Nancy K. Bristow
Office: 140 Wyatt Hall
Phone: Ext. 3173
Email: nbristo@pugetsound.edu
Office Hours:
Monday 1:00-1:50
Wednesday 1:00-2:30
Friday 3:30-5:00
And by appointment
In the Prologue to their recent book, Catastrophe in the Making: The Engineering of
Katrina and the Disasters of Tomorrow, the scholars William R. Freudenburg, Robert
Gramling, Shirley Laska and Kai Erikson describe an American tendency to treat disasters as “un-events,” as “sudden shocks,” “far-removed from the patterns of everyday life.” This practice, the authors conclude, allows Americans to respond to catastrophic events as “not just unfortunate, but uncommon, unexpected, unplanned, uncontrollable.” These authors offer an alternative interpretation.
Focusing on Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath, they argue that “the experiences of
New Orleans are better seen as shared, rather than unique, and as having a lot to teach the rest of us about what we have come to see as
‘normal.’” This course takes this position as its starting point, arguing that moments of catastrophe offer historians a unique window into a culture and its practices.
Focused on disasters in the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries in the United States, the course follows a roughly chronological path, but is organized around different kinds of catastrophe Americans have faced and the historical themes and issues these moments of crisis revealed. The course does not claim exhaustive coverage of every disaster, but seeks instead to expose students to the range of historiographical approaches employed in the study of catastrophe, including for instance explorations focused on the environmental, social, cultural, political, economic, technological, legal, public health, military, and psychological history of these crisis moments. Using these different lenses will allow us to ask a range of questions and to confront a number of issues related to Americans and catastrophe. What, for instance, counts as a catastrophe? How might we define the difference between a “natural” and a “human-made” catastrophe? What role has social identity played in shaping the disparate experiences of Americans as they suffered through disasters? What role did the American state play in shaping those experiences, and how has that role changed over time? How do those moments of
1

catastrophe that were intentionally caused—by other Americans, even by government officials—fit into our understanding of the nature of catastrophe? How have Americans dealt with the private trauma of disaster? And finally, what role has public memory played in shaping those private experiences? Exploring these questions and more will allow us to understand more fully the relationship between the day-to-day and the catastrophic, the common and the uncommon, occurrences that have shaped American life over the last century.
Through this course you will have the opportunity to:
 develop a broad understanding of American experiences of, and reactions to, catastrophe in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries
 develop your skills in the craft of historical study, including careful and close reading, critical thinking and analysis, and research
 continue polishing your skills in the presentation and defense of your ideas in both written and oral forms
 build your skills as a leader, planning and coordinating a class day
 fine-tune your ability to work cooperatively with others on shared learning
This course requires a very heavy reading load. It will give us all a chance to practice our skills in handling large quantities of material, both primary and secondary, and in putting those texts in conversation with one another. The following books are available at the university’s bookstore and on reserve at Collins
Memorial Library:
 Kevin Rozario, The Culture of Calamity: Disaster and the Making of Modern
America
 Ted Steinberg, The Unnatural History of Natural Disaster in America
 Guenter B. Risse, Plague, Fear and Politics in San Francisco’s Chinatown
 Amy Louise Wood, Lynching and Spectacle: Witnessing Racial Violence in
America, 1890-1940
 Michael Bilton and Kevin Sim, Four Hours in My Lai
 Susan Brison, Aftermath: Violence and the Remaking of a Self
 Dave Cullen, Columbine
 Edward T. Linenthal, The Unfinished Bombing: Oklahoma City in American
Memory
 Rebecca Solnit, A Paradise Built in Hell: The Extraordinary Communities that
Arise in Disaster
2

Following the notion that writing is a valuable way to develop one’s understandings of complex issues and ideas, this course will ask you to do a great deal of writing. These assignments are designed to ensure both your broad engagement with the course’s concepts and your deep exploration of a specific topic and question of interest to you.
(Roughly 3 pages in length)
During the first eight weeks of the semester you will be expected to complete five short essays in which you analyze closely the sources we are reading for class and use them to explore an important issue related to the history of catastrophe. Brief explanations of each of these essays are included in the day-by-day account of the semester included later in the syllabus. You must complete five of the available seven essay sets, providing you with a little flexibility. You MUST, though, complete the first of these. After that, you are also welcome to develop your own question to explore, and any group project is also welcome to pose additional or alternative questions for their day of class. These essays will be due in class on the day on which we will discuss the sources, groups, individuals, or issues you have selected to write about. This will allow us, as a class, to make effective use of your explorations and insights in our discussions. At any point you are welcome to locate a primary source related to a day’s reading and use it as the focus of your essay.
The largest writing responsibility for the semester will be a final research paper on a topic of your own design. Such a project accomplishes several goals—allowing you to engage in substantial exploration on a subject of particular interest; expanding the intellectual territory our class can cover; providing additional insights for our explorations together; and giving you a chance to continue polishing your skills in the conceptualization, development, completion and presentation of a research project on an historical issue. The research paper will be the focus of your writing energies in the second half of the course. To allow us to move toward the completion of the project together, you will complete two preliminary assignments which will be shared with the class and the instructor, and you will also present your research during the final days of the semester. Instructions for each of these are outlined briefly below.
3

Research Paper Assignment #1 Selecting an Issue
This will be your first attempt to outline the focus of your research project. You should write roughly three paragraphs, and should work to accomplish the following: 1)Identify the issue or debate in which you are interested. 2) Explain how this issue or debate could become the centerpiece of a focused research question. 3) Suggest the broader significance of such an investigation, offering one possible connection to an issue of importance for our study of catastrophe and/or
American history more broadly. Recognize that your paper can take one of two forms—an historiographical essay that analyzes the existing work on a particular theme or issue or a focused research paper based in primary source research. (Note that this latter option nevertheless benefits from engagement with the existing historiography.)
Due in class on Friday, March 29 th
Research Paper Assignment #2 Annotated Bibliography
For your second preparatory assignment you are asked to develop an annotated bibliography. The bibliography should include: 1) A statement of your focused research question. 2) Sufficient (appropriate) primary sources to illustrate that you will be able to answer that question. 3) At least three secondary sources in order to demonstrate at least minimal familiarity with the scholarly literature related to your research.
Due in class on Monday, April 15 th
Research Paper Assignment #3 Research Presentation
To provide you with a forum for the presentation of your work and an opportunity to learn from the research of your classmates, the final four days of our class will be dedicated to presentations of your projects. You will be assembled into presentation “panels,” and will be responsible for making an eight-minute presentation of your work, as well as offering a question to one of your classmates on their research. These presentations will give us an opportunity to synthesize some of our findings for the semester even as we continue to expand the reach of our explorations.
Final Research Paper (Roughly 15 pages)
Due in my office by 6:00 p.m. on Monday, May 13 th
 A typical “A” paper is clearly written and well organized, but most importantly it contains a perceptive and original central argument, cogently argued and supported by a well-chosen variety of specific examples. It demonstrates that the student has grappled with the issues raised in the course, has synthesized the readings, discussions and lectures, and has formulated a compelling, independent argument that is fully developed in the paper. An “A” paper also succeeds in suggesting the importance of its subject and of its findings.
4

 A typical “B” paper is a solid work containing flashes of insight that demonstrate that the student has engaged in significant thinking and has developed substantial evidence and discussion in the paper. Yet a typical “B” paper may not be as complex or creative in its ideas as an “A” paper. In other
“B” papers the argument is sophisticated, but it is not presented as clearly or convincingly as in “A” papers.
 A typical “C” paper has a good grasp of the material on which it is based but provides a less thorough defense of the student’s independent analysis, or may suffer from more significant problems in presentation such as frequent errors, unclear writing, or confusing organization.
 A paper that receives a grade lower than “C” typically does not respond adequately to the assignment, is insufficiently developed, is marred by frequent errors, unclear writing, confusing organization, or some combination of these problems.
Discussion is an important part of this course. While the course will include some brief lectures, it is in class discussions that we will have the opportunity to pursue together answers to the multitude of questions the readings will raise. Working together, we have the opportunity to learn from one another, to consider opinions different from our own, and to build on one another’s ideas. Keep in mind that attendance and contributions to discussions will make up an important part of your grade. The following suggestions will help to make our discussions as fruitful as possible:
 Prepare for class: This includes not only reading all assignments before class, but thinking about them as well. It is often useful to write down a few thoughts and questions before class. This not only forces you to think critically about what you are reading, but will often make it easier for you to speak up during the discussion.
 Attend class: Unless you are in class, the rest of us cannot benefit from your ideas, and you will miss the opportunity to benefit from the ideas of your classmates. Further, lectures offer you information and context to help you understand your readings, and should not be missed.
 Participate in discussions: We can only know your ideas if you express them. Twenty minds are always going to be better than just one. For this reason, we will all benefit from this course to the degree to which each of you participates in our discussions. Each of you has a great deal to contribute to the class, and each of you should share that potential with the class.
 Listen to your classmates: The best discussions are a cooperative effort to understand the issues and questions before us. Listen to one another, and build on the conversation. While we will often disagree with one another, you should always be sure to pay attention to the ongoing discussion, and to treat your classmates and their ideas with the respect they deserve.
Recognize that you will do some of your best thinking when you discuss complex issues with people whose ideas are different from your own.
5

 A student who receives an “A” for his or her participation typically comes to every class with questions and ideas about the readings already in mind. He or she engages other students and the instructor in discussion of their ideas as well as his or her own. This student is under no obligation to change their point of view, yet listens to and respects the opinions of others. This student, in other words, takes part in an exchange of ideas, and does so on a regular basis. This student also makes use of specific texts and examples during the discussion, providing depth to their contributions.
 A student who receives a “B” for his or her participation typically has completed all the reading assignments on time, and makes important contributions to our discussions. This student may tend to wait for others to raise interesting issues, rather than initiating discussion. Other “B” discussants are courteous and articulate but do not listen to other students, offering their ideas without reference to the direction of the discussion. Still others may have a great deal to contribute, but participate only sporadically, or may not regularly connect their contributions to particular texts or specific examples.
 A student who receives a “C” for discussion typically attends every class and listens attentively, but rarely participates in discussion. Other “C” discussants would earn a higher grade, but are too frequently absent from class, or may not listen openly to the ideas and suggestions of others.
 A student who receives a grade lower than “C” is consistently unprepared, unwilling to participate, often seems distracted from the discussion, or is too frequently absent.
In addition to your regular participation in class discussions, you will also have the responsibility, along with three classmates, of leading discussion during one class period. You will be asked to coordinate the entire day’s discussion. We will work as a class to assign responsibilities for discussion leadership with the hope that each of you can lead discussion of material that you find particularly engaging or significant.
Fuller details on your responsibilities as a discussion leader as well as the criteria for grading your work will be circulated and discussed in class, and will be posted on our Moodle site.
 In this course, we will operate according to my “48 hour rule.” This means that you can turn in one paper up to 48 hours late without penalty or explanation. Beyond this, though, late papers will be accepted only in cases of illness or emergency, or when prior arrangements have been made, and will generally be penalized except in cases of illness or emergency.
6

 You must complete all writing assignments in order to successfully complete this course. This applies to graduating seniors as well as all other students in the course. In other words, if you don’t turn in one of the writing assignments, you will not pass the class.
 For any policy issue not covered here, I follow the rules set down in the
Academic Handbook. You have a responsibility to be familiar with the handbook and the policies it contains.
Because of its importance, I wanted to say a quick word about academic honesty.
It is assumed that all of you will conform to the rules of academic honesty. I should warn you that plagiarism and any other form of academic dishonesty will be dealt with severely in this course. Plagiarizing in a paper will result in an automatic F on that assignment and potentially in the course, and may lead to more substantial university-level penalties. Because academic dishonesty is such an egregious offense, the penalty is not negotiable. As a member of this academic community, your integrity and honesty are assumed and valued. Our trust in one another is an essential basis for our work together. A breach of this trust is an affront to your colleagues, to me and to the integrity of this institution, and so will be treated harshly. Rest assured that I will make every effort to familiarize you with the rules surrounding academic honesty. If at any time you have questions about these rules, too, know that I am anxious to help clarify them.
In assigning grades, both during the semester and at its end, I will use the following scale:
A+: 97-100
B+: 87-89
A:
B:
93-96
83-86 B-:
A-: 90-92
80-82
F:
C+: 77-79
D+: 67-69 below 60
C: 73-76
D: 63-66
C-: 70-72
D-: 60-62
Your final grade in this course will be based on the following : short essays 25% finding an issue annotated bibliography
5%
5% research presentation research paper attendance and participation in discussions group project
5%
25%
20%
15%
7

Friday, January 25: Introductions
Week 2
Monday, January 28: The Possibilities of Catastrophe Studies
We will begin our studies of the history of catastrophe with a case study, the ongoing catastrophe of Hurricane Katrina. A Journal of American History special issue, available online, will allow us to recognize the range of issues the study of catastrophe involves while introducing us to the diversity of exploratory lenses historians have employed in exploring these issues.
READING:
 Select any ONE essay from: “Through the Eye of Katrina: Past as
Prologue,” Special Issue, Journal of American History 94(December 2007), available online at: http://www.journalofamericanhistory.org/projects/katrina/
Short Essay #1: REQUIRED
 Select one of the essays from the JAH special issue and write a short essay explaining and critically analyzing the historiographical approach employed there. What interpretive lens does the author use? Does the author employ it effectively? What constraints does the lens put on your understanding? What particular issues does the lens make clear? Could it be applied to other catastrophic events? To help explain your answers, it may be useful to read more than one article.
Friday, February 1: The American Culture of Catastrophe
Today we will turn our attention to historian Kevin Rozario, who will give us some arguments—about American reactions to catastrophe and the impacts it has had on our culture—against which we can test our own developing ideas this semester.
We’ll spend today thinking about the formative years leading up to the period of our study.
READING:
 Kevin Rozario, The Culture of Catastrophe: Disaster and the Making of
Modern America, Introduction, ch. 1, Interlude, ch. 2
 Visit the National Archives’ “The 1906 Earthquake and Fire” website at http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/sf-earthquake-and-fire/index.html
 Read any two documents at the Virtual Museum of the City of San
Francisco’s “The Great Earthquake and Fire of 1906” website at: http://www.sfmuseum.org/1906/06.html
. Also be sure to look through the photographs.
8

Monday, February 4: A Modernizing Nation and Catastrophe
We’ll continue our discussion of Americans’ “culture of catastrophe” as defined by
Kevin Rozario today. We’ll think in particular about the ideas he presents about the evolution of American experiences and culture in the twentieth century, the focus of our work this semester. You might be thinking about whether his ideas have been supported by recent disasters we’ve experienced. (Think Superstorm Sandy or the shootings in Connecticut, for instance.)
READING:
 Rozario, The Culture of Catastrophe, chs. 3-5 and Epilogue
Short Essay #2
 Using at least one primary source drawn from recent news coverage, test one of Rozario’s claims against one of our recent catastrophes.
Friday, February 8: Natural Disaster?
Today we’ll begin our investigations in earnest, turning our attention to “natural disasters.” The very term, of course, suggests an event beyond human control. Yet as we already know from thinking about Hurricane Katrina, such a notion is too simple. The work by Steinberg will give us ways to complicate our understanding of what he terms “unnatural” disasters.
READING:
 Ted Steinberg, The Unnatural History of Natural Disaster in America,
Prefaces, Introduction, and Part I, “Return of the Suppressed”
Monday, February 11: Managing the Environment/Managing Disaster
This week we continue our exploration of the concept of “natural disaster,” starting today by bringing Steinberg’s ideas up to the present. Do Steinberg’s ideas resonate with what you have observed over the past year or two as disasters of a variety of kinds have struck the United States?
READING:
 Ted Steinberg, The Unnatural History of Natural Disaster in America, Parts
II and III, “Federalizing Risk” and “Containing Calamity”
 Moodle: o Photographs of the Galveston hurricane’s aftermath: http://www.1900storm.com/photographs/ o Editorial, “The Galveston Hurricane,” New York Times, 13
September 1900: 6. o Isaac M. Cline, “Special Report on the Galveston Hurricane of
September 8, 1900,” Scientific American (supplement), 1900
Short Essay #2
 Is the term “natural disaster” an appropriate description of the Galveston
Hurricane and its aftermath? Why or why not? Be sure to contend with the ideas presented by Steinberg as one part of your answer.
9

Friday, February 15: “Natural” Disaster in Primary Sources
Today we will consider how a series of natural disasters were conceptualized by their contemporaries. Your job for today’s class will be to locate at least one primary source written about a “natural disaster” in the first half of the twentieth century, and to consider how contemporaries were conceptualizing the catastrophe.
Did they think of it in the way Steinberg has described, or did they use some other lens?
READING:
 Locate a primary source on any of the “natural disasters” between
1900 and 1950. If you need any help locating a primary source, just let me know. The ProQuest Historical Newspapers is one obvious route to a source, but you might explore much more broadly. The
Library of Congress Memory Project is another excellent place to look for sources.
 Moodle:
Silent film created by the Signal Corps in 1936 that recorded the aftermath of the flood at http://archive.org/details/mississippi_flood_1927
Short Essay #3
 Using your primary source(s), consider how contemporaries understood the disaster about which they are writing (or taking pictures etc.) What interpretive lens did they employ to make sense of what happened? How does it correspond to Steinberg’s arguments?
Monday, February 18: The Social Construction of Disease
Epidemics are another form of “natural” disaster, caused by infective agents sometimes beyond human control. At the same time, the experience of epidemics has routinely been shaped by American culture, an idea historians refer to as the
“social construction of disease.” We start this week by situating ourselves in contemporary understandings of health, disease and identity in the late nineteenth century in the city of San Francisco.
READING:
 Guenter B. Risse, Plague, Fear, and Politics in San Francisco’s
Chinatown, Introduction and Part I (“Before Plague”)
 View “Scene in Chinatown,” Library of Congress, available at: http://www.sfmuseum.org/loc/chtownvisit.html
10

Friday , February 22: Epidemic Disease: Difference, Disparity and the State
Today we will explore how ideas about disease and identity intersected with notions about state responsibility in the midst of a health crisis, the bubonic plague crisis of 1900-1905 in San Francisco. These events offer a case study for exploring how social identity and cultural patterns shaped American experiences of, and responses to, epidemic disease, as well as the role played by social identity in shaping public health policy and community responses to disease outbreak.
READING:
 Risse, Plague, Fear, and Politics in San Francisco’s Chinatown, Part II
(“Plague”) and Epilogue
 Moodle: o “Suggestions for City Improvement: Why Chinatown has
Remained Where it Is” (1902)
Public Health Reports o “Plague in San Francisco,” Commentary and excerpts from o New York Times coverage of the plague outbreak
Short Essay #4
 Using any of the primary sources, explore the notion of causality. What can we learn about American notions of identity through these sources?
What, in turn, might we learn about their notions about disease? About the role of the state in protecting health?
 Analyze Risse’s Appendix, “San Francisco Plague Cases.” What historical insights does a close and critical reading offer to the historian?
Monday, February 25: Communal Violence as Catastrophe
This week we expand our consideration of the nature of catastrophe to explore communal violence as a form of catastrophe. Did the costs and consequences of catastrophe shift when its causes were intentional human actions, carried out by fellow citizens?
READING:
 Amy Louise Wood, Lynching and Spectacle: Witnessing Racial Violence in
America, 1890-1940 , Parts I and II (“Spectacle” and “Witnessing”)
 Visit the website, “Without Sanctuary: Photographs and Postcards of
Lynching in America” at http://withoutsanctuary.org/
Here you will confront the souvenirs Americans produced and collected of lynchings. These images are very difficult to view. We will talk in class in advance of this assignment about how to approach these sources.
Short Essay #5
 Using the postcards as primary sources, write an essay in which you explain how these documents represented the nature of lynching.
Obviously, from the perspective of the postcards the lynchings were not catastrophes. What were they, then?
11

Friday , March 1: Race, Responsibility and Catastrophe
Exploration of community-sanctioned assault in the form of lynching today will allow us to foreground the role of difference in shaping the experience of catastrophe and the dissonant perspectives of these events, as well as issues related to the ethics of responsibility and community.
READING:
 Amy Wood, Lynching and Spectacle, Part III (“Bearing Witness”)
 Moodle:
Ida B. Wells, “A Red Record,” 1895 (excerpt)
Dyer Antilynching Bill and Congressional Record excerpts
(1922)
NAACP correspondence related to the Dyer Bill
Erika Doss, “Shame: Duluth’s Lynching Memorial and Issues of
National Morality,” in Memorial Mania: Public Feeling in
Short Essay #5:
America
 What lens did those who actively fought against lynching bring to its practice? How did they define what lynching was? Be sure to rely on the primary sources (both on Moodle and in the pages of Wood’s book) to answer this question.
 We have been working on defining the very notion of “catastrophe” this semester, and the material on community-sanctioned violence, in particular lynching, may complicate this task still further. State your current definition of “catastrophe” and test it against the practice of lynching. Can an event be a catastrophe if many in a community not only approve of it but carry it out?
Monday, March 4: State Sanctioned Violence
If the state sometimes chose to evade responsibility for controlling violence against communities, in other cases it moved with speed and force to put down civil disturbances, often resulting in significant casualties. This week we will ask questions about the meaning of citizenship, civil rights and civil liberties in the context of state-sanctioned violence, starting with the cases of the shootings at Kent
State University and Jackson State College in 1970.
READING:
 Moodle: o “4 Kent State Students Killed by Troops,” New York Times, 5 May 1970 o “Kent State: Martyrdom That Shook the Country,” Time, 18 May 1970 o “The South: Death in Two Cities,” Time, 25 May 1970 o David Bryant, “Sowing the Wind: A Special Report from Kent State
University,” Christianity Today, 5 June 1970 o CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE!!
12

MARCH 4 CONTINUED: o John Lombardi, “A Lot of People Were Crying and the Guard Walked
Away,” Rolling Stone, 11 June 1970 o “Jackson Police Fire on Students,” New York Times, 15 May 1970 o Coverage of the Jackson State shootings by the Blue and White Flash
(campus newspaper) o Coverage of the Jackson State shootings by Mississippi newspapers o President’s Commission on Campus Unrest, The Report of the
President’s Commission on Campus Unrest, excerpts on Kent State and
Jackson State o I. F. Stone, “What’s a Little Murder”
Short Essay #6:
 State-wielded violence must constitute a special brand of catastrophe. Select one of the events—the shootings at Kent State University or Jackson State
College—and explore how one observer interpreted the event. Did they view it as a catastrophe? Why or why not? And if not, what alternative interpretation(s) did they offer?
Friday, March 8: Race, Repression and Catastrophe
Today we will continue our exploration of state-sanctioned violence as catastrophe, turning our attention to the repression of the Attica State Prison revolt of 1971.
Such an exploration will complicate still further our thinking about the definition of
“catastrophe” and its relationship to citizenship and the state.
READING:
 Moodle: o Tom Wicker, A Time to Die: The Attica Prison Revolt, excerpt o New York Times coverage of the Attica revolt and its suppression o Time coverage of the Attica revolt and its suppression o Roger Starr, “Prisons, Politics, and the Attica Report,”
Commentary, May 1973 o “Rockefeller on Attica Raid, From Boastful to Subdued,” New
York Times, September 12, 2011 o To listen to audio, go to: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/nyregion/rock efeller-initially-boasted-to-nixon-about-atticaraid.html?pagewanted=all o Eyes on the Prize, Episode 12: “A Nation of Law?”
Short Essay #6:
 Again, explore how one observer interpreted the repression of the Attica
State Prison riot and the riot’s suppression. Did they view it as a catastrophe?
Why or why not? And if not, what alternative interpretation(s) did they offer?
13

Monday, March 11: Catastrophe in the Context of War
War is the largest example of state-sanctioned violence, and an event that is often understood as catastrophic for civilians and soldiers alike. Looking at the case of the
American war in Vietnam, we will have a chance to explore American forces both committing violence and suffering from its consequences, and doing so both in the
“normal” circumstances of war and in the extreme example of the My Lai Massacre.
READING:
 Michael Bilton and Kevin Sim, Four Hours in My Lai, chs. 1-5
 Peers Commission, “Military Situation in Quang Ngai Province”
 Nguyen Hieu and Nguyen Bat, “Testimony to the Peers Commission”
 Do Vien, “Testimony to US Army CID, 1970”
 Interview with Larry Colburn at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/interview/m ylai-colburn/
 Interview with author Tim O’Brien at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/interview/m
ylai-obrien/
Short Essay #7:
 Given what we have learned so far about how historians are conceptualizing catastrophe, does war itself constitute catastrophe?
Friday, March 15: The My Lai Massacre and American Views of War
Today we will continue to explore the catastrophe of the My Lai Massacre, asking how the perpetrators and the American public responded in its aftermath. Why were Americans so unwilling to criticize the soldiers who committed the murders?
READING:
 Michael Bilton and Kevin Sim, Four Hours in My Lai, chs. 6-8, chs. 11-12
 Ronald Ridenhour, “Letter to Military and Political Leaders,” 29 March 1969
 “Notes and Comment,” New Yorker, 20 December 1969
 “The Great Atrocity Hunt,” National Review, 16 December 1969.
 Peter Steinfels, “Calley and the Public Conscience,” Commonweal, 12 April
1971
14

Monday, March 25: The Aftermath of Catastrophe: PTSD
Trauma from catastrophe was never limited only to public violence and the public sphere. In the end, there is always the individual and personal level of catastrophe.
Today we will explore the private suffering of those living with Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder.
READING: ON MOODLE:
 Jonathan Shay, Achilles in Vietnam: Combat Trauma and the Undoing of
Character, Introduction
 Allison Berg, “Trauma and Testimony in Black Women’s Civil Rights
Memoirs: The Montgomery Bus Boycott, Warriors Don’t Cry, and From the Mississippi Delta”
 Albert French, Patches of Fire, excerpt
Also visit the National Institutes of Mental Health website on PTSD at: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/post-traumatic-stressdisorder-ptsd/index.shtml
Friday, March 29: Recovering from Catastrophe--Remaking the Self
Today we turn to the aftermath of catastrophe as understood by one victim of a violent crime, an avenue of inquiry that will encourage us to ask, again, how we are defining catastrophe. Must it be a community-wide event, or a public event, to constitute a catastrophe? What similarities and differences do we see between private and public cataclysms? Between their consequences?
READING:
 Susan Brison, Aftermath: Violence and the Remaking of a Self, entire
15

Monday, April 1: Domestic Terrorism and Catastrophe--Columbine
To continue our discussions of the nature of catastrophe, we turn this week to terrorism as catastrophe, but turn our focus inward first, looking at the shootings at
Columbine in 1999 as a case study of the kind of domestic terrorism that has become familiar in shootings recently from the assaults at Virginia Tech and Sandy
Hook Elementary to the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords in a public appearance in Arizona and the attack last summer at a Colorado movie theatre. Today we will start by looking at the day of the catastrophe itself, exploring the immediate reactions prompted by live coverage of a catastrophe in process.
READING:
This may be the hardest reading of the semester for many of us. I also recognize our concerns about fulfilling the killers’ goal of remembering them and their actions. To help with these difficulties, I’ve given you the option of reading only selectively from this book. Those readings in bold lettering avoid many of the chapters written exclusively about the killers.
 Dave Cullen, Columbine, Note on sources and Parts I and II.
(Alternatively, chs. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9-19, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30)
Friday, April 5: The Aftermath of Catastrophe
Today we turn to explore the aftermath, both immediate and long-term, of this kind of public catastrophe. We will want to note the cultural tendencies that emerged in both the private and public responses to the shootings, and the insights these provide into our culture at the turn of the twenty-first centry.
READING:
For today’s readings I again separate out the chapters on the killers and their descent toward the murders. Today I strongly encourage you to read only the bolded chapters.
 Dave Cullen, Columbine, Parts III, IV and V (chs. 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 41,
43, 45, 47, 49, 51, 53, Afterword)
 Susan Klebold, “I Will Never Know Why,” available at: http://www.oprah.com/world/Susan-Klebolds-O-Magazine-
Essay-I-Will-Never-Know-Why
Monday, April 8: Finding Meaning in Catastrophe--Building Community
As we have already noted many times this semester, Americans seek meaning in their catastrophes, and do so in many different ways, from placing blame to locating
God in their narratives. This week we explore the important place of “a paradise built in hell” in Americans’ thinking about the impact of catastrophe.
READING:
 Rebecca Solnit, A Paradise Built in Hell, Parts I, II and V
16

Friday, April 12
No class today. I will be in San Francisco attending the Organization of American
Historians meetings. This would be a good opportunity to work on your annotated bibliographies, which are due next week.
Monday, April 15: Finding Meaning in Catastrophe: Oklahoma City Bombing
Today we return to our discussions of American efforts to find meaning in catastrophe, looking in particular at the range of narratives that often emerge in that struggle, and the difficult contestation over public meaning that can result. We’ll use the terrorist bombing in Oklahoma City as a case study this week.
READING:
 Edward T. Linenthal, The Unfinished Bombing: Oklahoma City in
American Memory, Introduction and chs. 1-3
Friday, April 19: Remembering Catastrophe: Oklahoma City
Today we turn our full attention to complex issues of American memory. Why do
Americans publicly remember some catastrophes but not others? We will begin by completing our exploration of the messy and conflicted processes of memorialization, looking especially closely at the creation of the memorial to the victims of the Oklahoma City terrorist attacks.
READING:
 Edward T. Linenthal, The Unfinished Bombing: Oklahoma City in
American Memory, chs. 4-5 and Conclusion, Postscript
 Marita Sturken, “The Spectacle of Death and the Spectacle of Grief:
The Execution of Timothy McVeigh” from Tourists of History
17

Monday, April 22: American Culture and Catastrophe in the 21 st Century
We conclude our studies with a broader exploration of how Americans are remembering disaster, in particular our memorializing practices, focusing especially, but not exclusively, on the remembering of 9/11.
READING:
 Solnit, A Paradise Built in Hell, Part IV: “The City Transfigured”
 Moodle: o Marita Sturken, “Introduction” and “Tourism and ‘Sacred Ground’: The
Space of Ground Zero,” in Tourists of History: Memory, Kitsch, and
Consumerism from Oklahoma City to Ground Zero o Marita Sturken, “Memorializing Absence,” from the Social Science
Research Council Essay Forum, “Ten Years after September 11” o Alison Landsberg, “Introduction: Memory, Modernity and Mass
Culture,” in Prosthetic Memory: The Transformation of American
Remembrance in the Age of Mass Culture o Erika Doss, “Statue Mania to Memorial Mania” in Memorial Mania
 Visit the 9/11 Memorial Website at: www.http://911Memorial.org
. Then locate and analyze a website selling “9/11 memorabilia.” (A quick Google search will yield plenty of options.)
 Also visit the website for conspiracy theorists at http://www.911truth.org/
Friday, April 26 Panel Presentations
During the final four class sessions we will have the chance to hear presentations from each member of the class, organized into panels. Each of you will also be responsible for responding to one of your classmates’ presentations.
Monday, April 29 Panel Presentations
Friday, May 3 Panel Presentations
Monday, May 6 Panel Presentations
th
18

At the request of the Academic Dean I am including the following emergency response information:
Please review university emergency preparedness and response procedures posted at www.pugetsound.edu/emergency/ . There is a link on the university home page. Familiarize yourself with hall exit doors and the designated gathering area for your class and laboratory buildings.
If building evacuation becomes necessary (e.g. earthquake), meet your instructor at the designated gathering area so she/he can account for your presence. Then wait for further instructions. Do not return to the building or classroom until advised by a university emergency response representative.
If confronted by an act of violence, be prepared to make quick decisions to protect your safety. Flee the area by running away from the source of danger if you can safely do so. If this is not possible, shelter in place by securing classroom or lab doors and windows, closing blinds, and turning off room lights. Stay low, away from doors and windows, and as close to the interior hallway walls as possible. Wait for further instructions.
19