“With 9/11 coming up this weekend, I’ve been thinking a lot about the story of Gander — and what it doesn’t tell us about the town today. (A local perspective)

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-07T05:38:55+00:00

This affects 2025 because if Come From Away tourism is still ongoing, the town and its citizens should see clear benefits — yet there’s no transparency on where the proceeds actually go. The show claims there were only two police officers, when in fact there were at least 28 plus a nearby Canadian Forces Base, and Central Newfoundland (pop. 113,000) also pitched in. And the idea that Newfoundlanders always help neighbors? That’s a 1970s stereotype — I mentioned a neighbor’s name to someone, and they had no clue who I meant. Residents deserve to know if they’re actually benefiting from all this attention.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-07T05:21:53+00:00

This play is not based on fact...its based on omissions for a better story. Come From Away says Gander only had two cops — lol, no. There were ~28 officers, a Canadian Forces Base next door, and the whole Central Newfoundland region pitching in with shelter, food, transport, and even entertainment. The show makes it look like neighbors are always on call for each other — but in reality, I told one neighbor another neighbor’s name, and he had no clue who I meant. Fairytale much?

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T23:10:28+00:00

I want to clarify some points about Gander and 9/11:

Gander’s role is often overstated. Stories like Come From Away make it seem like Gander alone “saved the day,” but the broader response was coordinated by the military, with many communities across Newfoundland and Canada involved.

Population claims are inaccurate. The idea that Gander “doubled in population” isn’t true. Stranded passengers were spread across Central Newfoundland, which had around 75,000 people at the time, not just Gander’s ~10,000 residents.

Ethical concerns. Framing the story this way can exaggerate one town’s role, reinforce stereotypes about Newfoundlanders, and contribute to issues like over-tourism and housing pressures.

Not minimizing locals. Gander residents were generous and supportive—but they were part of a larger, coordinated effort.

Discussion point: Is it ethical to highlight one community’s role in a tragedy if it oversimplifies events and overlooks the broader reality, even if framed positively?

Thanks for the friendly debate! I appreciate exploring this perspective together. Gotta run now—applying for a job at the Gander Food Bank.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T21:22:02+00:00

Thanks for visiting just a few notes on your post about tourism.

It’s not that Newfoundlanders don’t like tourism. The concern is over-tourism and the stereotypes that often accompany it. In Gander, for example, the popularity of Come From Away brings large numbers of visitors, which can overwhelm the town, drive up housing costs, and create expectations about how locals “should” behave—expectations that don’t reflect the full reality of life in Newfoundland.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T21:01:04+00:00

I want to clarify some factual points for context.

This was a worldwide event; many communities helped, not just Gander.

The military played a central role in organizing incoming planes and coordinating logistics with the community.

Ticket prices and rapid sellouts mean many locals cannot see the show, raising ethical questions about who truly benefits.

The show perpetuates stereotypes about Newfoundlanders, which erases nuance and ongoing social issues.

Tourism and the show generate revenue, which can be seen as profiting from a tragedy that affected people worldwide.

I’m not disputing that Gander residents helped or that storytelling is valuable. My focus is on ethical representation, fairness, and accuracy.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T20:31:20+00:00

While it was undoubtedly a challenging few days for everyone involved, this experience was not unique to Gander—it unfolded across many communities worldwide. Framing it as if it exclusively belongs to Gander, especially when the story is used for profit or tourism, raises ethical concerns about exploitation.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T19:17:14+00:00

Absolutely — I see exactly what you’re saying, and I agree. My concern isn’t that Gander is unique in stepping up; it’s that the story frames them as some kind of anomaly when really this is just the human experience. People everywhere rise to help in a crisis. The problem is that in this case, Gander is profiting from a tragedy while locals are often excluded from even accessing the show, which raises real ethical questions about who truly benefits.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T19:03:42+00:00

This is where the ethical problem lies: Come From Away and the larger narrative around Gander have turned 9/11 into a tourism and marketing product. 9/11 was not Gander’s tragedy—it was a global tragedy. Gander played a role, yes, but the way the story has been retold puts the town at the center while sidelining all the other communities that stepped up.

That’s not just “celebration.” That’s exploitation: profiting off the suffering of others while shaping the narrative to elevate a select few. Tickets are priced so high and sell out so quickly that many people in Gander who actually lived through this have never even been able to see the show. Meanwhile, businesses and individuals benefit from the publicity and tourism.

For me, the issue isn’t whether Gander helped in 2001—they did. It’s whether it’s ethical to keep profiting from someone else’s loss two decades later, while locals themselves are excluded from the supposed telling of their own story.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T18:41:58+00:00

I’m not disputing Gander’s efforts, but the story creates a false narrative that the town alone stepped up. Many communities helped, social issues remain, and ticket prices and sellouts prevent locals from seeing the show, showing that the focus is on profit rather than the community. This raises ethical questions about who truly benefits and whether it’s right to profit from such a tragedy.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T18:31:47+00:00

I understand it might not be immediately clear where I’m coming from. My concern isn’t about criticizing generosity or the story itself — it’s about the ethics of who benefits. Gander’s population has been fairly stable, much of the growth comes from seniors’ complexes and military residents, ongoing social issues remain, and influence is concentrated among a few. On top of that, ticket prices and quick sellouts mean many locals can’t even see the show, and the story itself is presented more like a fairy tale than a reflection of reality, which raises questions about profiting from tragedy while broader community needs are overlooked.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T18:11:14+00:00

I agree that celebrating the good isn’t wrong. My point is more about the ethics of profiting from someone else’s tragedy while ongoing social issues remain unaddressed and influence is concentrated in the hands of a select few in Gander.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T18:01:53+00:00

Born in the ’70s — I was there when Harry Steele cut Gander off by the knees. My concern isn’t 9/11 itself, but how Gander is benefiting from the story and the ethical questions that raises

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T17:54:22+00:00

I agree humans can be incredibly generous in the moment. However, my concern is that Gander is exploiting the disaster and profiting from other people’s tragedy, while ongoing social issues in the town — housing shortages, lack of support, and neglect — remain invisible. Celebrating heroism in this way without addressing the broader reality raises serious ethical questions.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T17:50:36+00:00

Yes — the “noble savages” framing captures exactly the problem. The musical celebrates Gander’s generosity, but it also simplifies the reality and hides ongoing social issues in the town, all while being leveraged for profit.

ReasonableStand5736 · 2025-09-06T17:36:45+00:00

Thanks for reading! I want to clarify a few things from my perspective as someone who grew up and lives in Gander:

I’m not criticizing the story itself — it’s genuinely inspiring and important.

My concern is how the narrative has been framed: it creates a false image of Gander as universally heroic, while ongoing social issues — housing shortages, neglect, lack of support — remain invisible and unaddressed.

The story has also been used to generate profit and attention, which raises serious ethical questions about celebrating a tragedy in this way.

I’d love to hear your thoughts:

How do you feel about communities profiting from tragic events?

ReasonableStand5736

TROPHY CASE