The perfect storm

Who hasn’t recently heard – or said – that the situation in Israel is reminiscent of rearranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic? Cliches succinctly express complex experiences which are shared by speaker and listener, thus creating both understanding and solidarity; research has shown that in time of crisis, of complexity, use of cliches increases. Israel’s seeming inability to extract itself from it sproblems therefore explains frequent references to the Titanic, an engineering wonder which was deemed unsinkable but did not survive an encounter with an iceberg.

There were certainly flaws in the Titanic’s conduct: warnings which were not heeded, travel at high speed in an area with icebergs, binoculars locked away, too few lifeboats and inefficient use of them. A difference in any of those would probably have lessened the impact, saved lives.

In 2000, three years after the blockbuster film about the Titanic, another American film about a disaster in the North Atlantic was released. “The Perfect Storm” soon joined its predecessor to become a cliché. To my mind, it better describes Israel’s current situation. While the luxury liner encountered – literally – one problem, an iceberg, the Andrea Gail, a swordfishing boat, met with one problem after another, all set against its captain’s excess confidence, which led to bad decisions and to fatal results.

Following a disappointing catch, the Andrea Gail embarked on another expedition. Led by an ambitious captain, its exhausted six-man crew set out from Gloucester, Massachusetts, in order to fill their pockets and also to prove to others that they are not failures. The voyage was outside the usual hunting grounds, out of season, far from other boats, and left behind it a developing tropical storm. In a sentence – due to personal considerations, the boat’s leader willingly chose vulnerability and isolation, while ignoring rules and warnings.

The yield was weak and the boat traveled even further, succeeded, and filled its stores. Then the ice machine broke and the goods could not be frozen. Despite the storm which was growing between the boat and the shore, it was decided to rush back. Voices which opposed risking all in order to save the fish were silenced. The vessel continued, ignoring warnings from other ships. Among new problems which soon arose, the wind broke the radio antenna, leaving the fishermen isolated, lacking all contact with others or guidance from them.

Giant waves, strong winds and the confluence of two powerful weather fronts, that indeed is a force majeure. Given his vast experience, the captain may have been able to confront each of these separately, or better – he would avoided them. But ambition, excess confidence and disregard for warnings resulted in wrong decisions. Every misstep further limited options, exposing the boat and its crew to new risks. A series of separate crises thus turned into one big disaster.

The book and subsequent film lent a term from meteorology to other areas. A perfect storm has become a cliché to describe a set of circumstances which come together to create insurmountable situations. Indeed, the storm itself could not have been more storm-like, a more perfect storm. But caution and better judgement would have averted the outcome.

The viewer, frustrated and fearful, cannot but cry out at the screen: Be careful! You are too small to face the storm on your own, with none to rescue you! Put personal considerations aside, reach out to other boats, heed them! It is not too late to avert disaster!

But the screen, like Israel’s leadership, as it continues on its self-destructive course, remains oblivious, unresponsive.