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 believe the events surrounding the interpretation of the fire by the populace of Chicago was vital in its recovery. Throughout Carl Smith’s article he details the reaction of the people following the great fire. One of the aspects of the recovery that he focuses on is the determination of those affected to quickly rebuild. The people of Chicago’s actions following the fire are the same as in any other type of disaster. A reaction of survival and opptimism is common of the human spirit. In dire situations, people are inclined to feel hopeful and instead of giving up and “shutting down”. They also find comfort in spiritual ways such as religion. These simple human reactions were glorified in the press to portray an entire populace becoming united by God and country to restore and improve a fledgling city. I consider this glorification was necessary and was knowingly fabricated in order for the nation to feel sympathetic towards relief efforts. Another aspect that was utilized by writers of the time was the metaphor of the phoenix once again used to relate to the city. It seems that writers purposefully knew about the bad name put on Chicago derived from stories of sin. They thus used the fire as a metaphor for cleansing; the city becoming a glorious Phoenix rising from the murky ashes.
Also notable of the post-fire writers is the focus on stories of heroism. This is a stark contrast to the looting and banditry described in the previous article on the fire by Bessie Bradwell Helmer. While stories are told of the chaos surrounding the events of the fire, they are used as a way to antagonize criminals. Looters and other profiters were denounced in the press to describe a new Chicago that was ready for reform. Smith even states, “stories may have suggested that Chicago was the innocent victim of a foreign conspiracy” (Smith, 151). Thus, writers also may have effectively shifted the blame in a way similar to the story of O’Leary’s cow.
Overall, the article seems to prove that the fire was an important factor in the growth of the city because it brought national attention to the city. The way the people of the city responded portrayed an image of Chicago as a symbol of “American resilience”. Despite this positive outlook, it is important to keep in mind that the fire was still a terrible event. As mvanderdussen described in his post, many people died by collapsing buildings and other horrific causes. I agree with him that one cannot be blinded by the positive and still take into account the reality of the disaster. It seems that people who read about the fire during the immediate aftermath chose to cling to the heroic “myth” of the Great fire.