Hurricanes as non-sequiturs
I was working on my new book today, but having trouble getting the hurricanes off my mind. I was thinking that, in terms of story, an event like a hurricane typically appears either as the main conflict (your basic man vs. nature plot -- e.g. The Perfect Storm), as a plot device in a larger plot (e.g. Key Largo) or as one of a series of trials which the characters must surmount (e.g. The River).
But for the hundreds of thousands of people made homeless (and worse) by the weather this year (not to mention those hit by the tsunami last December), the hurricane is none of those. It's just something that happens to them; it doesn't serve a narrative purpose. For many, I think it's unlikely to really change their lives and make them something they weren't before. I'll bet that five years from now most of the people made homeless by the hurricane are in the same socioeconomic status they were in before the storm -- of course, I'm just guessing, but that would be interesting to find out eventually.
Part of what I'm getting at is how insulated we are from what actually happens in the world. Not only insulated by modern society (for example, you lose your house, get financing and insurance payments, move into another house, get a job similar to the one you had before, and go on with your life) but by larger forces in society. The hurricanes are unlikely to change the fact that we live in a consumer society dominated by large corporations and global trade. The hurricanes are unlikely to -- by whatever means -- make people form cooperatives and live in a less consumeristic way, trade their lives as consumers for lives as peace activists, stop eating junk food and all do yoga, or change the nature of public education in society.
In fact, I have the feeling that the more life is disrupted by an event that is essentially a nonsequitur -- a storm, a hurricane, an earthquake -- the more people want to go back to the way things were before. They just aren't enough to truly disrupt the status quo.
Look at the areas devastated by the tsunami in December. Did the tsunami make the people of Sri Lanka stop the civil war and try to live in peace? No, not for more than a couple of weeks. Did the tsunami make the government (or people) of Thailand create programs to raise up the poorest and make the society more democratic? No, things are exactly the way they were before; the emphasis is on rebuilding the tourist industry. Did the tsunami (or the catastrophic flooding in Mumbai two months ago) suddenly make the caste system of India disappear? No, no change at all. Yes, you have hundreds of thousands dead, millions homeless, and a fathomless amount of infrastructure destroyed -- yet society remains the same.
So while the hurricanes are terrible and exciting events, chances are in the end they will change nothing at all. That's what I mean when I say people are isolated from reality. We can trust that no matter what happens -- short of a major war -- things will remain the same. Thus events like hurricanes and earthquakes are, in the end, meaningless.
And the same can be said for an event like Sep. 11, 2001, after which everyone went around repeating the phrase "Everything has changed." Well, one thing did change: The U.S. became a country that invades other countries without being attacked, and a country that tortures prisoners of war. And that does change me, in a moral and ethical sense. But I still drive to work, get a latte, do my job, go home, watch the ballgame on TV -- and if terrorists invaded my workplace this minute, or a tornado hit, killing everyone but me, a year or two from now I would be doing exactly the same. Only the name of the company on my paychecks would be different.