Seeing disasters through the eyes of children: a critical reading of One Snowy Night and The Storm in the Barn through the lens of critical disaster studies

The paper investigates how disasters are portrayed through children’s perspectives in two plays—Charles Way’s One Snowy Night (2007) and Eric Coble’s The Storm in the Barn (2012)—to illuminate children’s ecological roles and experiences during crises. Situated within children’s literature and theatre, which are inherently educative and closely tied to environmental concerns, the study argues that rising global hazards necessitate early ecological awareness and disaster literacy. It posits that presenting disasters in children’s theatre through fantasy and personification can make complex environmental phenomena comprehensible and less threatening, fostering coping mechanisms and eco-citizenship. Using critical disaster studies (CDS), the paper reframes disasters as socially constructed, historically situated processes tied to vulnerability, risk, resilience, and social inequities (e.g., poverty, marginalization). The study’s purpose is to analyze how the plays depict disasters across phases (preparation/mitigation, response, recovery), how children contest adult worldviews and mismanagement, and how theatrical strategies cultivate ecological literacy and empower child agency.

The literature review interweaves ecocriticism, children’s literature, disaster studies, and critical disaster studies. Foundational ecocriticism (Glotfelty) frames literature’s relationship with the physical environment and supports the pedagogical role of children’s texts in addressing global threats (Hintz). Research on children in disasters (Kousky; Peek) documents heightened vulnerability and significant psychosocial impacts while challenging the stereotype of children as passive victims; studies highlight children’s constructive participation across preparedness, response, and recovery (Gibbs et al.; Solfiah et al.). Children’s theatre is presented as a potent educational medium (McCaslin; Demmery; Wood & Grant) where fantasy/personification (Nikolajeva; Stakić) provides moral guidance and empowerment. Disaster studies contributions distinguish natural, environmental, and man-made disasters (Cordova), cautioning against erasing human factors when labeling events “natural” (Mauelshagen), and centering key concepts of hazard, vulnerability, risk, and resilience (Andharia; Lindell; Wisner et al.). CDS (Remes & Horowitz; Matthewman & Uekusa) critiques traditional technocratic framings, contending that disasters are interpretive, political, and unfold over time, shaped by inequalities and cultural practices. The review also contextualizes the Dust Bowl as a protracted environmental crisis exacerbated by poor agricultural practices (Hurt) and underscores the scarcity of analyses of such events in children’s theatre, motivating the comparative focus on Way’s and Coble’s plays.

A comparative textual analysis applies disaster studies and critical disaster studies frameworks to two children’s plays. The approach: (1) maps disaster phases (pre-impact/preparation-mitigation, trans-impact/response, post-impact/recovery) as dramatized; (2) analyzes personification/fantasy (e.g., trolls; Storm King) as devices that render hazards intelligible to children and foreground human–nature interdependence; (3) examines child agency versus adult responses, including mismanagement and harmful coping practices; (4) situates portrayals within socio-ecological vulnerability (poverty, access to care, environmental degradation) and CDS tenets (disasters as interpretive, political, and temporal processes); (5) evaluates ecological pedagogy (ecological literacy, identification with nonhuman life, pro-environmental values) communicated through narrative, dialogue, staging, and sound/visual cues. Evidence includes quotations, scene descriptions, and thematic patterns illustrating shifts from fear to resistance, resilience, and recovery.

- Both plays center children’s perspectives to introduce, interpret, and respond to disasters, using fantasy to personify hazards and catalyze ecological understanding. - One Snowy Night (Iceland): Nonni experiences all disaster phases. Preparation/mitigation is shown through sheltering behaviors; response involves venturing into a snowstorm to recover lost sheep; personifications (Ice and Fire Trolls) embody concurrent Icelandic hazards (glaciers/volcanoes), emphasizing nature’s power and cyclical dominance. Recovery brings familial reconciliation, new responsibilities (shepherd role), and seasonal renewal (spring), underscoring acceptance of recurring natural phenomena. - The Storm in the Barn (Dust Bowl, Kansas 1937): The play begins mid-crisis (response), omitting the pre-impact phase and highlighting socio-economic/ecological vulnerability (illness, abandoned barns, pests). Adult mismanagement and destructive practices (e.g., mass rabbit slaughter, attempts to annihilate grasshoppers) exemplify harmful cultural coping that worsens disasters. The Rain is personified as the Storm King—“refusing to serve”—marking disaster as socially mediated. Jack confronts the Storm King, releases rain, and triggers family/community recovery and resolve to stay and farm sustainably. - Child agency vs adult failure: Children reject adult fatalism and ecologically harmful responses, instead enacting resistance and problem-solving that lead to recovery and strengthened family bonds. - Ecological literacy: Storytelling (tales of trolls; Ozma of Oz; Ernie’s Jack stories) functions as coping, ethical instruction, and activation of agency. Identification with animals and nature reframes defense of the environment as self-defense. - CDS alignment: Findings illustrate vulnerability (ecological/social-economic), resilience, disasters as interpretive fiction (personification), political (adult practices and inequalities), and temporal (Dust Bowl’s protracted development due to poor agriculture). - Recovery and networks: Both endings stress bonding ties (familial reconciliation) as key to recovery alongside implied shifts toward sustainable practices.

The analysis shows that portraying disasters through children’s eyes reconfigures disasters from inexplicable threats into meaningful, navigable experiences that cultivate ecological literacy and agency. Fantasy and personification enable children to grasp human–nature reciprocity and the moral stakes of environmental behavior, while theatre’s multimodal aesthetics (narration, staging, sound) scaffold understanding without overwhelming fear. The plays critique adult worldviews—fatalism, mismanagement, and violent coping—revealing the political and cultural dimensions of disaster emphasized by CDS. Distinct dramaturgical treatments of disaster temporality (full cycle in One Snowy Night vs. mid- to late-crisis in The Storm in the Barn) foreground children’s crucial roles in response and recovery. By connecting vulnerability (poverty, health access, hazardous geographies) to resilience (resistance, transformation, bonding networks), the works demonstrate how children can drive sustainable recovery and model pro-environmental practices. Collectively, the findings underscore children’s theatre as an effective medium for disaster education, risk reduction, and empowerment.

The paper contributes a CDS-informed comparative reading of two understudied children’s plays that depict natural and environmental disasters. It demonstrates how personification and storytelling translate complex hazards into accessible narratives that promote ecological literacy, resilience, and child agency. One Snowy Night stages the full disaster cycle in Iceland, guiding acceptance of cyclical hazards and familial/role transformation; The Storm in the Barn dramatizes the Dust Bowl’s socially mediated nature, critiques harmful adult practices, and celebrates a child-led resolution and recovery. Both conclude with reconciliation, hope, and implicit commitments to more sustainable environmental relations. Future research could expand to additional cultural contexts and genres within children’s theatre, explore audience reception and learning outcomes empirically, and further examine how CDS concepts inform pedagogical design for disaster risk reduction in youth-oriented performance.

The study does not report empirical audience data or measured educational outcomes; it offers interpretive textual/stage analysis of two plays, which may limit generalizability. It focuses primarily on familial (bonding) networks rather than broader community or institutional (bridging/linking) dynamics, and it centers two Anglophone works/case settings.