This year marks the 50th anniversary of the sinking of the Edmund Fitzgerald, the legendary freighter that went down in Lake Superior on Nov. 10, 1975. For nearly five decades, screenwriter Chris Chabot has been immersed in the story — a personal and creative curiosity rooted in his Upper Peninsula upbringing. What began as a screenplay 33 years ago has evolved into a lifelong investigation, shaped by extensive research and firsthand interviews with captains who sailed through the same storm that claimed the Fitzgerald. As renewed public interest surrounds Great Lakes shipwreck discoveries and the enduring mystery of that final voyage, Chabot’s work stands at the intersection of history and human memory, honoring the lives lost while challenging the myths that have accumulated over half a century.
As The Munising Beacon launches Chabot’s exclusive three-part series chronicling his expedition to the wreck site, he sat down with Jennifer Champagne to discuss why the story continues to matter, what his research has uncovered and how the Fitzgerald became a defining creative mission in his life.
Champagne: You had the rare opportunity to meet and speak with captains who were on the lake the night the Fitzgerald sank. What did you learn from those conversations?
Chabot: We held a dinner in Port Huron with six captains who had been sailing in that same storm system. One of them was Captain [Donald] Erickson of the William Clay Ford. That ship had already reached the safety of Whitefish Bay but turned back out onto the lake to search [for the Fitzgerald] along with the [Arthur M.] Anderson. Erickson had a son serving on one of the ships that night, and he said that if it had been his son’s ship that went down, he would want someone to go look for him — so he went back out. What struck me was how calm and matter-of-fact they were about what happened. They told me, “These were professional sailors. They don’t panic. They stay focused, and they work the problem.” They believed whatever happened at the end came very fast. The captain had multiple microphones around him — all he had to do was hit a button to call mayday — and he didn’t. So that tells you the end came sudden.
After years of research, what do you believe actually caused the ship to go down?
What I always emphasize is that it wasn’t one single thing. It was a chain of failures. The ship was slowing down. They were running the pumps. The waves were enormous — 25-foot seas, 30 feet, maybe higher. The middle section of the ship, which held the taconite, disintegrated. When they examined the wreck on the lakebed, they found the cargo spilled like pellets on the moon. A ship that size doesn’t just vanish unless there’s catastrophic structural failure. Everything suggests it was a rapid break-up.
You actually went on an expedition to the wreck site. What was that experience like for you personally?
There’s a difference between reading about it and being out there. I was on the Anglian Lady, and we were going through the Soo Locks at midnight. I left this voicemail for my wife — my voice was so high I didn’t even recognize it — saying, “I’m actually here. We’re going out to the Fitzgerald.” I knew I was witnessing history. Later, we sat with Red Burgner, the Fitzgerald’s longtime cook. He was identifying fixtures, hallways, ladders, the galley. He was pointing to things and saying, “This is where so-and-so would’ve been during that shift.” That’s when it hit me: This wasn’t just a shipwreck. These were 29 real men, with routines, with lives.
In recent years, new shipwrecks such as the Western Reserve have been located using advanced sonar. Do you think we’re entering a new era of shipwreck discovery on the Great Lakes?
Absolutely. For years, fishermen picked up big anomalies on sonar and would just log them in a notebook. They might say, “There’s something down there,” and keep going. Now the technology can scan those anomalies and identify shipwrecks that were essentially hiding in plain sight. Some of these “new discoveries” have probably been unofficially known about for decades — they just weren’t documented. The Great Lakes are giving up their stories.
Despite nearly 50 years passing, public interest in the Edmund Fitzgerald is only growing. Why do you think this story endures?
It’s the mystery. This was not a rusty relic limping along. This was a massive, modern ship, one of the largest on the lakes. These were experienced sailors. They were almost within reach of the safe harbor at Whitefish Bay. To have all of that — the size, the crew’s professionalism, the familiarity with Superior — and still lose everything without a distress call, it challenges our understanding of control. People feel the weight of those last 14 miles.”
During the development process, you had interactions with Hollywood figures, including James Cameron.
At the Writers Guild Awards in 1997, James Cameron walks up to me and says, “Edmund Fitzgerald — I read about you.” He asked to see some of the footage we had from the expedition. We sent it to him. I never heard back, but I like to think he watched it. The interesting thing is, before “Titanic” came out, people told me, “No one is going to sit through a ship movie.” After “Titanic,” everything changed. It proved audiences can connect deeply to real-life maritime stories.
After decades of work, multiple drafts, interviews and expeditions, why are you still committed to telling this story?
Respect. These were working men doing an essential job. People rely on Great Lakes shipping for the steel in their cars, the materials in their buildings — it’s the backbone of industry. The Fitzgerald is not just a shipwreck. It’s a human story about risk, responsibility and loss. If this story is told truthfully, maybe it helps people understand the cost.
What do you hope readers take away from your series?
That this is not just about solving a mystery. It’s about remembering the men, understanding the realities of the Great Lakes and acknowledging what these waters can do. They’re not just five lakes on a map. They are inland seas. They demand respect.