What do you think?
Rate this book
Shredding Paper: The Rise and Fall of Maine's Mighty Paper Industry
From the early twentieth century until the 1960s, Maine led the nation in paper production. The state could have earned a reputation as the Detroit of paper production, however, the industry eventually slid toward failure. What happened? Shredding Paper unwraps the changing US political economy since 1960, uncovers how the paper industry defined and interacted with labor relations, and peels away the layers of history that encompassed the rise and fall of Maine's mighty paper industry.
Michael G. Hillard deconstructs the paper industry's unusual technological and economic histories. For a century, the story of the nation's most widely read glossy magazines and card stock was one of capitalism, work, accommodation, and struggle. Local paper companies in Maine dominated the political landscape, controlling economic, workplace, land use, and water use policies. Hillard examines the many contributing factors surrounding how Maine became a paper powerhouse and then shows how it lost that position to changing times and foreign interests.
Through a retelling of labor relations and worker experiences from the late nineteenth century up until the late 1990s, Hillard highlights how national conglomerates began absorbing family-owned companies over time, which were subject to Wall Street demands for greater short-term profits after 1980. This new political economy impacted the economy of the entire state and destroyed Maine's once-vaunted paper industry. Shredding Paper truthfully and transparently tells the great and grim story of blue-collar workers and their families and analyzes how paper workers formulated a folk version of capitalism's history in their industry. Ultimately, Hillard offers a telling example of the demise of big industry in the United States.
Michael G. Hillard deconstructs the paper industry's unusual technological and economic histories. For a century, the story of the nation's most widely read glossy magazines and card stock was one of capitalism, work, accommodation, and struggle. Local paper companies in Maine dominated the political landscape, controlling economic, workplace, land use, and water use policies. Hillard examines the many contributing factors surrounding how Maine became a paper powerhouse and then shows how it lost that position to changing times and foreign interests.
Through a retelling of labor relations and worker experiences from the late nineteenth century up until the late 1990s, Hillard highlights how national conglomerates began absorbing family-owned companies over time, which were subject to Wall Street demands for greater short-term profits after 1980. This new political economy impacted the economy of the entire state and destroyed Maine's once-vaunted paper industry. Shredding Paper truthfully and transparently tells the great and grim story of blue-collar workers and their families and analyzes how paper workers formulated a folk version of capitalism's history in their industry. Ultimately, Hillard offers a telling example of the demise of big industry in the United States.
286 pages, Hardcover
Published January 15, 2021
12 people are currently reading
83 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
March 3, 2024
A book like this could be the story of unions in America writ small. Growing power through the mid century, weakening at the seams in the late seventies and then a steady spiral down after Reagan decimated union power in tne eighties.
The secondary story though and perhaps the more relevant one is how the ownership of mills and their attitude changed and how today’s immediate need for profit to shareholders in the short term changed everything. This policy of what the author calls financialisation is what, combined with an anti union administration brought about the end of the employee centric days of the Maine paper mills.
Much of the book focuses on the SD Warren mill in Westbrook, Maine. Even as unions became prevalent in the Maine paper industry, SD Warren stayed non union. “ Mother Warren” was able to do this because of its generous paternalism to its employees. They treated thier employees in a way that encouraged loyalty. The mill is also given as an example of the “ spillover “ effect on wages and benefits in non union employers in predominantly union industries. To keep out the union the employer provides similar compensation that could be gained with a union.
Interesting Note from today RIGHT NOW. With the UAW just settling last week with the Big Three automakers on substantial raises we see in the news that Honda, Toyota and the other foreign car makers building cars in the South in non union plants plan to raise wages in an attempt to forestall any union expansion. This is the spillover effect at play.
Companies like SD Warren could be more generous in this way because of the nature of ownership in those days.
Paternalistic employers who when they sold stock did not have an immediate profit based responsibility
Shareholders did not have influence over corporate strategy. Therefore research and paying employees well were acceptable and even encouraged
Stockholders were quiet and accepted thier dividends as enough, stocks were likely considered as retirement income vehicles.
Corporate leaders could plough back profits into the business and favor, stability and growth over maximizing shareholder profits
Even after SD and later Johnny ( his nephew) and longtime mill manager were gone the same paternalism and generosity pervaded the employer/ employee relationship. Even as the Mills employment doubled and then trebled the same practices held.
Any hard luck would bring about a loan to be paid back at a dollar a week from forthcoming pay checks. These were not, for the most part, heavily educated men. “ workers often saw advice on personal problems. The problems which the help brought to Mr. Hyde were frequently financial, an employee might come, for instance, to get Mr. Hyde‘s advice on whether the house in which he was interested in buying was a good one. Employees might come because they need a loan to pay for a new home, a new baby, or divorce. Often employee raise questions relating to his position, his desire for a transfer, a promotion, or dissatisfaction with the way his supervisor handled him. . One of the employees remarked about Mr. Hyde. He’s a great guy he ain’t no different from us.”
John Hyde was a Mill manager from 1931 to 1949. He kept the practises and symbolism of the early warrens paternalism fully intact: getting to know the workers, management by walking around, continuing employment of employment security for the worker in the work with extended family and an open door policy that kept him busy day in and day out with great numbers of workers and managers seeking help
“ Management by walking around “ was a practiced philosophy in the call center I ran years ago.
It inevitably was to SD Warren’s benefit to mix caring for his employees and making money and profit. He knew or at least he practised that these two things were not, as is now the case mutually exclusive.
A biographer of the Warren family summarizes it as such “it was not just a pile of dollars, of purchasing power, that the Warren fortune,, but as an achievement, as a manifestation of the fathers energy, imagination , application and virtue. SD Warren’s life was a success story and a moral example. He had started with nothing, and ended up with a fortune, and it seemed that he had made it without cheating, indeed, by being good on the way up. He was seen as a Hero of the business ethic, a man who show that Christianity was good for business.
Still being non union meant that even in the decades after the Depression there were no pensions as it were. Many workers stayed until they died. Warren celebrated these workers with a 50 year club. But one must assume, these senior citizens might have been better off with a pension
Much talk about the mothering of employees. Sending employees away for drying out, helping spendthrift employees with thier finances, the accounting office doing employee taxes for free.
Employees once hired were rarely if ever fired. Employees would do the work of a down on his luck employee and submit a time card for him
A general loyalty in both sides exhisted for good reason for a long time. Which of course kept out the union for so long
Family hiring systems were the norm, and whether or not the mills unionized in the early 20th century, Papermill workers across the state, enjoy the same cutting edge, benefits, employment, security, and craft pride, along with other signal benefits. These included the much noted great northern paper company policy were giving its workers, virtually free plots on the companies, most beautiful lakes, where workers build their summer camps, and over time year-round homes. At Fraser paper, the ability of the company to pay a family wage where families had anywhere from five or six to up to 20 children made it prized employment
In the years after World War II SD Warren grew to have over 4000 salesman, managers, chemist, engineers, and workers. It was prosperous enough to maintain an immense amount of work force slack. The mills all encompassing security permitted some workers to do a little, but it created an atmosphere, where employees would knockhimself out, if physically called upon.
Slack would be one of the first victims of the new management techniques that were to come in the 80s
It was the mills practice of taking care of employees. If they were injured, or having a hard time, and otherwise incapacitated. This might not happen to you as an employee, but might happen to a family member. The family hiring policy in which brothers,cousins, uncles, fathers all work in the same mill created a camaraderie. This also created a loyalty from the employees to do whatever I needed to be done to keep the mill profitable and moving forward.
By the 1960’s all the mills in Maine were unionized and most were now owned by larger national paper companies. Warren itself unionized in 1967 and was soon sold to Scott Paper.
The unions became combative with shop floor rules in constant debate. The ground was moving under the unions feet though they did not yet know it.
Managers from the national with no knowledge of local practices both formalized in the contract and informal tradition alienated. Strikes and disputes were occurring much more often.
Speaking specifically of SD Warren union efforts failed consistently through the forties and fifties. The Mother Warren dynamic was real. Employees remembered the great effort of the mill owners in the Depression to keep all workers employed. In the post war years the mill worked with veterans suffering from alcoholism and what we would now call PTSD , keeping men employed and paid through long term absenteeism and poor performance.
By the sixties though the personal practices, informal at best relying heavily on the open door policy of the mill manager started to slip. New mill managers in the fifties and sixties did not maintain the same relationships with the ever increasing number of employees. Some sections of the mill were still a haven of family and goodwill. Others however sank into abusive treatment and rank nepotism.
While the potential sale to Scott was an impetus to the support for the union there also was a large growth in shop floor problems
On top of this the pay system of bonuses based on productivity was widely unfair as many employees had no real input on productivity but thier bonus structure implied they did.
We have a whole chapter on the strike at the Madawaska mill of Fraser paper. Set on tne border of Canada and Maine’s northernmost town in the St John River Valley this was an interesting situation. The inhabitants of the valley and the workers at the mill we’re predominantly Franco American. In the midd,e of tne century Maine had passed laws forbidding the speaking of non English languages in any instruction. This was taken personally in the valley. Then in 1968 the owners of the mill after barely fighting off a hostile takeover attempt brought new managers, English speaking as always, but also “ from away.” The workers agreed to a pay freeze in exchange for the promise of hundreds of new jobs. Those jobs never materialized and the new managent encouraged speed up practices to increase productivity. By 1971 the mill workers were ready to strike. And it was a violent strike, confrontation with police, and methodology taken from tne civil rights movement. Tne workers won tne strike, more in job rules than wages, but this did set up better contracts in the future.
We see again the author noting the workers feeling undercut by the union National and their being too accommodating to management. Knowing the history of what’s to come in tne eighties this is effective foreshadowing
And what was to come was the eighties. The author does not delve into the actual strikes at the Rumford and Jay mills. Other books have been written on them as they, especially Jay, became a cause in the national labor movement. Suffice to say the unions were broken and things were never the same again
If one has an interest in labor politics what happened in this instance to paper workers has much further application to other industries
The secondary story though and perhaps the more relevant one is how the ownership of mills and their attitude changed and how today’s immediate need for profit to shareholders in the short term changed everything. This policy of what the author calls financialisation is what, combined with an anti union administration brought about the end of the employee centric days of the Maine paper mills.
Much of the book focuses on the SD Warren mill in Westbrook, Maine. Even as unions became prevalent in the Maine paper industry, SD Warren stayed non union. “ Mother Warren” was able to do this because of its generous paternalism to its employees. They treated thier employees in a way that encouraged loyalty. The mill is also given as an example of the “ spillover “ effect on wages and benefits in non union employers in predominantly union industries. To keep out the union the employer provides similar compensation that could be gained with a union.
Interesting Note from today RIGHT NOW. With the UAW just settling last week with the Big Three automakers on substantial raises we see in the news that Honda, Toyota and the other foreign car makers building cars in the South in non union plants plan to raise wages in an attempt to forestall any union expansion. This is the spillover effect at play.
Companies like SD Warren could be more generous in this way because of the nature of ownership in those days.
Paternalistic employers who when they sold stock did not have an immediate profit based responsibility
Shareholders did not have influence over corporate strategy. Therefore research and paying employees well were acceptable and even encouraged
Stockholders were quiet and accepted thier dividends as enough, stocks were likely considered as retirement income vehicles.
Corporate leaders could plough back profits into the business and favor, stability and growth over maximizing shareholder profits
Even after SD and later Johnny ( his nephew) and longtime mill manager were gone the same paternalism and generosity pervaded the employer/ employee relationship. Even as the Mills employment doubled and then trebled the same practices held.
Any hard luck would bring about a loan to be paid back at a dollar a week from forthcoming pay checks. These were not, for the most part, heavily educated men. “ workers often saw advice on personal problems. The problems which the help brought to Mr. Hyde were frequently financial, an employee might come, for instance, to get Mr. Hyde‘s advice on whether the house in which he was interested in buying was a good one. Employees might come because they need a loan to pay for a new home, a new baby, or divorce. Often employee raise questions relating to his position, his desire for a transfer, a promotion, or dissatisfaction with the way his supervisor handled him. . One of the employees remarked about Mr. Hyde. He’s a great guy he ain’t no different from us.”
John Hyde was a Mill manager from 1931 to 1949. He kept the practises and symbolism of the early warrens paternalism fully intact: getting to know the workers, management by walking around, continuing employment of employment security for the worker in the work with extended family and an open door policy that kept him busy day in and day out with great numbers of workers and managers seeking help
“ Management by walking around “ was a practiced philosophy in the call center I ran years ago.
It inevitably was to SD Warren’s benefit to mix caring for his employees and making money and profit. He knew or at least he practised that these two things were not, as is now the case mutually exclusive.
A biographer of the Warren family summarizes it as such “it was not just a pile of dollars, of purchasing power, that the Warren fortune,, but as an achievement, as a manifestation of the fathers energy, imagination , application and virtue. SD Warren’s life was a success story and a moral example. He had started with nothing, and ended up with a fortune, and it seemed that he had made it without cheating, indeed, by being good on the way up. He was seen as a Hero of the business ethic, a man who show that Christianity was good for business.
Still being non union meant that even in the decades after the Depression there were no pensions as it were. Many workers stayed until they died. Warren celebrated these workers with a 50 year club. But one must assume, these senior citizens might have been better off with a pension
Much talk about the mothering of employees. Sending employees away for drying out, helping spendthrift employees with thier finances, the accounting office doing employee taxes for free.
Employees once hired were rarely if ever fired. Employees would do the work of a down on his luck employee and submit a time card for him
A general loyalty in both sides exhisted for good reason for a long time. Which of course kept out the union for so long
Family hiring systems were the norm, and whether or not the mills unionized in the early 20th century, Papermill workers across the state, enjoy the same cutting edge, benefits, employment, security, and craft pride, along with other signal benefits. These included the much noted great northern paper company policy were giving its workers, virtually free plots on the companies, most beautiful lakes, where workers build their summer camps, and over time year-round homes. At Fraser paper, the ability of the company to pay a family wage where families had anywhere from five or six to up to 20 children made it prized employment
In the years after World War II SD Warren grew to have over 4000 salesman, managers, chemist, engineers, and workers. It was prosperous enough to maintain an immense amount of work force slack. The mills all encompassing security permitted some workers to do a little, but it created an atmosphere, where employees would knockhimself out, if physically called upon.
Slack would be one of the first victims of the new management techniques that were to come in the 80s
It was the mills practice of taking care of employees. If they were injured, or having a hard time, and otherwise incapacitated. This might not happen to you as an employee, but might happen to a family member. The family hiring policy in which brothers,cousins, uncles, fathers all work in the same mill created a camaraderie. This also created a loyalty from the employees to do whatever I needed to be done to keep the mill profitable and moving forward.
By the 1960’s all the mills in Maine were unionized and most were now owned by larger national paper companies. Warren itself unionized in 1967 and was soon sold to Scott Paper.
The unions became combative with shop floor rules in constant debate. The ground was moving under the unions feet though they did not yet know it.
Managers from the national with no knowledge of local practices both formalized in the contract and informal tradition alienated. Strikes and disputes were occurring much more often.
Speaking specifically of SD Warren union efforts failed consistently through the forties and fifties. The Mother Warren dynamic was real. Employees remembered the great effort of the mill owners in the Depression to keep all workers employed. In the post war years the mill worked with veterans suffering from alcoholism and what we would now call PTSD , keeping men employed and paid through long term absenteeism and poor performance.
By the sixties though the personal practices, informal at best relying heavily on the open door policy of the mill manager started to slip. New mill managers in the fifties and sixties did not maintain the same relationships with the ever increasing number of employees. Some sections of the mill were still a haven of family and goodwill. Others however sank into abusive treatment and rank nepotism.
While the potential sale to Scott was an impetus to the support for the union there also was a large growth in shop floor problems
On top of this the pay system of bonuses based on productivity was widely unfair as many employees had no real input on productivity but thier bonus structure implied they did.
We have a whole chapter on the strike at the Madawaska mill of Fraser paper. Set on tne border of Canada and Maine’s northernmost town in the St John River Valley this was an interesting situation. The inhabitants of the valley and the workers at the mill we’re predominantly Franco American. In the midd,e of tne century Maine had passed laws forbidding the speaking of non English languages in any instruction. This was taken personally in the valley. Then in 1968 the owners of the mill after barely fighting off a hostile takeover attempt brought new managers, English speaking as always, but also “ from away.” The workers agreed to a pay freeze in exchange for the promise of hundreds of new jobs. Those jobs never materialized and the new managent encouraged speed up practices to increase productivity. By 1971 the mill workers were ready to strike. And it was a violent strike, confrontation with police, and methodology taken from tne civil rights movement. Tne workers won tne strike, more in job rules than wages, but this did set up better contracts in the future.
We see again the author noting the workers feeling undercut by the union National and their being too accommodating to management. Knowing the history of what’s to come in tne eighties this is effective foreshadowing
And what was to come was the eighties. The author does not delve into the actual strikes at the Rumford and Jay mills. Other books have been written on them as they, especially Jay, became a cause in the national labor movement. Suffice to say the unions were broken and things were never the same again
If one has an interest in labor politics what happened in this instance to paper workers has much further application to other industries
March 9, 2023
I picked this book up around Christmas time as I have always been interested in my home state’s economic history though writings on it can be sparse; I am happy to announce Michael Hillard’s addition is a must read on the subject. Taking a detailed look at the history of Maine’s Paper and Pulp Industries, Hillard uses the tale of hard working and passionate folk battling with a changing economic landscape to demonstrate how the US broader has wound up in the position it finds itself.
Using this narrative Hillard demonstrates how we as a community can come together to change the economic conditions we find ourselves. Hillard’s emphasis on the “folk political economy” that Maine Paper Workers developed signifies that while we lack this same cohesion today, it still exists in rare communities waiting for a spark to reignite it’s passionate spread across the US.
Using this narrative Hillard demonstrates how we as a community can come together to change the economic conditions we find ourselves. Hillard’s emphasis on the “folk political economy” that Maine Paper Workers developed signifies that while we lack this same cohesion today, it still exists in rare communities waiting for a spark to reignite it’s passionate spread across the US.
October 8, 2022
"WALL STREET'S WALKING PAPERS"
‘Shredding Paper’ hit very close to home. The Fraser Paper Company in Madawaska, Maine is one of the mills highlighted in Mr. Hillard’s book. I grew up there during the mill’s tail-end economic heydays in the 1960s and 70s. Our dad was a mill electrician for most of his adult working life and retired with a generous retirement package. My 4-year-older brother and I both worked there in the summers between college semesters. The income helped finance our university educations. Neither one of us returned to work at the mill once we graduated from college. Along with the Catholic Church, potato farms, and the French-Acadian heritage, Madawaska culture was defined by its association with the Fraser Paper Company. A great deal of pride was associated with making paper that was sold worldwide. Mr. Hillard’s depictions are accurate.
While the text has a slight academic feel, I did not find Mr. Hillard’s book to be a difficult or boring read. ‘Shredding Paper’ begins with a history of papermaking and Maine becoming an important resource for making the various paper products. The towns that sprung up around the more remote mill sites were due to the mill owners investing largely into the nascent communities’ development and sustainability. In return the paper companies had dedicated highly skilled workers for the often dangerous and unhealthy work. The 2020 book filled in a lot of blanks for me about the industry. It explains such things as the unique company structure of papermaking and how the owners and workers formed a mutually acceptable paternalism; how the papermaking process works; how the industry’s ethos shaped and sustained its community; the introduction of unions into the mills was not due to just pay but also job security and distrust of management outsiders; and the focus evolving from long-term plans to short-term investment strategies. Mr. Hillard presents a fair perspective of unions’ pros and cons as well as the challenges corporate managers faced that included corporate consolidations, foreign competition, shareholder demands, and automation replacing employees. ‘Shredding Paper’ focuses primarily on S.D. Warren, Fraser Paper, and the pivotal strike in Jay, Maine. I was truly appalled at the woodcutters’ deadly working conditions and the way they were exploited by paper companies. I never realized that loggers and mill workers had such an antagonistic relationship. The book also explains how President Reagan’s firing of air traffic controllers sent the signal that union-busting was hunky-dory with Washington. Strikes, starting the in the 1980s, became an effective tool for management and not for unions. In the 1990s, closing or reducing employees became the norm. The book includes a handful of black-and-white photos and a chart showing the decline in Maine mill employment.
‘Shredding Paper’ avoids the environmental harm that the papermaking caused. The book is about the business structure and its management-employee relationships. Mr. Hillard effectively explains that there was not just one reason for the changing landscape in the paper industry. Raw material, technology, geography, and markets all played key roles in the need for the industry and employees to adapt. Community memory of the “good ole days” and Wall Street’s insistence on maximizing short-term profits made clashes between unions and management inevitable. I still return to Madawaska to visit my elderly parents and have witnessed the decline of the town’s business vibrancy. The community remains proud of the mill and that it is now owned by the workers. I also know people who were affected by the likely sociopath “Chainsaw Al” Dunlap gutting the former S.D. Warren company. ‘Shredding Paper’ is a highly informative but an eventually depressing reading experience. Neoliberal capitalism in the United States sure makes stockholders happy campers but at the cost of pounding the remote Maine mill communities into friggin’ pulp.
(If you enjoy ‘Shredding Paper,’ I highly recommend the memoir ‘Mill Town: Reckoning with What Remains’ by Kerri Arsenault about growing up in the mill town of Rumford and ‘The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism’ by Naomi Klein)
‘Shredding Paper’ hit very close to home. The Fraser Paper Company in Madawaska, Maine is one of the mills highlighted in Mr. Hillard’s book. I grew up there during the mill’s tail-end economic heydays in the 1960s and 70s. Our dad was a mill electrician for most of his adult working life and retired with a generous retirement package. My 4-year-older brother and I both worked there in the summers between college semesters. The income helped finance our university educations. Neither one of us returned to work at the mill once we graduated from college. Along with the Catholic Church, potato farms, and the French-Acadian heritage, Madawaska culture was defined by its association with the Fraser Paper Company. A great deal of pride was associated with making paper that was sold worldwide. Mr. Hillard’s depictions are accurate.
While the text has a slight academic feel, I did not find Mr. Hillard’s book to be a difficult or boring read. ‘Shredding Paper’ begins with a history of papermaking and Maine becoming an important resource for making the various paper products. The towns that sprung up around the more remote mill sites were due to the mill owners investing largely into the nascent communities’ development and sustainability. In return the paper companies had dedicated highly skilled workers for the often dangerous and unhealthy work. The 2020 book filled in a lot of blanks for me about the industry. It explains such things as the unique company structure of papermaking and how the owners and workers formed a mutually acceptable paternalism; how the papermaking process works; how the industry’s ethos shaped and sustained its community; the introduction of unions into the mills was not due to just pay but also job security and distrust of management outsiders; and the focus evolving from long-term plans to short-term investment strategies. Mr. Hillard presents a fair perspective of unions’ pros and cons as well as the challenges corporate managers faced that included corporate consolidations, foreign competition, shareholder demands, and automation replacing employees. ‘Shredding Paper’ focuses primarily on S.D. Warren, Fraser Paper, and the pivotal strike in Jay, Maine. I was truly appalled at the woodcutters’ deadly working conditions and the way they were exploited by paper companies. I never realized that loggers and mill workers had such an antagonistic relationship. The book also explains how President Reagan’s firing of air traffic controllers sent the signal that union-busting was hunky-dory with Washington. Strikes, starting the in the 1980s, became an effective tool for management and not for unions. In the 1990s, closing or reducing employees became the norm. The book includes a handful of black-and-white photos and a chart showing the decline in Maine mill employment.
‘Shredding Paper’ avoids the environmental harm that the papermaking caused. The book is about the business structure and its management-employee relationships. Mr. Hillard effectively explains that there was not just one reason for the changing landscape in the paper industry. Raw material, technology, geography, and markets all played key roles in the need for the industry and employees to adapt. Community memory of the “good ole days” and Wall Street’s insistence on maximizing short-term profits made clashes between unions and management inevitable. I still return to Madawaska to visit my elderly parents and have witnessed the decline of the town’s business vibrancy. The community remains proud of the mill and that it is now owned by the workers. I also know people who were affected by the likely sociopath “Chainsaw Al” Dunlap gutting the former S.D. Warren company. ‘Shredding Paper’ is a highly informative but an eventually depressing reading experience. Neoliberal capitalism in the United States sure makes stockholders happy campers but at the cost of pounding the remote Maine mill communities into friggin’ pulp.
(If you enjoy ‘Shredding Paper,’ I highly recommend the memoir ‘Mill Town: Reckoning with What Remains’ by Kerri Arsenault about growing up in the mill town of Rumford and ‘The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism’ by Naomi Klein)
May 21, 2021
Part I was a slog to get through. It read like a textbook and was filled with endless complex sentences that forced slow and/or repeated reading. I think a few diagrams and photos of the paper-making process would have been very helpful. Maybe the editor should have made this suggestion?
Part II was interesting and had more of a human element that created empathy and generated many questions. I'd like to have seen some photos of the incidents covered in Part II.
Part III provided insight into the effects of the paper industry on the culture of many Maine communities. I think the editor got tired and neglected to edit some of Part III. I found multiple errors and repeated sentences that were just constructed differently.
There's a helpful section of notes & an index.
I really wish that this book was written in a style similar to G.J. Meyers, an author of historical nonfiction. The content of this book could have been so much more engaging. I blame the editor for much of its shortcomings.
Part II was interesting and had more of a human element that created empathy and generated many questions. I'd like to have seen some photos of the incidents covered in Part II.
Part III provided insight into the effects of the paper industry on the culture of many Maine communities. I think the editor got tired and neglected to edit some of Part III. I found multiple errors and repeated sentences that were just constructed differently.
There's a helpful section of notes & an index.
I really wish that this book was written in a style similar to G.J. Meyers, an author of historical nonfiction. The content of this book could have been so much more engaging. I blame the editor for much of its shortcomings.
September 5, 2021
The book was informative and interesting. I learned a lot about the paper industry and the labor history of mills where some of my relatives worked. I remember the strike in Jay most vividly but was too young at the time to understand the politics behind it. I also didn’t realize until I read this book the role the Reagan Administration played in the destruction of the unions’ power. I rated this 3 stars because it was a challenging read as I should have expected from a book written by an economist.
April 4, 2021
Required reading for any Mainer who knows these old mills towns or explores the logging roads crisscrossing the north country. As to be expected, this book has its stretches of (appropriate) dryness, but contains an exciting narrative of struggle that is very human and palatable. Read it.
September 8, 2021
It's a fascinating history and one that has broad applicability to our current times here in Maine and across the nation and world. However, Hillard's editors failed miserably - they are so many typos and mechanical errors that parts of the book are almost unreadable.
March 24, 2021
Enjoyed this more than I expected. Great look at an industry and a labor movement vital to Maine’s past and future.
July 5, 2021
Academic but good labor history of people who developed and worked in Maine paper mills.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews