amcarter – American Disasters

May 5, 2014December 16, 2020

Why do History Anyway?

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

At the heart of Cronon’s piece, “A Place for Stories: Nature, History, and Narrative,” is a discussion of the veracity of the narrative form of history. Cronon attempts to assign value to the narrative form, by stating that narrative is essentially fundamental to our experience as humans permeating our lives down to the very way that we conceive of time and events. He conducts his investigation by surveying three specific narrative veins within the literature created on the subject of the Dust Bowl, illustrating how each uses narrative to accomplish the telling of radically different histories. Cronon does not seem bothered by this multiplicity of narrative; in fact, he thinks that it is positive.

The blog seems to be steeped in debate about whether or not Cronon’s assertion that narrative history leads ultimately to the creation of moral truth. Dajames objects to this in his piece specifically, saying that the privileging of moral truth prevents us from valuing in a sense objective truth. However, I don’t think that this is the most interesting part of the piece. Whatever we could argue about how moral truth is manufactured, or how valuable it is in comparison to objective truth is not nearly as interesting as his assertion that who we are has a fundamental impact on the histories we write. Furthermore, our position in an academic community (and otherwise) impacts our decisions as well. It is the idea that encoded within each history textbook is the fingerprint of its historian tells us something fascinatingly useful about history as a practice. History is about identity.

There are several theories and methods, each with entire schools of historians saying this is the best way to discover the objective truth that will rise from the causal relationships that can be identified from a sequence of events. Each historian accuses the others of being near-sighted, far-sighted, reductionist, and so on. The real lesson that narrative history teaches us most clearly, as Cronon alludes to in his article, is that our histories are as plural as the people who walk the earth. We use history to piece together the stories that form the foundations of our identity. Objective truth is impossible to achieve, and separating a man’s writing from his bias is arguably more so, but understanding the significance of a written history as a whole can help us understand who we are. That is why, despite no real method to write history with an accuracy that will produce objective truth, we will always write, read, and study history. History is as close to us and the flesh that covers our beating hearts.

April 30, 2014December 16, 2020

So, What Next?

In his book review entitled, Dusty Volumes: Environmental Disaster and Economic Collapse in the 1930s, Koppes evaluates two pieces written on the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. Koppes clearly comes down in favor of the piece written by David Worster, agreeing wholeheartedly with Worster’s thesis identifying capitalism as the great cause of the Dust Bowl. According to Koppes, Worster contends that three maxims that are cultivated by capitalism invariably led to the 1930s disaster. The first is that nature must be seen as capital, the second is that man has a right, or even an obligation to use that capital for self-advancement, and third that social order should both permit and encourage this insatiable pursuit of wealth. Worster then goes on to say that it is this capitalist model that produced the consumption of land and disregard for future environmental repercussions that caused the Dust Bowl.

Price, in his post, finds that Koppes’ argument on behalf of Worster is lacking. He contends that Koppes does not have enough evidence, in the form of actual policy records to make this claim; however, I would have to disagree. Worster’s claim does not hinge on the presence of official policy records that would indicate the presence of capitalist interference, nor does it matter that the farmers were born into a capitalist economy, the problem that Worster is trying to identify is one of culture. The three maxims outlined above are essentially a set of core beliefs or values that are cultivated in a capitalist economy. Worster is arguing that the capitalist system is the perfect petri dish for growing these toxic values which contribute to the reckless consumption of natural resources. While it is possible to draw parallels to policy with respect to this analysis, a cultural study of American values and the way that they manifest themselves would be the most relevant method for seeing Worster’s thesis come to life.

Worster’s research has important implications. As the world comes to recognize more and more environmental problems exacerbated by reckless consumption of natural resources, the more we will search for solutions. However, the solution requires sacrifices we are unwilling to make. It requires that we see the world not as a tool for our advancement above all else, meaning we must essentially change our mental framework. The real question then becomes: is that even possible?

April 7, 2014December 16, 2020

Reaching Back

The second part of Down with the Old Canoe is an exploration of the second wave of meaning manufacture that occurs in the late 1900s. This is where Biel explores our contemporary understanding of the Titanic Disaster. The theme that threads these conceptualizations together seems to be this sense of nostalgia. These groups find themselves in a world radically different from the world when the titanic sank. Changes in culture, technological advancements, and even politics have occurred and Americans once again find themselves in a period of great anxiety. One of the great examples Biel utilizes to explain this impulse for nostalgia is the byproduct of the creation of the atomic bomb. With the creation of a device that can level whole cities in an instant leaving little or no survivors. To these individuals the Titanic represented a simpler time, a time when death left room for dignity and chivalry. Efforts to rediscover the Titanic, to complete its maiden voyage was more than just a misogynistic expression of masculine anxiety about changing gender roles, it was about getting in touch with a simpler past. Rediscovering the Titanic meant getting in touch with a past that didn’t include fears about instant nuclear annihilation.

It is true, as dajames has said in his post that the Titanic served as a vehicle for resisting communism, feminism, and the other isms that proliferated at the time. However, the rediscovery of the Titanic and the narratives that grew around it demonstrated an anxiety about the state of American affairs much like conceptualizations of the Titanic right after the sinking demonstrated their anxieties and struggles regarding the state of society as they knew it.

April 2, 2014December 16, 2020

Mining for Meaning in the Depths of the Ocean

Steven Biel’s Down With the Old Canoe: A Cultural History of the Titanic Disaster, asserts that the historical value lies in the ways in which we understand and use the disaster. Biel points out that the Titanic in and of itself, the sinking of a single steamship in the middle of the ocean which in reality did not yield any great policy changes regarding ocean safety, was not actually significant. What was significant, according to Biel, are the ways in which Americans used the Titanic to understand their current anxieties about the world in which they lived. Biel stresses that the Titanic did not flip the switch from enchantment with technology to disillusionment with progress. He emphasizes that it did not signal the end of a happier simpler period. Biel describes the current state of unrest within American society which existed prior to the sinking. It is the way that each of these groups used the Titanic to extract lessons and advance causes that were already near to them which made the Titanic an irreplaceable part of American Culture. It was the way the Titanic served as a powerful metaphor for groups all across American society, groups like women’s suffragists, African Americans, the wealthy, and even traditionalists.

This view of the Titanic allows us to interrogate why we feel that the Titanic signified a simpler time. It allows us to understand more fully the state of American Affairs. It allows us to see the multiplicity of meaning that was invested in the sinking. And it allows us to think critically about this event. Like Wells mentions in his post, there is no true, universal, and singular meaning that arose from the deep waters into which the Titanic sank. The meanings manufactured were as diverse as the tensions experienced at the time. This makes the Titanic more than just a powerful metaphor, but a literal archaeological site for some of the greatest issues of the early 20^th century.

March 10, 2014December 16, 2020

Description 2.0: Reading Between the Lines

Chapters four through six of McCullough’s book The Johnstown Flood, is essentially a chronicle of the disastrous element of the natural disaster. It was less an investigation of the causes of the flood, but rather an explication of the events that took place the day of the flood. The narrative that McCoullough crafts accomplishes two goals: it details the great losses that result from the flood and it provides descriptions of the flood. The narrative describes death and the destruction of homes. It describes men and women fearing that their families have been drowned as the wave passes by and consumes the only homes they’ve known. It describes men and women watching from the hill as the flood smashes their homes to smithereens. It describes a man’s horror at having to drop a cripple, and essentially leave him for dead, in order to save himself. Likewise, McCoullough describes the height and speed of the wave as it crashes through towns swallowing bridges, trees, and homes. He describes how the wave carries with it a thick mixture of trees, debris, mud, packed earth from the dam, and twisted metals from ruined train tracks.

But what is most interesting about the narrative that McCoullough builds is his insertion of humanity. When we think about natural disasters it’s easy to think about body counts or property value lost and turn that into a great epic about tragedy. Like Catherine Schmidt referenced in her post, great stories about floods persist in the myths of various different cultures, but these stories focus on great loss or the heroics of one man. But the version of the events, as told by McCollough, forces us to see the wide spectrum of humanity that persists during an event such as this. It includes tales of bravery, temperance, tragedy, cowardice, and fear. We are forced to consider not just what happened in Johnstown, but what happened to the towns touched along the way. And through interwoven impressions we are also able to see the wave through the eyes of those who experienced it. For example, McCollough contrasted the testimony of the man who felt the wave was one-hundred feet tall, with the study which put the wave at about forty. In seeing his exaggeration we are able to contextualize the fear this man was feeling. Both his description of the loss and descriptions of the flood allow for this insertion of humanity causing us to see the vast ways that the flood affected life in Johnstown and surrounding areas. McCollough leaves us with a history of the flood which is more than the sum total of bodies left in its wake.

February 26, 2014December 16, 2020

Down with the Robber Baron: Class Struggle through the Lens of a Gilded Age Disaster

Central to the analytical discourses surrounding disaster is the question of what role human action, or the products thereof, can and should play when considering whether or not a catastrophic event will be labeled a natural disaster. This tension arises out of the view that human agency, involvement, or culpability renders a disaster unnatural. However, it is impossible to avoid the structural elements that contribute to the severity of any disaster regardless of the perceived human role played in the event. In order to examine the relationship between structural elements and our perceptions of natural disaster, a case must be considered which contains a unique blend of natural occurrences and human interaction. That case study will be the sinking of the Titanic.

It is clear that human engineering, human oversight, and other structural considerations played a key role in the sinking of the Titanic. Thus, my first area of inquiry will concern the design and engineering of the ship. Who designed the Titanic? Who oversaw its construction? To what extent were they aware of the risks involved in building a ship of such grandeur? Why were the necessary precautions not taken to prevent the magnitude of deaths? This will allow insight as to the basic facts surrounding the ship and its safety as well as safety protocol. While technical information regarding the ship’s construction is one important physical element of the structures that exacerbated the sinking of the Titanic, the sociopolitical and socioeconomic composition of the ship played a role as well. Consider the time period in which the disaster was situated. This was a time of rapid expansion, industrialization, and class stratification as well.

Thus, my second line of inquiry will concern the socioeconomic composition of the ship. How many individuals from each class (lower, middle, and upper) were present on the ship? Was the number of deaths disproportionate in terms of class? If so, how were the deaths distributed among the classes? How was class articulated in terms of advertisement and on-ship accommodations? This will allow us to examine the socioeconomic structures that played a role in the exacerbation of the disaster. And, finally, to address the element of human perception, an examination of the narrative that was constructed in the wake of the sinking of the Titanic will be conducted. Therefore, my third area of inquiry will be about how the sinking of the Titanic was conceptualized at the time. What narrative is constructed regarding the sinking of the Titanic? What language is used? Is there a discussion of culpability, and if so what does that tell us about the time period?

In order to conduct this study, some of the primary sources that would be helpful in addressing the first line of inquiry are schematics of the ship, documents describing the ship’s precautionary planning, a list of individuals involved in the ship’s design and information on their backgrounds. Primary sources helpful in addressing the second line of inquiry are documents describing who purchased a ticket and boarded the ship, a list of survivors, advertisements for the ship, and a list of the accommodations that were made along class lines such as where upper class passengers were seated versus lower class passengers. And finally the primary sources needed to answer the third line of inquiry would be journals, newspaper clippings, letters, possibly even memoirs, biographies, and autobiographies from surviving passengers.

February 12, 2014December 16, 2020

An Ideological Thermometer

In the wake of disaster, often our attempts at conceptualization provide valuable insight as to our values or belief systems. In the cases like Pernin’s work on the Peshtigo fire, access to one man’s beliefs, in this case Catholicism and God’s divine will, can be found in his attempt to understand his experiences. The Chicago fire, however, presents a unique opportunity to access the nation’s belief system due to the volume of explanatory work that grew out of the city’s newspapers, correspondence, writing from various other great cities across the nation, etc. Due to the sheer magnitude of individuals concerned with what transpired in Chicago and the volume of explanatory work available, we are able to do a case study of the nation’s maxims. Carl Smith’s, “Faith and Doubt” is an in-depth review of the two distinct ways that Chicagoans and others attempted to explain the significance of the Chicago fire. What becomes clear upon examination is that both these explanations are the result of the intersection between three crucial elements of American society: religion, class, and American exceptionalism.

The first method of explanation that Carl Smith describes in his piece is the view of Chicago rising from the ashes like a phoenix as a moral pillar that was chosen by God to uplift the nation. This explanation asserts that the Chicago was essentially baptized by the fire, and that only the most pure, most pious, most humble, and most hardworking of the population remains. It also asserts that God hand-picked Chicago to be this uplifting example, and that only Chicago could have emerged triumphant from a trial such as this. Also, this explanation posits that through her misfortune the rest of the United States could return to its philanthropic and giving core. Essentially this version explains the fire as a gift and declares Chicago’s future bright as ever.

This explanation is essentially an intersection of religious fervor and a strong belief in American exceptionalism. This explanation provides evidence that the country is still very much a religious nation, looking to the Bible and God’s divine will as explanation for misfortune. Their belief that Chicago was hand-selected and uniquely prepared to emerge triumphant from this kind of disaster – which is why God chose Chicago rather than say London – is indicative of this belief in American exceptionalism.

The second method of explanation that Carl Smith describes in his piece is the view of Chicago sinking into fiery peril. There is talk of God’s punishment being exacted upon the city, and a focus on the crime that runs rampant in the wake of the fire. They describe the fire as an act of Satan which was designed to plunge the city into ruin. There is the juxtaposition of “good” wealthy or middle-class Chicagoans suffering at the hands of vagabonds who are now free to enter the city to take advantage of its vulnerability. And furthermore, there is the characterization of the lower-class Chicagoans taking over parts of the city where they were previously not welcome as a result of their own deplorable way of life.

This explanation, like the previous one, utilizes religion to explain the significance of the Chicago fire. In this case, God is exacting his judgment against the city, and therefore it should be taken as a warning to change their way of life. It is even characterized as an attack of the Devil. The emphasis on the good majority of Chicagoans – wealthy and middle-class inhabitants – being taken advantage of by vagabonds – lower-class inhabitants – is indicative of class stratification. Catherine Schmidt talks about the element of class that comes into play in reference to the Chicago fire. The tension between the classes, with the wealthy dismissing the poor as dirty, conniving, responsible for their plight, and ready to steal from those who worked hard for their success, is very clear here. The tensions that arise along with industrialization and the urbanization that occurred as a result play out here.

Therefore, it is clear that the United States, at the time of the Chicago fire, was still a very religious minded country, that believed in American exceptionalism, and struggled with the intensification of class stratification that is born of the industrial revolution. Often what we learn from eyewitness accounts, and primary sources such as newspaper articles or pieces of art, is what those who created them were thinking. We learn about their fears, belief systems, hopes, and aspirations. And by tapping into a large enough body of these sources, we can almost take the ideological temperature of the nation.

February 5, 2014December 16, 2020

A Different Perspective: Man vs. Creator

What seems to be characteristic in all the posts made thus far in response to the Cronon piece entitled “Nature’s Metropolis” is a questioning of the legitimacy of juxtaposing city and country. This questioning has taken the form of an interrogation of the natural vs. unnatural dichotomy where the notion of humanity and its naturalness is explored. Catherine Schmidt articulates the debate between those that would have us believe that all things are nature and those that would have us believe that nothing is nature. She sides with the former explaining how ultimately humanity and its creations are in a sense natural. Sherwood Callaway makes a similar point, albeit in a different manner, our view of the city as unnatural stems from an unprecedented “newness” in a sense. According to Callaway, the drastically unprecedented product of progression, in the form of industrialization and urbanization, caused us to see the city as at odds with the country. While these are valid points and important ideas, I fear we may be taking a more-narrow minded approach.

The real question here is why do we feel the need to separate country and city, and most importantly why do we ascribe to them adjectives of morality? In the beginning of Cronon’s piece it becomes clear that the dominant narrative would hold the country as good, pure, and beautiful, while the city is described as evil, dark, and almost mystical in nature. When one enters the city he or she is aware of all the bad, men that try to steal belongings and the polluted air that fills the lungs, that transpires here, however they are entranced by its strength as an almost prophecy for the future of human “triumph over nature.” Here is where we find the key to this debate and the answers to the aforementioned questions. For centuries man has crafted a narrative wherein he, the protagonist, battles with nature in an ongoing fight to control his own existence. Man creates houses to mitigate the effect of temperature and weather change on his ability to live. Man creates farmland as a way to coax the earth into yielding greater supplies of food in a sustainable fashion in order to further control his ability to live. Man creates air-conditioning, weather-proof building plans, unsinkable ships, state-of-the-art airplanes, all in an effort to control the conditions under which he lives in order to make them more favorable.

In this manner, the city and the country are essentially the same, as other students have so astutely pointed out. They are both monuments to this great struggle between man and nature; examples of man bending nature to his will. The only difference between the two is that one appears to be more drastic than the other, but this is a superficial distinction at best. But when we examine this great struggle, a new development in the ramifications of the newest development becomes clear. Although the struggle is essentially the same, there is a small difference in the interpretation of what these new developments means. Agriculture can be characterized by man struggling with nature causing it to yield more of its bounty to us in the form of foodstuffs. City development can be characterized by man struggling against nature, putting a concrete barrier between human and Earth privileging his creation over “hers.” From this springs interesting questions about creation. In his piece Cronon states, “to see one’s world as a self-created place opened the doorway to heroic achievement, but finally denied any other Creator be it Nature or God.” From this realization stems discomfort. If we have finally “done it” so to speak, then what does that mean for the things we have yet to control like death, some forms of disease, poverty, or discrimination? The city then becomes a symbol for despair in a way that the country does not. Perhaps this is where the narrative of the good country, where God remains supreme, and the bad city where man reigns unchallenged comes from. However, it is clear that the root of this debate is a human discomfort with encountering environments that would appear to be engineered entirely by us.

January 24, 2014December 16, 2020

From Trial to Triumph: Art and its Role in Beginning the Healing Process

On Friday, March 11, 2011, Japan was hit off the Pacific coast of Tōhoku with most powerful earthquake known ever to have hit their countryside. It was the fifth most powerful earthquake in the world since modern record-keeping began in 1900. This undersea megathrust earthquake triggered a powerful tsunami waves reaching heights of up to 40.5 meters which, in certain areas, travelled up to 10 kilometers inland. This earthquake tsunami combination inflicted damage on a colossal scale in terms of death, injury, infrastructural damage, and psychological damage. A report completed by the Japanese National Police Agency on September 12, 2012, confirmed 15,883 deaths, 6,150 injured, and 2,643 people missing. The earthquake and following tsunami inflicted extensive and severe structural damage in north eastern Japan, leveling thousands of buildings and partially leveling thousands more. In addition the tsunami initiated nuclear accidents. Areas surrounding the nuclear power plants were evacuated, while at least three nuclear reactors suffered explosions due to hydrogen gas that had built up within their outer containment buildings after cooling system failure.

The great struggle in the wake of unexpected, large scale destruction is how to understand or conceptualize what has occurred. How can communities process the tremendous loss they have experienced, and how can we, the larger world community, understand and talk about their loss both in terms of specific incidents and in broader world context? Coming to terms with the experience is an essential part of the healing process. In order for this to take place, a platform for discussion must be established. Art is a particularly useful medium because of its reconstructive and interactive nature. Through the creation of artwork, the artist must first identify the meaning they are trying to convey, then decide how to reconstruct that meaning in a physical space. In this way the artist must come to terms not only with the effects of the event, but also with how the event fits into a greater narrative. Furthermore, once the art is created, the observer then brings to the viewing of the art his or her own previous experiences. Thus, the piece is a facilitator for a unique dialogue between artist and observer that connects them through common human experience.

The artist Miki Kato-Starr, who lived through the earthquake and subsequent tsunami, created a piece for the 2011 earthquake and tsunami for the State of Emergency Exhibit which does just that. The piece that she created utilizes two trees. Strung from its branches are light bulbs and attached to its trunk is a series of strings, one that circles the trunk and several others that connect to the boats at the very base of the tree. Each one of these boats fashioned out of paper is filled with grains of rice, and the boats are arranged in a circle. This piece of art simultaneously captures the aftermath of the disaster as well as the process of moving on. In the words of the artist, the earthquake and tsunami ravaged the land and left Japan disoriented. The circle formation of the boats was meant to invoke a sense of directionless drifting. However, with time it has become clear that the Japanese people, now a few years after the earthquake, are beginning to piece their lives back together. Thus, Miki Kato-Starr gave the boats traveling in the circle a slight direction. The boats seem to curl in, slowly making effort to travel to the tree. Here the tree, with branches full of light, represents life and a hopeful future. The piece powerfully depicts that although a clear path has not yet been established, the Japanese people are forging ahead to create for themselves a new life and future in the wake of the disaster. Her use of rice to fill the boats is poignant as well in that it transcends class and regional barriers to provide a depiction of how all suffered from the disaster. Just as rice, as a staple part of the Japanese diet, is consumed by all, the rich and the poor alike lost their homes.

Art as a medium for discussing disaster can be useful in that it provides a rare opportunity for interactive experience in a way that words may fail us. Adjectives may never be big or exact enough to communicate how the disaster has touched the lives of those involved. Furthermore, it is transformative. It allows us to forge something beautiful from the ashes of devastation.

Amani Carter