Constructing Disaster Narratives

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

I think both Wells and Dan rightly argue that disasters present people with a “blank canvas” on which they are able to project their own meanings or interpretations. We can see this to be true in Biel’s chapter, “The Rule of the Sea and Land” where he writes, “A conventional narrative of the Titanic disaster began to take shape before any survivor had been interviewed” (23). The narrative of the chivalric male dominated the press accounts of the disaster before any eyewitness accounts had been documented. Further, in the foreword, Biel cites Henry Adams who used the disaster to promote his own anti-Republican agenda.

I want to pause and acknowledge Molly’s assertion that we must not undermine the significant human loss of disasters’ such as the Titanic. I do think that in the study history there is a tendency to try to understand the broader social and historical implications of a disaster, and then as a result gloss over the numbers of dead. However, I think it is precisely this that constitutes a disaster in the first place – loss of human life and capital. Not to put words in their mouths, but I believe that where Wells and Dan argue that a disaster becomes a blank canvas is after the event becomes viewed as a disaster.

In considering this idea that the Titanic presented an opportunity for people to promote their own agenda or to assert their own disaster narrative, we can see a similar scenario play out in other disasters we have studied. In my own research into the San Francisco Earthquake, this idea plays out in numerous ways. For one, the Progressives certainly saw the disaster as an opportunity to rebuild the city to reflect Progressive ideals. Another example is the intense seismic denial following the Earthquake, as well as the aggressive attempt to ascribe the damage to the fires for fear that the city would not be rebuilt.

As we discussed early on in the course, disasters have the unique ability to bring social issues to the surface. Perhaps the way in which these societal tensions surface is through people using disaster as an opportunity to express sentiments that might be disregarded otherwise.