(Untitled)

[gwynraven]

I'm reading this book, a mystery that's set in a small town in Louisiana. This fictional town is in the process of recovering from the devastating fictional hurricane Bernardine. It is quite clear that Bernardine is a stand-in for Katrina

Comments

[harkalark]

I agree. It would be like writing a book about the nation's response to the terrorist attacks of, let's see, October 14, 2001 when the planes hit the.. Jim Smith Towers in New York. Why not just talk about the real thing when everyone knows that's what you're talking about anyway?

[corivax]

Maybe people feel it's less disrespectful to use an imaginary event? It might seem less liek one is capitalizing on the suffering of others.

[gwynraven]

Then change something. To take a real event and call it by a imaginary name seems much more disrespectful to me. You're still capitalising on the real event but you're not even honouring the suffering of those who actually went through it. By calling it by an imaginary name you're denying the real event at the same time you're capitalising on the obvious association.

[tewok]

I'm an outsider -- I've only been in Louisiana twice, both times decades ago. So, take what I say with a shaker of salt. And remember that I'm not disagreeing with you.

Traumatic events affect different people in different ways. It's very possible this awful find the name Katrina too emotionally charge, or is worried about those who do. I expect there are people who couldn't read a book about Katrina, but are fine with a book about Bernardine, just as there are those who will be alienated by Bernardine. Maybe the editor forced the change for fear that the publisher would be accused of trying to profit from Katrina. Maybe this is the only way the author can deal with her experiences with Katrina.

I see your point and I agree with you, but there are (imo) valid reasons for an author doing what was done in this book.

[cissa]

I tend to agree. I think if one is not offering a twist, it'd be better to tie the book into real history- 9/11, Katrina, etc.

I'd suppose the authors that don't are refusing because they don't want to do something historically accurate; they want to do their fiction... but in that case, I'd think they could change something.

This whole situation was made more real to me recently, when I'd read a book based on devastating earthquakes in the Mississippi Valley... a few weeks before there was such an earthquake, albeit thankfully less major. Obviously the book was written before the event... but it still made me think about the connection between such things.