San Diego (all of it) is on fire

If you are reading this from another part of the country (i.e., not san diego),  you may not know -- or not have known until today -- that San Diego is very much on fire.  Much more than Malibu.  As lovely Tricia (you can also look here, here and here) has said, news reports around the nation (particularly on tv?) have until recently been scant in their mention of the SD fires, focusing instead on rich Malibu and the celebrities affected.  I didn't realize that was happening and, like Tricia, was wondering why some of my friends living away from SD hadn't called to see how I was doing (I got a call from Nada in NY last night and she was shocked to hear how bad the fires were.  She didn't even know how much San Diego was burning.  And those of you who know her know that Nada is a news-a-holic).  Now I'm seeing that it's only now that people across the nation are learning that the fires are huge in San Diego.

I am okay, and so is my family.   The fire came close to mom's house Monday night and we "pseudo-evacuated" :-).  Monday night I stayed at mom's house, but couldn't sleep.  I was checking up on the Harris fire, which seemed to be approaching mom's house.  It felt like there was a lot of activity outside too. When I looked out the window, I saw neighbors packing their cars, many cars driving up and down the streets, and a layer of smoke seeming to come closer and closer to covering us.  Meanwhile everyone in mom's house was sleeping.  I went to the bathroom, looked out the window and good lord!  I could see the fire!!  I went to the backyard and there was a red glowing wall behind it.  The fire looked very close -- it was San Miguel mountain on fire.  Woke up mom, she freaked out of course.  Our neighbors were all packing their cars, and like good social beings, we did the same :-).  We went to my apt in La Jolla w/ the dogs while my stepdad and uncle stayed behind for if any official evacuation call came through.  It never did, thank god.  But that fire was close!  Since then I've been keeping updated on the Harris fire, which has seemed to come close and then move away from mom's house (you can get updates here, and here . Also, here is a good map that gives a good indication of how big the fires are, although it may be a little inaccurate: yesterday it was showing that my mom's street should be evacuating, but they never got any official call to do so).

Now here's what began to irritate me based on my initial observations: until today a lot of national news coverage that did discuss San Diego focused exclusively on the fires in North County and the multi-million dollar homes that have burned down there.  It is as if there is not even a fire in south San Diego.  While I recognize that the Witch fire up there is bigger, and has burned more acres, and is therefore definitely a big concern, I do not like that more emphasis is placed on rich people's losses and none is placed on the losses of lower-income families.  Rich people's homes may be more valuable monetarily but in no other way are they more valuable than other people's homes.  And further (further!) I'd bet those homes are monetarily worth a smaller proportion of their owners' incomes than are the homes worth in proportion to incomes of people south of the 8 freeway and east of the 15 (i.e., those affected by the Harris fire).  Who do you think, on average, has struggled more to purchase their home?  The guy who lives in Rancho Santa Fe or the guy who lives in Chula Vista, Spring Valley, Tecate or Jamul?  Also, exclusive focus on losses by the No. County fires (and I know there have been a lot. Very sad!) make it seem like none have been experienced in south and east San Diego.  But this isn't the case: 200 homes destroyed, 250 homes damaged, 25 injuries and 1 (officially reported) death caused by the Harris fire (see here for more info).

But yet, over the last two days the reporters on tv stand by the burnt down multi-million home, lamenting that such and such house cost such and such million dollars.  News articles report on the dollar value of homes lost in North County.  I have yet to see a reporter on tv stand by a burnt down home affected by the Harris fire, lamenting its family's loss (I should say here, though, that I haven't watched much tv. Of what I have watched, though, I have not seen that).  

I am not saying that a rich family has less to be worried and sad about than a lower-income family when losing their home.  What I am pointing to is, what seems to me, to be an obsession with property over personal loss.  Actually, the first person to really direct me to this was a friend in grad school, who sent me a really interesting article about the difference between the USA's and Cuba's response to natural disasters; the USA focuses on saving property while Cuba focuses on saving lives (unfortunately I cant find the article right now, but if I do I'll post it here).  Please don't read this and think that I don't care about losing property.  It is a horrible situation for all the people who lose their homes -- I was really anxious about my mom possibly losing her home to the fire, and we'd be devastated if it happened.  But I disagree that a family should be given more attention, or sympathy, just because they lost a house that was worth "so much money!" (here is an example from the LA Times...,price of homes lost in No County mentioned, Harris Fire not mentioned)

Other news articles don't seem to focus exclusively on one area when reporting on where the fires are, but I have noticed that the anecdotes they give of specific families, etc most exclusively come from No. County (Rancho Santa Fe, Rancho Bernardo, Poway, etc).  It also seems that any looters or people who refuse to evauate that the news articles reports on come only from south or east San Diego.  I don't believe that the only looters and people who use firefighter resources by refusing to evacuate are in south or east San Diego.  What do you think? 

I don't want anyone to read this and think that I don't care about No. County.  I am very worried about No. County, which is facing the by far largest fire, which has burned near 200,000 acres, damaged at least 375 homes and burnt down 805 homes.  It's also apparently only 1% contained.  Shit.

But here's one article from the Huffington Post (huffingtonpost.com) that also cites the limited news coverage of the fire and its effects in south San Diego.  I do want to note, though, that it was reading the articles about the fire on the Huffington Post (despite its supposed socially critical slant) that initially sparked my attention to the relatively little discussion of the fires in south San Diego in the news.  (I have searched for these articles but can't find them.  Am I being paranoid to think the Post has removed those articles when people started to point out the imbalance in attention to the fires in San Diego? Maybe I'll keep looking later). 

But, okay, now the Post is taking the (appropriate in my view) critical line of the media's coverage.  But in this same article, I'm noticing what may be another trend that's starting to emerge: the comparison of this disaster in southern California to the natural disaster that hit New Orleans last year.  This guy doesn't exactly do a direct comparison. After speculating that the only reason Bush and FEMA are interested in quickly assisting San Diego is because rich white people are losing their homes, he oddly celebrates the charity San Diegans are willing to give (somehow Bush and FEMA are being charitable only because rich white people are being displaced, while San Diegans are being charitable because, well, we're just "good people").  Then he says, "One person, displaced to my couch last night, stated he was almost embarrassed to witness the amount of charity being poured out in the midst of this disaster, considering the Katrina debacle, and all the "snags" that went along with that."  Indirect comparison, yes, but a comparison that congratulates San Diegans for doing what New Orleans, he implies, didn't do: take care of each other.  He immediately says, "It's nice to see that even if FEMA had decided to sit on its thumbs for three days before stepping foot over here, the residents of San Diego decided to take care of themselves."  And New Orleans residents "decided" not to?  This isn't the only place the comparison is being made, and prolly not the only place it will be made.  But lets think about this here.

San Diego is a rich city.  It's also a conservative city.  Rich white New Orleans certainly showed racism and classism, and of course lack of unity, when they blocked fleeing lower-income, predominantly black New Orleans from entering their upscale neighborhoods.  But I wonder, if the only fire in the county was the Harris fire, would the outpouring of support be the same? (see here for another super cheesy celebration of how "great" we are)  Ok, maybe it's not fair for me to speculate, so I'll go elsewhere.  Biggest thing to me is that not everyone in San Diego is affected by the fire (aside from dirty air) and so there are more people who are able to go to the store and buy things to donate.  When there's a hurricane, though, who's gonna be able to run to the local store to buy things?  And who would you "donate" it to other than yourself, who is also being affected by the hurricane? duh. 

But more?  This celebration of a "unified" San Diego wipes over the racism that pervades this city.  And the comparison of this (imaginary) San Diego to New Orleans during Katrina wipes over the racism that led to the complete destruction of New Orleans.  It gives an image of a utopic San Diego, where we love and support everyone the same, and that's why, it's suggested, we'll make it in the end (which, I'm thinking, we will.  But I'm thinking we will make it because this same author is right in this respect: we prolly will get a lot of federal support because it's a lot of rich white (republican) people who are being affected).  So it's not because of our love and support that we'll make it, but rather because of those (are you ready?!  Here it comes!) hidden structural forces (come on, I am a sociologist!) that work in our favor.  And it's not because of a lack of this unity that New Orleans residents suffered so much and still have not recovered their losses.  We know the federal response to New Orleans was ridiculously slow and incomplete.  That response, though, has never changed (although, I wonder if it has for the rich white folk there). 

So once again it's the same old line: "We" make it because we work for ourselves.  "They" don't make it because they don't work for themselves.  The image of "us" is one of an independent, self-reliant community.  The image of "them", in contrast, is one of an inept and dependent one. 

I'll definitely keep an eye on how this plays out.