Similarly to the Gorky excerpts from last class, “Voices from Chernobyl” on numerous occasions focuses on the warlike interactions between humans and nature in the 20th century Soviet Union. While the canal construction depicted in Gorky’s work focuses on a war with humans on the offensive, the Chernobyl disaster puts humans on the defense as they are faced with an invisible threat rarely encountered in the past.
Unlike conventional conflict, where the aggressors and defenders are clearly defined, the battle lines of Chernobyl are not clearly drawn given the nature of the disaster. As one of the individuals who returned to Chernobyl after the catastrophe claims, “Chernobyl is like the war of all wars. There’s nowhere to hide. Not underground, not underwater, not in the air” (45). Interestingly, although many of the people affected by this disaster have connections to previous wars, like World War Two, they approach the radiation with the exact same outlook despite the foe fundamentally being different. Radiation is a foreign opponent to people living near the reactor given its invisibility, the scientific knowledge required to understand it, and the inability to escape its destructive power. The uncertainty surrounding the radiation is highlighted not only by a boy’s question of “what’s radiation?,” but also by its characterization as “like God” (everywhere and invisible) (50-51). Given the unique warlike situation, some Chernobyl area residents adopt the steadfast attitude that “we lived through the war, now it’s radiation. Even if we have to bury ourselves, we’re not going!” (37). Not knowing how else to respond, some resort to holding onto their land and believing that where they currently are is where they need to be (38).
Ironically, while the Gorky excerpts depict a warlike approach to control and conquer nature, the attempt to completely control one of the smallest components of the natural world (the atom) prompts a retaliatory attack from nature itself in “Voices From Chernobyl.” Perhaps as a sign that humans are overstepping their bounds, Chernobyl serves as a reminder that the natural world is “not anyone’s land,” and that the disaster is only “God [taking] it back” (58). Perhaps this view of the catastrophe explains why some refused to evacuate, though it would be interesting to further discuss what prompted some people to think that their lives became better because of the fallout.