Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Matthew Desmond?ethnographer, sociology graduate stu dent, and wildland firefighter?describes the disturbing moment that led him to spend his fourth and final year with the Elk River engine crew, both fighting fires and asking questions. Peter, one of the crew members, had mentioned to the others that Rick Lupe, a wildland firefighter who was severely burned in the Sawtooth Mountain prescribed fire one month earlier, had just died. The other crew members paused for a moment. Well, Peter added, turning away, he lasted about a month. And with that, crew members went back to what they were doing. As Desmond says, Lupe's death didn't seem to bother or perplex them in the least. But it disturbed me deeply ... (pp. 3-4). Desmond wanted to learn how firefighters understand risk and death and how organizations get firefighters to stand in harm's way and stay there. His answer, developed in eight well-written chapters and a superb set of notes, is that the practical logic shaped by a rural, masculine, blue-collar upbringing (general habitus) predisposes people to embrace the specific habitus of the Forest Service, with its equivalent focus on individual ism (don't trust anyone to for you). The meshing of these two sets of dispositions results in a durable, genera tive paradigm that guides thoughts and behaviors involving danger, risk, and death. That guidance is articulated and rein forced by informal, often crude socialization at the crew base (chapters 3 and 4) and more formal socialization through learning about fire behavior, 10 fire orders, and 18 situations that signal watch out (chapters 5 and 6).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2008 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: