Abstract
ABSTRACTThe article asks whether disasters that destroy life but leave the material infrastructure relatively intact tend to prompt communal coping focusing on loss, while disasters that destroy significant material infrastructure tend to prompt coping through restoration/rebuilding. After comparing memorials to New Zealand’s Christchurch earthquake and Pike River mine disasters, we outline circumstances in which collective restorative endeavor may be grassroots, organized from above, or manipulated, along with limits to effective restoration. We conclude that bereavement literature may need to take restoration more seriously, while disaster literature may need to take loss more seriously.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
