In the aftermath of one of the worst hurricanes in history, naming the storm became a quite controversial topic. With CNN banning the coined phrase "Frankenstorm" made popular by meteorologist Jim Cisco. From Hurricane Sandy to Hurricane Exxon, this hurricane is having a bad case of an identity crisis.
But if you're someone like me, the first question that popped into my head was, "Does it even matter?" However, according to this fascinating article post, there's a lot to be learned from Hurricane Sandy's name.
Hurricane Sandy, in fact had 4 different names:
1. Frankenstorm
2. Sandy
3. Megastorm
4. Hurricane Exxon
Starting with the name Frankenstorm, a combination of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and mother nature's wrath. The name indicates what happens when human error combines with mother nature. According to Bill Nye (Yes, the Science Guy), although climate change does not cause hurricanes, it sure makes them worse. In other words, the name is far from just a Halloween nickname, but it prompts us to recognize how this hurricane is in part due to our own mistakes.
Then there's Sandy. Following in the footsteps of the centuries old tradition of naming hurricanes, Sandy was the lucky winner. Yet, does using the name Sandy really do anything? Well, if anything, hearing the name Sandy flashes images of Olivia Newton-John or even the dog from "Annie." In other words, giving the hurricane such a common name anthropomorphizes the natural disaster. Putting names and faces to the hurricane creates a more emotional connection and allows us to talk about the hurricane in the context of our the ones we love and care about.
However, Tina Rosenberg of the New York Times reminds us, the cost of Sandy just this year might amount to nearly $50 billion. That's some major bucks, which explains this next name, Megastorm. While Sandy's impact is catastrophic, the name also reminds us the money, energy, and time that goes into "saving the world." Maybe rather than having to save it all the time, making certain choices to avoid that path would create efficiency. 
Yet, my personal favorite has to be Hurricane Exxon. As Bill Mckibben explains, "Hurricanes should be named after fossil fuel companies." As of this year only, fossil fuel companies have spent more than $150 million blocking solutions to the climate crisis that affect the companies. Naming the hurricanes after fossil fuel companies would directly associate mother nature's wrath to the big fossil fuel companies.While we don't realize it, naming makes a significant difference to what narrative we subscribe to, whether it's the belief that it's a human made error or it's the fault of fossil fuel companies. However, could the naming process be considered as a waste of time? After all, the focus might not be what we call it, but how we react to it? Could it also serve as a dividing force in a time when unity and teamwork is necessary?
Discuss!
This is a really interesting blog post. However, one question is for Frankenstorm, you said that humans interfering with Mother Nature causes the hurricane. So is pollution the human error, did it cause the hurricane? And is pollution the cause of other hurricanes as well? Also, do you know how they name the hurricane? Do they pick a famous person or a friend that the forecasters know?
ReplyDeleteWhat if we had called this hurricane Hurricane Unite? Now I know this doesn't sound very good, but consider it just so I can make a point. If this had been the name prior to the hurricane actually hitting, could it have preemptively ensured more unity in the aftermath of the hurricane (not that unity was lacking)? Does calling the hurricane Frankenstorm force people to prepare more for it? I feel that the name is important not just for how we look back at it but also for how we look forward to it. Perhaps had Katrina had a more ominous name, more would have evacuated. Of course this is an unsubstantiated thought, but nonetheless it is evident that names can have that impact (otherwise why so many different names?). Finally, who gets to choose the name? If I come up with a name for the hurricane, no one will really care. If Al Roker coins a term, people will look up. What makes someone enough of a figure to be listened to in terms of naming impacts the name itself and creates a further connotation.
ReplyDeleteThe point that naming seriously influences human perception is one that expands to all aspects of our society. As the English language evolve, certain names gain different connotations. For example, there are many different names for a house. It could be called a house (neutral connotation), a home (positive connotation), or, depending on the size, a McMansion (negative connotation). Words are used as a medium to communicate aspects of reality, but it is strange how influential they can be on reality as defined by human perception. You bring up a lot of interesting ideas.
ReplyDelete