In her 2009 monograph A Paradise Built in Hell, journalist
Rebecca Solnit analyzes the effect that disasters have played on communities
affected by massive tragedy. She contends that in times of crisis, survivors
usually respond in one of two ways. In the case of most communities, people are
generally altruistic, “urgently engaged in caring for themselves and those
around them,” without the interference of authority figures or the use of
money. However, in all these communities, there are elites, usually wealthy and
white who panic and commit atrocities believing “that others will behave
savagely and that they themselves are taking defensive measures against
barbarism.”[1] Largely
limiting herself to events in the twentieth century North America, Solnit uses
a variety of disasters ranging from earthquakes to terrorism to illustrate
these reactions. Beginning with the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake, she gives
examples of the city uniting to share food and shelter and generally
maintaining good spirits. This contrasts with the reaction of wealthier elites
as well as those in positions of military leadership who looted, accidently
exacerbated the Great Fire, and even shot innocent civilians. She next analyzes
the 1917 Halifax explosion, showing how civilians organized rescue efforts
seeming to personify Kropotkin’s evolutionary theory of mutual aid. She then
jumps forward almost seventy years to the Mexico City Earthquake in 1985. This
disaster, which killed far more people than any other tragedy in this volume, resulted
in citywide movements to assist refugees with housing and provisions. However,
simultaneously, industrialists left their workers to their deaths and used
soldiers to salvage their equipment instead. This resulted in a large-scale
rejection of the apparent corruption in the government and ultimately, the
crumbling of the Industrial Revolutionary Party. She next discusses the
apolitical altruism which arose all over the country in the aftermath of 9/11.
She argues that the city was drawn by a need to help their neighbors, even
making symbolic gestures like giving blood or playing music when their services
were rejected at ground-zero. Finally, she concludes with Hurricane Katrina,
and contrasts the owners of small vessels who rescued people from their homes
with the vigilantes in Uptown who shot strangers fearing a riot.
Solnit addresses two ideas of nature
in her book. First, she addresses the havoc that the natural world, such as
earthquakes and hurricanes can wreck on human populations. Even more
prevalently however, she addresses the concept of human nature within the
context of disasters. Using a great deal of sociological evidence, she suggests
that in a crisis, people react calmly and with overwhelming altruism. She gives
countless examples of people who risked their own lives or sacrificed their
property to aid their neighbors. Even more puzzling, she gives many instances
of individuals who reminisced fondly over the time immediately after the
disaster, due to the community spirit and sense of togetherness. She also
discusses the phenomena of “elite panic,” where when the government is in
disarray, elites and those with a semblance authority panic and takes extreme
measures to maintain what they think is law and order. That often includes
endangering the lives of lower income populations. Beyond this, it is apparent
that Solnit views natural disasters to be one of the quasi-objects
characteristic of Bruno Latour. She shows how though a disaster like an earthquake
may alter a natural landscape, it mainly affects human populations and
structures. Further, death rates and injuries are exacerbated or even caused by
human activity. Disasters like the Halifax Explosion, 9/11 and the Chernobyl
meltdown are caused explicitly by human actions where the deaths caused by
earthquakes and hurricanes usually come from shoddy construction, gas leaks and
overzealous city officials. Natural disasters, therefore, are human disasters.
Solnit’s text is interesting for many
reasons. She offers a unique perspective and comprehensive analysis of a
variety of historical events that have already been studied in depth. However,
there are several problems with her text. For example, she offers no clear or
consistent definition of disaster or crisis, and simply equates the political
act of 9/11 to the San Francisco Earthquake in 1906. This is somewhat
problematic as all of the events that she compares happened within separate and
distinct economic, political, social and environmental situations. For example, the racial unrest between whites
and blacks during Hurricane Katrina is vastly different from the Protestant-Catholic
tensions in 1917 Halifax and the anti-Japanese sentiment during the SF
Earthquake. Additionally, by limiting herself to North America, she is
examining a (relatively) homogenous area of the world. Finally, some of her
analysis is misleading. She suggests that the government only acts as an
intrusion and an unwelcome distraction at best in the post-disaster communities,
giving little note of the organized efforts of the municipal government during
9/11, and the disease prevention efforts of the army during the San Francisco
Earthquake. Additionally, during
Hurricane Katrina, most of the problems came from the lack of government
response, not unwelcome intrusions. However, her analysis is an interesting and
welcome contribution to the field of disaster studies and the history of the
environment.
[1]Solnit, Rebecca. 2009. A paradise built in hell: the
extraordinary communities that arise in disasters. New York: Viking. p. 2
