Citation

Dynes RR. Int. J. Mass Emerg. Disasters 1999; 17(2): 211-215.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1999, International Sociological Association, International Research Committee on Disasters)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

When I was asked to comment on Drabek's Human System Responses to Disaster (1986), I was, at the time, involved in exploring disasters in the 18th Century. It was in the 18th Century when there was the first major attempt to develop an encompassing encyclopedia. This was also the time when there was discussion about the possibilities of a social science and, paradoxically, the first application of social science knowledge about disaster. My focus, then, is a short essay on the sociology of encyclopedias, historically and comparatively. The foray to the 18th Century will be short but will provide a background for the discussion of Drabek. This excursion is intended to make the point that creating an encyclopedia in a period of intellectual ferment can be a creative act, but not all encyclopedias are born in such a context. Most other encyclopedias reflect a static past, useful for historical accuracy but devoid of imagination. With that point made, we can shift to Drabek. In his paper, Drabek revisits decisions made earlier. In creating an inventory, a decision to include is also a decision to exclude something else. Each set of categories excludes another. Certainly, there are times when an encyclopedia can pull new ideas together, as both Diderot and Drabek did. But there is also a time when an encyclopedia only codifies outmoded ideas, presenting them as universal truths. In the future, unconventional "hazards" will impact non-traditional social units. Standardizing formats could delimit flexibility and creativity. Creating a format to deal with the past can become an iron cage in conceptualizing the future. Unfortunately, such a possibility only becomes apparent when we look back.