think he did a good job. I am grateful that this book does honor the victims of this tragic event, and I hope that the documentary film mentioned by the author does come out.

This is a flawed book that you could tell had the potential to be much better. I bought this book because I like books about fires and other disasters. That is what I expected from this book and that is what I base my judgment on. From the point of view of the disaster account genre, this book is a failure. The disaster book narrative structure is straightforward and pretty formulaic. 1) Introduce a *limited* number of characters, telling their back story and history to make them relatable and get the reader invested in their fate (a discussion of the general community affected may also be part of this section, such as the NYC German Lutheran immigrant community devastated by the General Slocum fire or just establishing the time period and what the affected commuity was like at the time) 1A (optional) Include information about sub topics such as fire fighting technology in the early twentieth century, the stages of a fire, the effects of burns on the human body, etc. 2) Discuss the venue of the disaster and any pertinent information (history of the building or ownership, corners cut on fire safety, etc.) 3) Tell the story of the fire (or disaster) in detail, with special focus on the characters introduced in the first part 4) Cover the aftermath (who lived, died and was injured, lawsuits, any changes to safety laws or to the community affected.Now, here is where it all went wrong for this book as a specimen of the disaster genre.1. No map of the venue - it is very hard to follow the action (who was were, where the exits were, the problem areas that increased fatalities) without a diagram of the building/venue2. Too many people to follow - fully the first 80% of the book is devoted to people involved in the fire and it seems like half of them were named Bud, Buddy, Rick or Bill. While hearing the back story of all these people was sort of interesting, there were too many people to keep track of to where it was almost impossible to keep all their stories straight. I get the impression that this, just who these people were, was of more interest than the fire for the author and at that point it becomes less a book about a fire than just a chronicle of random people who, by the way, happened to be at the same bar one night. Just writing the stories of everyday average people isn't necessarily bad but when the book advertises itself as being about a fire and then the fire turns out the be in shoved in the back 20% of the book in favor of the minutiae of people's lives, it loses its focal point and narrative coherence.3. Spoilers - even before we hear about the fire, even before we know exactly what happened and how it happened, the author is already revealing who died, who was injured, etc in the section on each person's individual background story. Part of the narrative suspense of the disaster book is waiting to reveal who lived and died until after the account of the fire/whatever. This allows a good long while for the reader to become interested in and attached to the victims who have been introduced and humanized in the beginning section and through whom they experience the disaster, allowing for maximal impact and engagement with the story once their fates are learned.4. Villains (and heroes) - this isn't absolutely necessary in the disaster narrative but most of them have them. Most of the time villains will be the arsonist, if there is one, the owner who cut corners or who is indifferent to safety, corruption in local government that allows for safety loopholes, cowards who behaved dishonorably during the disaster. Disasters bring out the best and the worst in people and the good disaster narrative will do a good job of showing these extremes. This book just had pretty much a mass of people without playing up any natural narrative roles (once again heroes and villains) that any of these people may have fallen into.5. Nice to have - photos help. They help create a bond with the victims and they help the reader visualize the venue/locale6. Awkward author - the author spent time in the intro and afterward describing the flaws in his research, his struggles with getting the book published. It's weird to have such self negativity/whining from the author and is kind of awkward. Having read this book, it is clear to me that the meat was there and that this could have been a successful disaster book. The trouble is less with the editors being negative about the book and more about the author being unable to craft a compelling narrative. He says, for example, that editors kept asking him "what changed?" (as a result of the fire). He maintains that nothing changed - well, guess what? Nothing changes in a lot of disaster books. Sure some of them led to new laws being enacted or something but many of them were just tragedies due to carelessness and negligence and no earth shattering changes were made (see Killer Show about the Great White), yet somehow a great disaster book can still be written about them.To sum up: this reads like a *granted* polished collection of research notes for a book rather than a finished work. I will fully admit that he creates an interesting collage of personal biographies and that the back stories of the various victims were engaging and well written. But this book isn't about the personal lives of gay men in the 70s; it's supposed to be about a fire. The disaster book genre is a genre like any other and has generic conventions like any other and the author utterly fails to conform to them. This may be one of the reasons why a coherent, powerful narrative did not develop here. The biography notes that the author has an MFA in fiction writing but whatever he learned he certainly didn't apply here, or maybe it was just that he didn't understand that narrative structure is as important to non-fiction history as it is to fiction. He would probably have benefitted from taking a look at examples of others books about fires to learn about the narrative structure of the fire book.P.S. For examples of fire books done right see:To Sleep with the Angels: The Story of a Fire (Our Lady of the Angels Fire, Chicago, 1958)Ship Ablaze: The Tragedy of the Steamboat General Slocum (Steamboat fire, NYC, 1904)Tinder Box: The Iroquois Theater Disaster 1903 and Chicago Death Trap: The Iroquois Theatre Fire 1903Triangle: The Fire that Changed America (Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire, NYC, 1911)Fire in the Grove: The Cocoanut Grove Tragedy and its Aftermath (Cocoanut Grove nightclub fire, Boston, 1942)Killer Show: The Station Nightclub Fire, America's Deadliest Rock Concert (Rhode Island, 2003)Finally, one non-fire: The Indifferent Stars Above: The Harrowing Saga of a Donner Party Bride (1846)

I guess I gave 5 Stars due to the history and background the author was able to acquire despite the passage of time. Being a native of Louisiana, this event has interested me since i encountered a fictionalized version in one of N. O. author Greg Herren's mysteries. Townsend gives insight into WHO the victims were not just the fire itself. At a few points the sentence structure is a bit strange to me but that aside this book has been engrossing and Townsend doesn't shy away from reporting some of the uglier reactions by city residents (such as someone repeatedly removing flowers left at the bar in memorial, failure to include information about this fire in a museum show about major New Orleans fires, and unfeeling responses by others like the drag queen told by a State worker that she, the drag queen, should have been in the bar and died too). But he also documents the caring acts by strangers toward the victims, both dead and horribly injured survivors. With 33 deaths there are a LOT of "characters" to keep track of but I feel, due to the details /background given about most, as if I knew them. My one regret is that Townsend did not include candid photos of the people or of the building in the aftermath of the fire. An interesting read and a good documentation of this event. Well worth checking this out.

This book is amazing!The research is thorough and the writing is very indepth. I feel as if I know each of these people after reading their stories. A very very vital book for anyone and everyone.It is a book that doesn't lend itself to be read in one sitting, though. I keep having to stop as it's just too sadly tragic. Very few books have made me cry but this one does it. The feeling of almost predestination is very heavy.I wish I could give it ten stars. A very important book for anyone interested in the LGBT struggle in the sixties and seventies.