In his article, “Denaturalizing disaster: A social autopsy of the 1995 Chicago heat wave”, Eric Klinenberg addresses various factors that he feels are significant in considering the damage and destruction caused by the Chicago heat wave of 1995. He takes a very different approach in evaluating the damage by taking a natural disaster and owing its drastic effects not to just nature, but to also the socioeconomic circumstances that he believes further escalated the catastrophe. He elaborates on this by stating that some features of “new urban poverty” that have contributed to the damage included “the literal social isolation of poor seniors…in the city’s most violent areas”, “the degradation and rising conflict in urban hotel residences”, and “the changes in public service delivery and the threats to the public health” (Klinemberg 240). Essentially, Klinenberg argues that the reason the Chicago heat wave affected so many people and the reason that it affected the KINDS of people that it did, namely low-income African Americans among others, is owed due to socioeconomic reasons, including the location of the communities and the availability of resources to those communities that could have been of substantial aid during the time.

While Klinenberg’s argument greatly qualifies and even undermines the natural disaster’s responsibility on the damage, he proposes a very important and culturally viable point that we must consider. Even if a natural disaster were to hit, it is no wonder why low-income, underdeveloped, and poorly supported areas and communities suffer more than those that are in wealthy, developed, heavily supported areas. Selected media coverage of certain areas and communities over others does not help the situation. It has become a social truth that this is how our world works, but this does not make it any less severe or worthy of disregard. This is a serious issue that must be faced and dealt with, because the longer that such issues are kept under a cloak, the worse the problem gets.

– Nadera Rahman