BY CHARLES R. ANGIONE
The romance of the American firefighter goes back to this nation’s colonial period. A man willing to take bold risks to save his neighbor’s life and property from the devastating common enemy of fire was highly prized and respected. Those who were attracted to this way of life were inspired by tales of heroic deeds, the nobility of community service, and selfless sacrifice for others. To be a firefighter was to be a part of an increasingly proud and romantic tradition.
Over the years, the storied mystique of the tough, leather-lunged smoke eater grew, not only in the imagination of the public he served but in the firefighter’s as well. As life will sometimes imitate art, he perpetuated this popular image: Firefighters ran into burning buildings while everyone else was running out. They took desperate chances to save a life, protect property, and accomplish their difficult duty. They risked their health and were prepared to sacrifice their very lives, if necessary, for their sacred honor. Although sometimes irreverent (and sometimes downright crude), a firefighter was thought of, with some justification, as a kind of modern-day knight.
Perhaps it is the seemingly exotic element of another day-the facing and overcoming of mortal danger for a noble cause-that accounts for the universal attraction of children to this job. Ask a group of young children what they want to be when they grow up; a very high representation will still respond “a firefighter.” Children don’t get to communicate personally with astronauts, jet pilots, or great athletes very often. But every town has its fire station with its friendly, rough-and-ready firefighters willing to answer kids’ questions, fix their bikes, and otherwise let them hang around the station. And, most kids have personally witnessed a fire apparatus speeding through town with siren and airhorn blasting on its way to high adventure.
And yet, with all its glamorous appeal for children, the traditional image of the heroic firefighter is gradually fading. In these litigious and regulatory times, that mystique is becoming an anachronism. Today’s firefighters are perhaps the last of a dying breed. Increasing regulatory legislation, more stringent safety standards, growing numbers of civil suits, and a new morality are among the many reasons for this. Even firefighters are questioning the danger of some of their previously routine duties. An aggressive interior attack is not quite as routine as it once was. Not too long ago, it was taken for granted that firefighters were ordered inside to save an abandoned building that even the owner didn’t care about. Now there is the modern realization that it is immoral to risk a firefighter’s life for mere property.
Some in the fire service even question the morality and the logic of risking a firefighter’s life on the mere chance of saving a victim who may already be dead. This is the other extreme and is a tough one for some of us to swallow.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s two-in/two-out rule calling for the assembling of four firefighters on the fireground (five if you want water, seven if you want a search above the fire) before entering a burning structure is but one example of the steady demise of heroic firefighting. Although unquestionably a sensible precaution in an ideal world, the rule presents what in many jurisdictions may be an impractical (and potentially deadly) delay. In the real world of shamefully understaffed departments and unforeseen circumstances, firefighters have been willing to accept a greater degree of personal risk commensurate with those circumstances. Such a regulation makes illegal at an emergency scene that behavior we might expect from civic-minded citizens, let alone trained professionals sworn to protect human life.
Of course, every generation thinks it has all of the answers. I’m sure the people who finally experimented with horsedrawn apparatus felt that their up-to-date fire service had come just about as far as it could. In a daring move, they had accepted horses to replace members’ pulling the wagons. And one day, after the automobile had become a common sight on our roads, they would take a chance on motorized apparatus.
I am equally as sure that firefighters of the future will look back on us with a smile, believing our own outdated methods to be somewhat quaint. Few will recognize that their progress was built on our advances, just as few of today’s firefighters recognize that we can see as far as we do because we are standing on the shoulders of the giants of previous generations.
Many of these safety concerns are, at the same time, legitimate and disturbing. Does the hazard indeed justify the risk? And yet, this very logical approach seems somehow in conflict with what is in many ways an illogical occupation. Many of us subject ourselves to danger and brutally difficult work because of a sense of pride and, yes, satisfaction in meeting the challenge. It feels good to beat the Red Devil in a desperate battle. But taxpayers are no longer willing to foot the bills so that we may achieve personal gratification. They are prepared to accept a certain amount of fire loss-and, yes, personal tragedy-so long as they can prevent a major conflagration and save a buck in the bargain. They are, in short, looking for practical solutions.
Added to this is the incremental “dumbing down” of the firefighter by politicians and government bureaucrats who display a thinly disguised contempt for our life’s work and for the degree of professionalism required of our calling. In this, they are ably assisted by the fire service itself, which generally does not wish to make a fuss and stir things up by insisting on educational qualifications and professional standing. While more and more government entities are requiring college degrees as prerequisites for appointment and promotion of police officers, for example, fire service leaders are often content to meekly accept the appointment and promotion of firefighters based solely (in many localities) on physical performance entrance tests and pass/fail promotional exams.
Our system of government places the amateurs in charge of the professionals. This is as it should be, I suppose, and it is not the fault of the system that the politicians-the amateurs who are supposedly responsible to the voters-are falling down on the job. The professionals are the leaders of the fire, police, and other departments who are there to make carefully considered recommendations; offer expert advice; and, it is hoped, educate the amateurs as to where we should be going and how we propose to get there. Unfortunately, those “professionals” too often find it easier to go along to get along. Many of them are too easily led into areas they know to be wrong and thereby abdicate their responsibility to the public as well.
Sometimes, the incredible decisions of these amateurs/politicians or their hired guns go beyond inappropriate interference in day-to-day operations about which they are completely uninformed. Sometimes, it borders on the criminal. I have seen politicians with absolutely no fire service experience display no qualms in unilaterally revising complex strategic and tactical procedures. And yet, some of the most embarrassingly inane (not to mention dangerous) decisions were not even questioned by many of our “fearless”-and ambitious-fire chiefs.
Back when I was a probationary firefighter, a white-haired veteran truckie told me, “It’s a funny thing, kid. You’ve got to put up with the 90 percent bull on this job to get to do the 10 percent you really like.” A generation later, that ratio remains relatively intact.
The job has changed, of course-in many ways for the better. Despite important improvements, however, many of the same negative factors, along with some new ones, are still with us. The mindless regulations stifle excellence. The political interference and corruption are blatant. The hostility, poverty, and mean-spirited ignorance of many we serve depress the soul. The physical and emotional beatings firefighters have to take are made harsher because of an ever larger workload (and ever increasing responsibilities) on an ever smaller workforce.
Petty jealousies and selfishness continue to place personal gain and political patronage ahead of the oath we swore. Even the opportunities that come with a chief’s gold badge-to make positive changes, to develop people, and to do things right-are often frustrated by budget cuts and undermined by political hacks who don’t have a clue as to what this job is all about and don’t want to know.
Although the American firefighter has already become a bit less hero and a bit more working stiff, the picture is not all bad. Despite all the divisive forces at work in America today and the political turmoil all around us, firefighters, regardless of race, ethnicity, or gender, continue to work together in meeting the objectives of their vital calling. And despite the 90 percent of the job that is less than great, one can still relish the wonderful 10 percent that remains.
To a great extent, a firefighter still gets to put his skill, courage, reputation-and, yes, his personal honor-on the line in meeting the challenge and fighting the Red Devil. A fire officer still gets to help develop good, caring people and to follow a truly noble calling: to lead brave men and women in defending life and property against a common enemy.
If we continue to allow others to change us, however, the eventual loss of our heroic image appears ensured. In the final analysis, this simple fact of life will be based on a changing view of what is important and what is no longer important in our society. One may even agree with some of the reasoning and yet still experience regrets at a certain loss of an earlier, nobler time. Whenever romantic tradition clashes with practical reason, the former tends to fade gracefully into folklore. That is the reason we may someday be fighting them all from the outside. And the heroic firefighter may well become just another worker. Thus, do honor and glory give way to progress.
About the Author
Charle R. Angione, a 25 year veteran of the fire service, is former operations deputy chief for the City of Plainfield (NJ) Fire Division. He is an instructor and a freelance writer and a frequent contributor too fire service publications. He has a degree in fire science, has received specialized command and executive training at the National Fire Academy, and is a state-cerfified fire instructor and fire official.
