Human Essay: Pale Rider

 The Morality of Mortality

Over humanity’s collective history, some of the most disastrous large-scale events have been shrouded in the unknown. One of the most common fears present throughout time is the act of not knowing, a person’s inability to grasp the full extent of a situation due to a lack of evidence, information, and experience. This comes into play in human against human tragedy, but also in the case of a “human against nature” event such as a pandemic or natural disaster. The scenario of pandemics causing mass panic and upset isn’t foreign to us in current times due to the ever-present Coronavirus-19 pandemic, but the 1918 “Spanish” Flu is another example of a wide sweep of uninformed disease. In Pale Rider: The 1918 Spanish Flu and How It Changed the World, Laura Spinney paints a picture of one of the most deadly pandemics in recent centuries, following the sickness itself as it swept the globe. Within her book, Spinney elaborates on the history of a disease that is often overlooked, although its death toll was at least twice that of the war that overshadows it in history books. In the context of our question regarding the presence of humanity in this text, while Spinney doesn’t focus on a specific person or group, the presence of humanity permeates the text’s very core. To be human within Spinney’s context is to have mortality and the ability to process and interpret that which is beyond your lifespan and experience.

One of the many reasons for the near-erasure of the 1918 flu’s history was the presence of not one, but two world wars happening near the time of this pandemic. In this case, many surviving civilians influenced by the plague’s wide reach chose to focus on something explainable, as many of the facts behind this epidemic are still unknown. In the 1940s, more research was done on the effects of the flu itself, but to those having just survived it, twenty years is more than enough time to make the decision of suppressing their memories of this event that wrapped the globe. Within the text, those introduced or mentioned, even in large groups, are defined by their mortality and willingness to remember and process the story that Spinney is seeking to tell. Many grotesque and graphic depictions of the pandemic itself aid in the reader’s understanding of these people, such as Spinney’s mention that, “as long as you were conscious, therefore, you watched death enter at your fingertips and fill you up” (Spinney, 2017, p. 45). It is not difficult to understand why watching over fifty million people worldwide meet that fate would result in not only generational trauma but an inclination to process the more presentable tragedy at the time, the war. 

In the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, one with a significantly lower death toll, the urge to hide these situations is still present. Many people within society seek a “return to normal,” a nearly impossible feat in the current time frame, especially since these people are often the ones foregoing vaccines for comfortable ignorance. This situation is where dehumanization comes into play, in the case of both pandemics. This dehumanization isn’t waged at a person or ethnic group, but at the large percentage of those affected by the tragedy at play. When any large-scale catastrophe is minimized, those affected by it are reduced to unnamed casualties. While examining those against COVID-19 precautions for any reason, it is important to remember the names they are covering up in order to do so. This statement does not address the harm these outliers could be bringing upon themselves and their communities, but they are often willing to be selfish in a way directly opposed to Spinney’s mention of selfishness within the text.

Spinney states that, within the context of being a citizen in the 1918 Spanish Flu, “your best chance of survival was to be utterly selfish…jealously guard your hoard of food and water, and ignore all pleas for help” (Spinney, 2017, p. 116). While this selfishness aligns very well with the Center for Disease Control’s recommended social distancing procedures, the selfishness most often seen in the current day is the opposite, a complete disregard for those around you, with the mentality of “once I get the virus, I’ll be over it and therefore immune.” While this attitude isn’t factually incorrect, it ignores the effects of being an asymptomatic carrier, or possibly creating a domino effect targeting those closest to the person reentering the world “normally.”

It is our responsibility, both in the case of the 1918 Spanish Flu and our current pandemic, to remember the effects of our actions both scientifically and socially. Helpful actions like social distancing are highly recommended in both cases, and a large portion of modern citizens align with CDC guidelines for safety at this time. However, there are always outliers, and it is our job to attempt to understand the situations taking place, and learn what our parts are in maintaining the collective well-being of our societies. It is our duty as members of society to seek an understanding of what ails society as a whole, especially in cases that are easy to dismiss, such as an invisible, unknown disease. While I cannot sympathize with those who act out against the guidelines aimed at keeping them and their communities safe, I can understand their fear stemming from a lack of information and guidance. Overall, in both the 1918 flu and the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, humanity is demonstrated through the effects of the disease on a population and culture, most notably in record-keeping and rule-following. Learning from the 1918 flu’s erasure, the current pandemic should be documented extensively, which it has been, and used as an example for future generations of the importance of understanding.