5 Conclusion
Representations contribute to social reality by formalizing content that can change
ideas and behaviors. They appear during the development of a technical system but
also further downstream, especially if the development leads to debate in civil
society. The issues that are at stake with respect to nuclear energy have caused deep
ideological divisions and sparked renewed controversy, coinciding with the various
accidents that have occurred in the sector. Nuclear accidents occupy a special place
in the story, in the sense that their effects concern not only the industrial context but
also living beings as a whole.
Cultural objects address this immeasurable dimension of the disaster. While they
have multiple uses and purposes, what they have in common is that they manifest
mourning for technical power and the dramatic consequences of nuclear accidents.
Their value for the researcher is that they make it possible to examine the (more or
less standardized) formalization of the representation. An analysis of the aestheticization process helps towards a better understanding of how representational
elements are realized in a particular cultural system. It is this real-world realization
that forms the perimeter of the study of objects.
Although research based on documentaries cannot aim for completeness, it
provides food for thought about the impact of Fukushima on representations. The
event does not seem to have upset the representational system of nuclear accidents.
Films describe a world that could be a duplication of Chernobyl. A radioactive
world, which is the demonstration of mankind’s technological pride: abandoned
territories, sacrificed populations, destinies that have been changed in a Faustian
pact with the atom. Behind these images and words, the unwavering shadow of the
sarcophagus of the Chernobyl plant looms. The Soviet accident remains the great
caesura which changed representations. It created new sensitivities, new ways to
show the invisible and say the unsayable. Chernobyl created a mythology, symbolic
references, practices, a whole range of signs, almost a language that subsequent
documentaries borrowed from to tell the story of Fukushima.
But the representation of Fukushima is not just the transposition of a Japanese
Chernobyl. If the central core appears to be intact, new elements appear in the
peripheral system.
18 Fukushima shows that the major technological powers are not
safe from a nuclear accident. The idea is not new: the Three Mile Island accident
demonstrated this in 1979. But low environmental emissions, skillful government
communication,
19 and the limited means of the anti-nuclear movement have
reduced the impact of the accident in France. The scope of Fukushima is very
different. The event reactivated the public debate, including elements such as the
myth of safety, the nightmare of waste, the exploitation of workers, the nucleocracy, and the desire for social autonomy. While Fukushima has not buried nuclear
18
Caution should be exercised and only broader research will test these hypotheses.
19
After Three Mile Island, French Prime Minister Raymond Barre announced that “The same
scenario that took place in the United States could happen in France” (Le Monde, April 3, 1979).
What Cultural Objects Say About Nuclear Accidents …
153
Representations contribute to social reality by formalizing content that can change
ideas and behaviors. They appear during the development of a technical system but
also further downstream, especially if the development leads to debate in civil
society. The issues that are at stake with respect to nuclear energy have caused deep
ideological divisions and sparked renewed controversy, coinciding with the various
accidents that have occurred in the sector. Nuclear accidents occupy a special place
in the story, in the sense that their effects concern not only the industrial context but
also living beings as a whole.
Cultural objects address this immeasurable dimension of the disaster. While they
have multiple uses and purposes, what they have in common is that they manifest
mourning for technical power and the dramatic consequences of nuclear accidents.
Their value for the researcher is that they make it possible to examine the (more or
less standardized) formalization of the representation. An analysis of the aestheticization process helps towards a better understanding of how representational
elements are realized in a particular cultural system. It is this real-world realization
that forms the perimeter of the study of objects.
Although research based on documentaries cannot aim for completeness, it
provides food for thought about the impact of Fukushima on representations. The
event does not seem to have upset the representational system of nuclear accidents.
Films describe a world that could be a duplication of Chernobyl. A radioactive
world, which is the demonstration of mankind’s technological pride: abandoned
territories, sacrificed populations, destinies that have been changed in a Faustian
pact with the atom. Behind these images and words, the unwavering shadow of the
sarcophagus of the Chernobyl plant looms. The Soviet accident remains the great
caesura which changed representations. It created new sensitivities, new ways to
show the invisible and say the unsayable. Chernobyl created a mythology, symbolic
references, practices, a whole range of signs, almost a language that subsequent
documentaries borrowed from to tell the story of Fukushima.
But the representation of Fukushima is not just the transposition of a Japanese
Chernobyl. If the central core appears to be intact, new elements appear in the
peripheral system.
18 Fukushima shows that the major technological powers are not
safe from a nuclear accident. The idea is not new: the Three Mile Island accident
demonstrated this in 1979. But low environmental emissions, skillful government
communication,
19 and the limited means of the anti-nuclear movement have
reduced the impact of the accident in France. The scope of Fukushima is very
different. The event reactivated the public debate, including elements such as the
myth of safety, the nightmare of waste, the exploitation of workers, the nucleocracy, and the desire for social autonomy. While Fukushima has not buried nuclear
18
Caution should be exercised and only broader research will test these hypotheses.
19
After Three Mile Island, French Prime Minister Raymond Barre announced that “The same
scenario that took place in the United States could happen in France” (Le Monde, April 3, 1979).
What Cultural Objects Say About Nuclear Accidents …
153