Gather initial thoughts and broad opinions about the book.

1. The book blends a high-level historical overview with the personal stories of individuals like 12-year-old Claire Innes and New Yorker Alexander Frear. Did this blend of the big picture and personal experience make the disaster feel more immediate or overwhelming for you?

2. How does this book compare to other historical nonfiction you may have read, such as Erik Larson’s Isaac’s Storm? Did you find Jim Murphy’s use of eyewitness accounts to be an effective way to tell the story of a city-wide catastrophe? Why or why not?

3. What was the most memorable or surprising part of the book for you? Was it a specific person’s account, a detail about Chicago’s flammable infrastructure, or the social aftermath of the fire?

Encourage readers to connect the book’s themes and characters with their personal experiences.

1. The narrative highlights widespread complacency before the disaster, with figures like newspaper editor Horace White initially ignoring the alarm bells because fires were so common. Can you think of any modern parallels where people may be becoming too accustomed to warnings about potential dangers? What does this book teach us about that tendency?

2. Whose story of survival resonated with you the most, and what qualities did they demonstrate that you found admirable?

3. A series of small human errors, from a locked alarm box to a watchman’s misjudgment, had catastrophic results. How has this story changed the way you think about the importance of individual roles within larger systems, whether at work or in a community?

4. James H. Hildreth made the difficult choice to blow up people’s homes to create a firebreak, which ultimately helped stop the fire’s southward spread. Do you think his actions were justified? Have you ever had to make or witness a difficult decision where some harm seemed unavoidable in order to prevent something worse?

5. How do you think the experience of a modern disaster differs because of the instant flow of both information and misinformation via social media and the internet? Have you ever experienced a situation where conflicting online information made it difficult to know what to believe?

6. The book describes the collapse of many official systems, forcing citizens like Julia Lemos to rely on their own instincts to save their families. In a crisis, where do you think your first instinct would be to turn for help or reliable information?

Examine the book’s relevance to societal issues, historical events, or cultural themes.

1. The book details how Catherine O’Leary and the Irish immigrant community were unfairly blamed for the fire, a narrative quickly amplified by the press. What purpose did this scapegoating serve for the city’s elite and their “booster myth” at the time? Do we see similar patterns of blaming marginalized groups during crises today?

2. Murphy shows how Chicago’s leaders and newspapers tried to portray the city as resilient and orderly after the fire in order to protect its reputation and attract investors. How does the media shape the narrative around modern disasters? What are the potential benefits and dangers of crafting such a positive story in the face of tragedy?

3. What lessons does Chicago’s story offer about the social responsibilities of urban development and disaster preparedness today?

Dive into the book’s structure, characters, themes, and symbolism.

1. Murphy structures the book around the competing perspectives of several eyewitnesses, from the detached journalist Joseph E. Chamberlin to the panicked outsider Alexander Frear. What is the effect of weaving these sometimes contradictory accounts together? How does this technique support the book’s exploration of how eyewitness testimony shapes public memory of disasters?

2. Wood is a constant presence in the book, from the pine-block streets and wooden sidewalks to the hidden frames of so-called “fireproof” buildings. How does Murphy use these highly flammable materials to critique Chicago’s rapid urban growth and lack of preparedness?

3. The fire is often described in personified terms, like “dogs of hell” bounding across rooftops or a “surging ocean of flame” (47, 63). What significance does giving the fire this kind of monstrous agency have on the narrative? How does it affect the reader’s understanding of the fire as something unpredictable and terrifying?

4. Did you find Murphy’s dual role as a storyteller recounting events and a historian providing analysis effective? Where did his authorial voice feel most present, and did it enhance your understanding of the events?

5. Murphy won a Newbery Honor for this book and another for An American Plague, both of which make history accessible for younger readers without simplifying the complex social issues involved. In what ways can you tell this book was written with a young-adult audience in mind? How does that impact the experience for an adult reader?

6. How do the differing experiences of figures like the elite Horace White and the child Claire Innes reveal the city’s deep class divides?

Encourage imaginative and creative connections to the book.

1. Imagine you are a journalist with a smartphone covering the Great Chicago Fire as it happens. What would your social-media posts or live updates focus on? How might your minute-by-minute reporting differ from Chamberlin’s newspaper accounts?

2. If you were tasked with designing a memorial for the Great Chicago Fire today, what aspect of the event would you choose to emphasize, and why do you think that part of the story still matters today?

3. The book details several key moments where things went wrong, from the watchtower mistake to the bursting hoses that created gaps in the defensive line. Choose one of these critical turning points. If that single event had gone differently, how do you imagine the rest of the night might have unfolded for the city and for one of the main figures like Claire or Frear?