Saturday, March 12, 2011

Relativity of Tragedy

At what point does tragedy become an annoyance? Consider the following scenario, the consequences of which I am still experiencing. It's 2 am. I am drifting off to sleep inside of my tent listening to the rhythmic breathing of my bedmate and the ocassional hum of a passing vehicle on the nearby highway. Suddenly, the night is punctuated by the audible evidence of a wreck, the sound of which will haunt me for some time. Based on the proximity of the crash and the screeching tires preceding it, I can assume that at least one victim came from these very campgrounds and thus, was likely drunk.

This is trivial of course because I am neither a victim, nor a helper in the scenario. However, these are the thoughts now puncuating my active, sleepless brain. Ocassionally, I can hear the odd passing car running over debris. The direction of travel for these cars and their lack of reducing speed tells me where and how the impact occured. Now I have a picture of the wreck in my head on which to apply the sounds of the various goings on. "It's going to be hard to go to sleep" I tell myself.

However, as minutes pass, the world quiets down. I tell myself that it must not have been as bad as I thought. I relax and start to slowly drift off again. Then, in the distance, the long-awaited report of an approaching siren. I perk my ears up and am ready to start gathering information again. One cop and one ambulance show up, the cop first. However, this is not enough to hold my interest and, eventually I start to drift off once again. I am actively awoken by the next report on the developing situation on the highway. The unmistakable deafening whir of a helicopter's rotors roaring directly above the campground. The wreck was more serious than I thought. At this point, I've lost all curiosity about the event happening nearby in the face of shear annoyance over my lack of sleep.

Herein is where my point lays. At what point does tragedy become an annoyance? It seems almost crass to even consider yourself over another's grief. Based on the helicopters time on the ground, I reasoned that it was more likely a specialist had been flown in to help revive someone, or some other outcome with equally tragic circumstances. I think the answer to my question is found in an idea closest resembling Einstein's Relativity. As with time for Einstein, tragedy becomes comedy or annoyance relative to your position to the incident. I have no personal stake in the wreck nor anyone involved in it. The extent to which I am connected to it is its effects on my sleep. Thus, it is not inappropriate for me to feel anger or lack of apathy towards the victims of the crash, because that is the extent of my involvement, much like the drivers on the road which are now being allowed to continue on their way since the helicopter has left. We are allowed to be angry at the event or more specifically, the unnamed driver who caused it, because that is our relative position to the incident.



2 comments:

  1. I get more annoyed at the idiot who was driving recklessly (or drunk) and caused the wreck. That's the one I vent toward when I'm stuck in a traffic jam behind the carnage he's created.

    Too bad the campground is so close to 290!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think the purpose of that post was misinterpreted. Of course, if life was lost then that is objectively tragic. What I was considering here was whether or not the average camper, with no personal ties to anyone involved, could be justifiably annoyed at the situation. In establishing this, I was hoping to examine the mechanism by which we create apathy for these kinds of occurences.

    It seems rediculous on its face to cry at a movie. The characters are fictional. The situation is fictional. Yet, we still cry every time they shoot Bambi's mother or when Atreu's horse sinks into the swamp. We have this apathy for individuals that have nothing to do with us.

    This is an issue I've been contemplating for several weeks. The other night, when that wreck occured, it gave me an alternate perspective on the problem.

    ReplyDelete