During our post-trip discussion we talked extensively about how we might respond to friends and family asking about our trip.  I’m finding that it was much easier to talk about this hypothetically with our group than it is to actually explain to people at home.  Part of the reason is that most of my friends from home are really looking for a sound-byte, not a lengthy conversation, when they ask “How was your trip?”.  In general, I would say that’s okay by me, and I don’t really blame them for their lack of genuine interest.  Except, now that I’ve been down there, I feel a sense of obligation to relay my experience.  We were certainly emplored to do so by some of our hosts, so I figure, its the least any of us can do.  With that in mind, I’m definitely trying to give anyone who will listen as complete a story of the situation in NOLA and Southern Louisiana as I can muster.  For example, I’ve found myself opening conversations describing NOLA as an awesome city, where some people are being screwed plain and simple.  While I do believe this to be true, it is certainly not the entire story.  Truthfully, it doesn’t even scratch the surface.  However, I think the shock value has worked to get people asking more questions.

However, even when people are interested and willing to listen, the task is not an easy one.  Another reason why its so difficult to discuss my experience with people at home is that there are so many interconnected and delicate issues surrounding the recovery efforts (wetlands loss, government efficiency/corruption, race, economic status, etc.) that its difficult to know where to begin.  Especially, when most people don’t have the first clue about any of these issues, never mind the overall situation in the area.  I think this is another example of something you can’t really blame on your audience.  I was just as ignorant before the trip.  Unfortunately, that doesn’t make it any less frustrating when someone says “Why bother rebuilding NOLA?”, or “Isn’t it sinking anyway?”.

Another thing that struck me regarding my conversations with people at home was the level of interest and general knowledge regarding NOLA/Katrina/Rita versus Dulac/Ike/Gustav.   It seems like everyone asks about Katrina and New Orleans, in disbelief that the city isn’t back to 100% of where it’s going to be over 3 years later.  While on the other hand, the damage caused by Ike and Gustav in bayou country is barely mentioned, despite the fact that these storms occurred a few short months ago.  Yet another case of blameless ignorance.  This common theme is really frustrating, when you’re the person who is charged with getting the word out.