Isaac’s Storm by Erik Larson is an interesting read, but definitely not his most accessible. While Larson usually has a knack for turning history into gripping narrative, this one gets a little weighed down by all the science. The detailed explanations of meteorology, though clearly well researched, can feel pretty dry, and at times, slow the story down.

What Isaac’s Storm does do exceptionally well is highlight the political undercurrents within the U.S. Weather Bureau at the turn of the 20th century. The most compelling aspect of the book isn’t the storm itself, but the internal resistance to using terms like “hurricane.” Officials feared not only being wrong, but being shown up by Cuban meteorologists, who had a more accurate understanding of tropical storms. This hesitancy contributed to tragic consequences—and offers a striking reminder of how ego, nationalism, and bureaucracy can interfere with science and public safety.

By the end, the book leaves you thinking less about weather patterns and more about how even something as seemingly objective as a weather report is subject to politics. In Isaac’s Storm, Larson makes one thing clear: everything is political, including the weather.