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
Overall, I liked Biel’s approach to the responses to the disaster, although I do not know if I entirely buy his argument.
Biel uses how the Titanic was popularly studied from the 1950s to the 1980s in order to analyze how people used the disaster to parallel it to their own lives. I am not quite sure if he is saying that he agrees with the movements, or if he is just quoting those who believed that the disaster reflected their specific time period, but I feel as though people used the disaster in ways they wanted to do so; the disaster did not necessarily have to do with all nuances that he mentions. Like jewarren I think that it is interesting how he talks about certainty and uncertainty, and how he parallels that to technology and the nuclear age. I definitely agree that before the first World War, Americans had a (false) sense of safety and security, and this disaster can parallel how Americans saw technology before and after the World Wars. I think that Biel’s arguments about masculinity, femininity, and the disaster are interesting, although I do not know if I entirely agree with him. His arguments seem a bit speculative, and I think that people used the disaster to describe the role of men and women in the Cold War period. I also do not know if I agree with his argument about the story needing to “have a happy ending” (219). As he talks about Carter and how his femininity showed, he also parallels that to Reagan and how the great feeling produced from the time period had to parallel the disaster and give proper roles of masculinity and femininity to it. People are still fascinated with the Titanic even though he says that it has had an ending. He does a great progression of cultural significance and how people responded to the disaster over time, but the arguments that he makes from his analysis seem a bit speculative to me.
P.S. Research Update: I have found four primary sources and one great secondary source for studying how classes perceived and were affected by the Sea Islands Hurricane. I feel much more confident about my body of resources, and I will now be able to move forward analyzing classes from this disaster specifically without using to much speculation or other disasters as examples and applying it to this one.