Scan barcode
lajacquerie's review against another edition
3.0
Solnit's work is difficult to classify. This is partially an overview of the field of disaster studies, partially a series of case studies looking at positive human interactions/communities that spring up in the wake of disasters, and partially a series of Solnit's observations and musings on the above, including some connections to unlikely places (most notably--for me, anyway--a digression on the parallels between Carnival celebrations and post-disaster conditions). I like some of these elements more than others. It helped me to keep in mind that this is something of a personal project for Solnit, who was herself affected by the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in California.
Solnit centers her work on a few major North American disasters: the 1906 San Fransisco earthquake; the 1917 Halifax explosion; the 1985 Mexico City earthquake; the 9/11 attacks in Manhattan; and Hurricane Katrina (largely centered on its devastation of New Orleans). In looking at these, she unpacks how humans are much more likely to espouse their "better angels," to the edification of those living in these zones (despite their loss). Solnit (and others) posit that a focus on the "now," a sense of purpose/contribution, and an increased connection with the surrounding community contribute to these positive feelings. Conversely, a lack of focus on the "future" (and its attendant massing of goods/wealth) and the unanticipated de-siloing of citizens (who homes and regular congregation spots are no longer functioning, often putting them out into the street with one another), engenders increased feelings of positive humanity.
Other topics that were usefully explored: the threads that make up and encourage societies practicing mutual aid (important explanations here of charity versus mutual aid); the academic confirmation of the fact that, in crisis, humans are more likely to act altruistically than selfishly; the repeated error that media (news and entertainment) makes in showcasing the opposite; the tension between slow-moving bureaucracies and nimble, ad-hoc responding groups that usually engage in post-disaster work (ie the pros and cons of each); what leads to more positive disaster responses (being involved in the rebuilding of your community; access to aid without proving residency, etc); the dramatic negative effects of "elite panic" during a disaster (these tend to be those with the most to lose, and the most focus on the future--as such, they tend to be have more selfishly); historical examples of property being valued over persons; and--Solnit's unresolved, but fervent question--how to make such disaster "utopias" persist (hint: most solutions involve far more communal participation, which is likely at odds with our hyper privatized, capitalist society).
Some points it feels like she drives home too often, or without sufficient evidence--primarily bothersome because I am sure that there is additional info out there that would support her main points even further and I would be interested to read it. Then again, what she is looking at is by nature hard to quantify and measure, and the conditions that make for a responsive, mutual aid society are not the same as those needed for tight, rigorous academic evaluation.
Overall, this raised some very interesting ideas that I will carry with me, but I do think I was hoping for it to be a little tighter and deeper, to pack more of a wallop (that's probably just me though--I'm sure many readers preferred her more personalized style).
Solnit centers her work on a few major North American disasters: the 1906 San Fransisco earthquake; the 1917 Halifax explosion; the 1985 Mexico City earthquake; the 9/11 attacks in Manhattan; and Hurricane Katrina (largely centered on its devastation of New Orleans). In looking at these, she unpacks how humans are much more likely to espouse their "better angels," to the edification of those living in these zones (despite their loss). Solnit (and others) posit that a focus on the "now," a sense of purpose/contribution, and an increased connection with the surrounding community contribute to these positive feelings. Conversely, a lack of focus on the "future" (and its attendant massing of goods/wealth) and the unanticipated de-siloing of citizens (who homes and regular congregation spots are no longer functioning, often putting them out into the street with one another), engenders increased feelings of positive humanity.
Other topics that were usefully explored: the threads that make up and encourage societies practicing mutual aid (important explanations here of charity versus mutual aid); the academic confirmation of the fact that, in crisis, humans are more likely to act altruistically than selfishly; the repeated error that media (news and entertainment) makes in showcasing the opposite; the tension between slow-moving bureaucracies and nimble, ad-hoc responding groups that usually engage in post-disaster work (ie the pros and cons of each); what leads to more positive disaster responses (being involved in the rebuilding of your community; access to aid without proving residency, etc); the dramatic negative effects of "elite panic" during a disaster (these tend to be those with the most to lose, and the most focus on the future--as such, they tend to be have more selfishly); historical examples of property being valued over persons; and--Solnit's unresolved, but fervent question--how to make such disaster "utopias" persist (hint: most solutions involve far more communal participation, which is likely at odds with our hyper privatized, capitalist society).
Some points it feels like she drives home too often, or without sufficient evidence--primarily bothersome because I am sure that there is additional info out there that would support her main points even further and I would be interested to read it. Then again, what she is looking at is by nature hard to quantify and measure, and the conditions that make for a responsive, mutual aid society are not the same as those needed for tight, rigorous academic evaluation.
Overall, this raised some very interesting ideas that I will carry with me, but I do think I was hoping for it to be a little tighter and deeper, to pack more of a wallop (that's probably just me though--I'm sure many readers preferred her more personalized style).
ivanssister's review against another edition
3.0
When I discovered this book in maybe 2022, I did not notice the publication date. Based on the title and cover, I mistakenly thought the Paradise wildfire would be one of the disasters addressed (LOL to me). I found the sections about Katrina and Mexico most compelling, as I didn't know as much about some of the life in the aftermath situations there, as say compared to 9/11. That section was difficult to read even 23 years after the fact, and I will admit that I found I need to skim because I didn't want to revisit those times.
skylarkochava's review against another edition
5.0
A paradigm-shifting book. I think about and mention this book every few days weeks after reading it. And I can't read my favorite genre the same way again - postapocalyptic fiction. Living through Covid in the early weeks and months has proven her points yet again. But I wonder about studies on the long-term disasters like we're in now.
zmj's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
medium-paced
5.0
riroriro027's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
4.0
alyssabookrecs's review against another edition
A dense but significant nonfiction read to better understand the true human condition when it comes to disasters.
bendebec's review against another edition
hopeful
inspiring
sad
medium-paced
4.0
A enjoyable book with a different perspective.
You often get the impression from modern media that humans are only a hair-width away from being the worst possible creatures, but this book argues that humans are much kinder and decent than that when the "chips are on the table".
It argues this using the evidence from multiple disaster sites, and shows how people spontaneously managed to organise and treat each other kindly, and if anything, it was the established powers that made things worse.
I would also recommend the book "Humankind" to reinforce this point.
There were powerful emotional moments in this book discussing the people's stories, it's the kind of book I wish more people would read. I think society would be better if we recognise the fundamental kindness present in others
Although something in the writing was quite repetitive, and I had to force myself through some parts.
You often get the impression from modern media that humans are only a hair-width away from being the worst possible creatures, but this book argues that humans are much kinder and decent than that when the "chips are on the table".
It argues this using the evidence from multiple disaster sites, and shows how people spontaneously managed to organise and treat each other kindly, and if anything, it was the established powers that made things worse.
I would also recommend the book "Humankind" to reinforce this point.
There were powerful emotional moments in this book discussing the people's stories, it's the kind of book I wish more people would read. I think society would be better if we recognise the fundamental kindness present in others
Although something in the writing was quite repetitive, and I had to force myself through some parts.
kokomoloko's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
4.75