In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

C Ch ha ap pt te er r 1 11 1 Place, Race and Displacement Following Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans LISA R. RAWLINGS INTRODUCTION Derived from the Latin platea (street) and Greek plateia/platys (broad), place refers to “a particular area or locality; region . . . the part of space occupied by a person or thing; situation.” (Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary 1370). Geographically, place is the site where life is rooted and sustained. Place retains meaningful organization to the people who reside there and provides links to other places. Place is an appropriated space (Easthope 2004). Contemporary concepts of space include broader conceptual frameworks, including social and psychological structures. For example, psychological concepts of space portray the individual and his/her adjustment to space. Coping with change of milieu generates stress reactions for many people. Understanding the meaning of place and the sense of “loss of place” becomes important for understanding personal responses to disasters and displacement. Experiences by Gulf Coast residents following Hurricane Katrina included this sense of loss. This chapter focuses on the impact of Katrina on the unique place of New Orleans and the implications of the widespread displacement it spawned. SPACE, LOSS, AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PLACE Perhaps the single most dramatic economic, social and demographic shift in recent American history occurred in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The impact, the scope of the dislocation, and breadth of the displacement spawned a “Katrina Diaspora” that included an estimated one-million-plus people nationwide. The poor, the Black and the vulnerable were disproportionately affected, and bore the greatest long-term burden of the failed response. Comprehending the impact of Hurricane Katrina on Gulf Coast residents, especially lower income, minority , and special populations requires an understanding of the historical consequences of slavery, previous experience with disasters, race relations, government mistrust, and contemporary concepts of place taken from several disciplines, that underscore place as a central component of individual’s lives. Fullilove’s (1996; 2004) discussion of the psychology of place rests on the assumption that people strive for a “. . . sense of belonging, which is necessary for psychosocial well-being, [and] depends on strong, welldeveloped relationships with nurturing places” (1996, p. 1517). In a relational context, place is the “psychosocial milieu” that consists of the social influence, interactions and transactions, particularly as they relate to inclusion and/or isolation. Massey (1995) suggests that social relatedness is inherent in place. Sacks (2001) describes place as “the primary means by which we are able to use space and turn it into a humanized landscape,” (p. 233) which reinforces the human interactions concept. Place develops special meaning through social processes (Low and Altman 1992). 148 Lisa R. Rawlings Paasi, suggests that place is the setting for the life story (1991), suggesting that place has individualized meaning. Thus, this “personal ‘sense of place’ is shaped by the person’s past, as well as by the person’s attitudes , beliefs and actions in the present” (Fullilove 1518). Culture often plays a role in shaping how individuals appropriate the environment. Additionally, Mock (1993) suggests that place should aid people in finding existential meaning in life, a symbolic role, that becomes critical when examining the emotional impact of displacement . In sum, Fullilove (1996) contends that place “provides the physical structures within which human relations unfurl” (p. 1518) or the “emotional ecosystem that attaches us to the environment” (Fullilove 2004, p. 17). Place creates the backdrop for life; it influences the individual or community associated with it. Place is also shaped by physical, economic and social factors. It establishes continuity and a sense of equilibrium while defining normality for each individual or community within it. Place provides the “external realities within which people shape their existence” (Fullilove 1996, p. 1518). These conceptualizations of place suggest a mutuality of the person-in-environment construct sustained through key psychological processes: familiarity, attachment and identity. These processes are overlapping and mutually inclusive, as are the consequences of their disruption. FAMILIARITY AND DISORIENTATION Place provides people with a cognitive map or gestalt of their surroundings, shaping how they move through space (Wallace 1957). Landmarks, landscapes and community icons are markers of place, each with their respective and collective histories. They lend a sense of continuity and equilibrium in the lives of residents and shape how people secure food, where people find shelter, where they seek comfort and refuge and whom they can trust. Freeman (1984) speaks to people’s need for a stable place: “Stability allows for people to develop...

Share