annorthup – American Disasters

April 2, 2014December 16, 2020

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.

February 26, 2014December 16, 2020

The Great San Francisco Earthquake and Its Role in Shaping a New California

Most estimates suggest that between 80 and 90 percent of San Francisco was ruined as a result of the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake. As a result, hundreds of thousands of people were displaced and forced to make new homes elsewhere as the city was being rebuilt. I would like to focus my paper primarily on the refugee phenomenon that occurred as a result of the fire, and more specifically how the earthquake helped to shape a new San Francisco, and more generally, a modern California. Prior to the fire, San Francisco had been the largest city on the West Coast, but population growth and commerce stalled following the fire. I would like to examine the places that experienced growth in population and commerce following the fire, and how such growth would foreshadow what California looks like today. For example, Los Angeles experienced growth following the earthquake in San Francisco, yet LA is located near the same San Andreas Fault that caused the destruction of San Francisco. In examining movement and development across California following the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906, I would like to pay particular attention to the movement patterns of different socioeconomic classes—especially immigrants. I think immigrants are interesting to pay attention to in the case of California as immigrants make up such a large part of the population, and play such distinct roles within California’s society. In terms of time frame, I will mostly focus on the few years following the fire, but then acknowledge how things changed further down the line, and note any parallels that can be made between California just post-earthquake and California today. Lastly, I would like to touch on the rebuilding of San Francisco, because that is important in itself to the shaping of a new, post-earthquake California.

In terms of primary sources, census records and photographs will prove to be particularly helpful as they can reveal information pre-earthquake and post-earthquake. Newspaper and magazine articles will help in terms of understanding the degree to which homelessness impacted citizens of San Francisco and the surrounding areas, after the earthquake and fires. Perhaps such primary sources could also reveal where people went following the fire, and maybe even further difference in movements between different social classes and demographics. Popular sentiment could also be expressed through print articles, which could suggest why people were moving away from the Bay Area if that was the case, or why not, if they chose to stay in the area.

February 10, 2014December 16, 2020

Searching for the Cause of the Chicago Fire

Eli doesn’t think the cow did it, Garrett thinks it was ‘Peg-Leg’ Sullivan, and Richard Bales seems to agree with both of them. After reading through Bales’ website (which I agree with Eli doesn’t seem to work as an extremely effective historiography, but proves interesting nonetheless), I came to the conclusion that whoever/whatever caused the initial spark of the Great Chicago fire can’t be held accountable for the whole disaster. On whomever one would like to ascribe the blame–Mrs. O’Leary, the cow, ‘Peg-Leg’, Regan–the disastrous outcome on the fire was ultimately a result of a combination of events on the night of October 8th.

Bales explains that Mrs. O’Leary was exonerated for 7 reasons, most of which were failures on the part of the Fire Department to accurately locate the fire quickly, as well as equipment malfunctions. Had such mistakes not occurred, Bales suggests that it is likely that the fire would not have caused such widespread damage.

I think that there is a tendency in history (and in society in general) to want to ascribe blame to one person or one group of people. For example, was the reason the Titanic disastrous because there weren’t enough lifeboats? There was complacency on the part of the crew? Not solid enough engineering efforts? Surely it was a combination of all of the aforementioned reasons. If we take a look at more recent disasters like Hurricane Katrina or the BP Oil Spill, there was an intense effort following each event to place blame. Perhaps it is a coping mechanism or a way to better comprehend the effects of a disaster, however, as students looking at history, instead of trying to find out the exact cause of disasters like the Chicago Fire, we should aim to gather a more comprehensive list of all the reasons the event turned into a disaster.

To quickly comment on Pernin’s account of the Peshtigo Fire, I agree with Catherine and Nate about the value of this particular primary source in better understanding historical events. I just wanted to pose a question about aside from Chicago being a more prominent locale, why does the Peshtigo Fire seem to be lost in memory?

February 5, 2014December 16, 2020

The Difficulty in Defining What is “Natural”/”Unnatural”

In reading Cronon’s Natures Metropolis, I was particularly taken by his contention that the boundary between what is natural and unnatural might not be as clear cut as is often thought. It seems that my classmates have taken particular interest in this same point, as everyone mentioned this notion to some degree or another in their blog posts. For me, having grown up primarily in large, urban cities, I have always seen rural life as separate and unfamiliar–perhaps even ignorantly, less “modern”. To then read Cronon’s take on cities forced me to think more deeply about how I view urban vs. rural spaces in relation to one another. Further, Cronon’s argument that, “City and country might be separate places, but [are] hardly isolated,” led me to consider whether cities and the country are truly independent spaces. As Cronon writes, “The more I learned the history of my home state, the more I realized that the human hand lay nearly as heavily on rural Wisconsin as on Chicago” (p. 7). Even further, cities and countrysides are quite interdependent. It is at this point where defining what is natural vs. unnatural becomes problematic.

I see the same issues in defining nature as in defining disaster. Wells brings up in his post Cronon’s idea of “First Nature” and “Second Nature.” I think these terms are helpful tools when discussing what is/is not nature. In my historiography paper, I discussed the vagueness of the word disaster and it’s potential to be problematic in the field of disaster study, but concluded (through examination of Bergman, Hewitt, and Biel) that it may not be that problematic after all. A changing/vague definition forces us to constantly reconsider the subject, perhaps leading to some new, previously overlooked, ideas on the subject.

Going now in a slightly different direction, I enjoyed Amani’s discussion of the morality of city and country. I think her question is a great one because there does seem to be a widely accepted notion that country represents the natural, which is better than cities which represent the unnatural. But if we consider Cronon’s argument that the two are interdependent, and that rural farms are not as natural as we might think, then this ascription of moral adjectives is no longer viable.

January 24, 2014December 16, 2020

Robert Polidori’s “5417 Marigny Street”: The Power of Photography

Different kinds of primary sources have the ability to offer distinct looks into the past. A diary entry can provide one person’s emotions and perspectives that may clue a historian into a pattern that existed across a certain faction of society. Advertisements offer suggestions about the interests of a particular demographic according to what the advertisement focuses on. Art is an interesting primary source in that it almost works as a visual diary through which the artist conveys a message. In the “State of Emergency” exhibit, the artists’ intentions seem to be grounded in eliciting an emotional response from the viewer. However, as historians, it is important to recognize these intentions and the emotions the artist is trying to convey in order to objectively analyze the works and their historical merit.

Robert Polidori’s photograph, 5417 Marigny Street, New Orleans, LA, is a great example how art can act as a primary source. The photo is of the inside of a home that was made uninhabitable by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. In it you can see dirty dishes on the coffee table, bottles of Tabasco on the counter, and tattered furniture that will never be sat in again; it is the portrait of a life interrupted. It is for this reason that this photograph is distinct from images that flashed across the TV screens, or were plastered all over newspapers and magazines following the disaster. While those images are disturbing and emotional in their own right, Polidori is able to strike a different chord with his viewers by photographing the inside of this home. Images from within the home paint a more complete picture of the people who lived in it, and the life that was taken from them.

Sometimes there are weaknesses in a primary source’s ability to provide a historian with enough information to draw larger conclusions. This photograph however, does not necessarily fall victim to this tendency because although this is only a picture of one home, the viewer knows that there were thousands more pictures to be taken, just like this one. Perhaps the furniture would have been arranged differently, or a different book on the coffee table, but it would still portray an interrupted life. This realization can allow historians to begin to assess the social implications of a disaster like Hurricane Katrina, which are crucial to writing the history of a certain event. While written accounts are valuable in their own ways, works of art like Polidori’s photograph can enhance a historians understanding through heightening the emotional response of the viewer through personalization.

For all its merits as a historical primary source, a potential weakness of Polidori’s photograph is that he did not live through Hurricane Katrina himself. He is a photographer that was sent to New Orleans post-Katrina by the New York Times to photograph the destruction. In the case of this particular photograph, 5417 Marigny Street, there doesn’t seem to be any traces of personal bias, but the photographer’s background is important to note for the reason that it may have affect his approach to this assignment, or even to his photography in general. It forces us to examine the Polidori’s motivations, which may not be bad, but should be noted. Despite this potential shortcoming, however, I still contend that his photograph is ultimately successful in enhancing our understanding of the impact that Hurricane Katrina had on the people of New Orleans, and subsequently, the wider implications it had on the city of New Orleans—politically, economically, etc.